 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / General Topics / May 2007Starvation
How effective is starvation for weight loss? For example, how long would I need to starve for to lose a noticeable amount of weight? Also how long can the body go without food without having a negative impact on future health? If I was to just take water and say vitamin tablets would that change how long I could do it for? Whats the realistic minimum calories my body would need per day to be able to function on based on being 6ft 5" and 350lbs? TIA Jay > How effective is starvation for weight loss? For example, how long would I > need to starve for to lose a noticeable amount of weight? It is very effective for losing weight, although, obviously, it had its side effects. http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/starvationexperiment.html We had a nanny whose father fasted (water fasting) for 40 or 43 days, for religious reasons. He lived for a long after that until 82 years and died of stroke. The problem with starvation and crash dieting is: - it does not teach you how to eat to maintain weight - you lose more muscle than you would on a more sensible plan, which makes maintenance difficult - it leads to malnutrition, gall bladder problems etc - some people report that crash dieting creates binge eating, although causes of binge eating are not well known. (http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health/nutrit/pubs/binge.htm). > Also how long can the body go without food without having a negative impact > on future health? If I was to just take water and say vitamin tablets would > that change how long I could do it for? Whats the realistic minimum calories > my body would need per day to be able to function on based on being 6ft 5" > and 350lbs? Arguments about how long it is safe to fast are endless and usually pretty groundless. I fasted for 38 hours and it did not do me any harm. Would not care to fast longer. Most sources that I have seen say that 3 days seems harmless enough. Most writing about fasting is done by people whom I consider to be kooks, so, I am skeptical about all their claims. Looks like you need to drop about 100+ pounds, so, fasting is unlikely to get you there. You can lose 28% of weight without much esoterics, by dropping some foods, eating less and exercising. i >> How effective is starvation for weight loss? For example, how long would >> I [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > i I have done it before for 4 days with no side effects but I am talking more about weeks than days this time - its either that, drugs or just end it all and thereby the problem goes away Once again thanks for ur input Jay > I have done it before for 4 days with no side effects but I am talking more > about weeks than days this time - its either that, drugs or just end it all > and thereby the problem goes away Forgot to say, in the final stages of starvation many people gain a lot of weight because of edema. Not a pretty sight at all and mostly belongs into history of our human race. So, if you starve to lose weight, you might find that for all your work, you have not lost any, although, obviously, your body fat, muscles, bones, etc will be replaced by water. i > about weeks than days this time - its either that, drugs or just end it all > and thereby the problem goes away Wait a minute, you are forgetting the most effective and permanent way that will not endanger your life (i.e. fasting for weeks, taking drugs or ending it all) -- making small healthy changes until they become permanent, and building on that success. Examples: -- Taking a 20-minute walk each day till you can work up to an hour -- Giving up whatever major binge food you might be choosing (for me it was sugar) -- Adding more vegetables to your daily intake -- Saying no to fried foods and packaged junk food -- Making sure you eat some source of protein with each meal -- Adopting an attitude of willingness and patience I realize I'm talking baby steps and you might be thinking -- it can't possibly work because I'm in a hurry to lose -- but weight lost in a hurry is often regained in a hurry, and to me, weight loss without maintenance is useless. Look, I'm a woman who is under 5'5" and I weighed 325 lbs 19 years ago. So I was in worse condition than you (unless you're under 5'5" too), and through commitment, consistency, patience and persistence, I've been able to make great progress. I have lost roughly 175 lbs (100 of those off for 19 years). I have struggled with my weight all my life, and so I know it isn't easy and can seem hopeless once you cross the 300-lb. mark. But drugs, surgery and extreme methods are not necessary -- I am living proof, and there is nothing magical about me. One step at a time, one day at a time. Good luck to you Jay. Mary M 325-154-148 > >> How effective is starvation for weight loss? For example, how long would According to numerous studies, the average person gains 15% of body mass within two years of doing any calorie reduction diet. The success rate for such diets (<5%)is the same as the percentage who develop eating disorders ( anorexia or bulimia) after using starvation to reduce weight. These statistics were recently used by the FTC in their sucessful lawsuit against the purveyors of such starvation plans ( Weight Watchers, Jenny Craig, etc). A far better approach is that employed by the world's thinnest people, the Maisi and Sambura tribes of Africa. They eat no vegetable products at all. They also eat the most fat of any people ever studied ( 65% of calories) and have the lowest cholesterol ( avg. 125) and heart disease of any people. Their diet is very high calorie and they exercise little ( the men not at all). I have used this method in the past with several clients and it results in fantastic weight loss - about 100 lbs. per six months. It also dramatically improves exercise endurance and mood. It also works better than Lipitor for improving cholesterol and triglyceride ratios. This method was studied scientifically by Anthropologist Vilhjalmur Stefansson who ate this way for decades ( 1906-1963). In his book "The Fat of the Land" he documents his U.S. Army experiments and his own Arctic experiences in using this method to cure scurvy. Feel free to e-mail me privatly if I can offer any assistance in your quest! I never charge for dietary advice. Ray Audette Author "NeanderThin" www.NeanderThin.com I would very much like to get your help with losing weight, I am not massive.. ...YET...... I am slowly going up, but can't seem to do anything to stop it. I have tried loads of diets, but findit hard to stick to anything let alone be able to afford the fresh fruit and veg most diets require. I need to nip this in the bud and get back to a size 14(uk) before it goes too far!!!! liz >> >> How effective is starvation for weight loss? For example, how long would > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >Author "NeanderThin" >www.NeanderThin.com > How effective is starvation for weight loss? For example, how long would I > need to starve for to lose a noticeable amount of weight? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Jay Jay, Drugs and starvation diets are not the way to go. From your current posts it appears you're depressed and desparate to lose weight the quickest and easist way possible. I hate to see someone so young possibly ruin their health with these methods. Many in this group have lost a significant amount of weight with a healthy regime of proper diet and exercise - Chris, Smokey, Matty just to name a few. Do a google search on Matty in this group and you'll be amazed at the progress he's made since February of this year when he came here. Why not give the healthy route a chance? You can get all the help and support you need from this group. Sorry I don't recall your entire background so these questions may have already been answered. Have you consulted your doctor for his help? Can you find a nutritionist to work with you? Are you currently on a diet? What type of exercise? Beverly It's great at killing you. Many people have posted here that after trying starvation diets, it rebounded on them. Don't do it. Start an exercise program and learn to eat healthy. > How effective is starvation for weight loss? For example, how long would I > need to starve for to lose a noticeable amount of weight? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Jay >It's great at killing you. Many people have posted here that after trying >starvation diets, it rebounded on them. Don't do it. Start an exercise >program and learn to eat healthy. You don't read much do you? Jay Jay is one of the all-time exercisers in this group. Barbara Hirsch, Publisher OBESITY MEDS AND RESEARCH NEWS The latest in obesity research and weight loss drug development http://www.obesity-news.com/ >>It's great at killing you. Many people have posted here that after trying >>starvation diets, it rebounded on them. Don't do it. Start an exercise >>program and learn to eat healthy. > > You don't read much do you? Jay Jay is one of the all-time exercisers > in this group. This isn't Jayjay. >>It's great at killing you. Many people have posted here that after trying >>starvation diets, it rebounded on them. Don't do it. Start an exercise >>program and learn to eat healthy. > >You don't read much do you? Jay Jay is one of the all-time exercisers >in this group. I think you've got the wrong person Barbara. This isn't the "original" jay jay - it's a different poster. janice >I think you've got the wrong person Barbara. This isn't the >"original" jay jay - it's a different poster. I got it after I sent the post in. Patricia so often doesn't listen, that I assumed it was her rather than a different poster. My bad. Barbara Hirsch, Publisher OBESITY MEDS AND RESEARCH NEWS The latest in obesity research and weight loss drug development http://www.obesity-news.com/ >How effective is starvation for weight loss? For example, how long would I >need to starve for to lose a noticeable amount of weight? Well, you're going to lose a disproportionate amount of lean body mass, which will make it harder for you to maintain once you do lose weight. What's the fascination with starvation? >Also how long can the body go without food without having a negative impact >on future health? If I was to just take water and say vitamin tablets would >that change how long I could do it for? Whats the realistic minimum calories >my body would need per day to be able to function on based on being 6ft 5" >and 350lbs? If you were healthy it would probably be easier to withstand the assault on your body. At 350 pounds, you're probably not in that category, and so more likely to have an adverse incident. Since there are no studies on starvation as a weight loss tool, there are no statistics on the morbidity and fatality rate. I'd rethink this idea and do something else. Anything else. Barbara Hirsch, Publisher OBESITY MEDS AND RESEARCH NEWS The latest in obesity research and weight loss drug development http://www.obesity-news.com/ > Since there are no studies on starvation as a weight loss tool, there > are no statistics on the morbidity and fatality rate. Actually, there were studies done on starvation and weight loss ( as well as several of the weight-loss drugs promoted on Barbara's site) in concentration camps during W.W.II. Thousand of people were involved and the results were noted in meticulous German fashion. Thousands died during these studies and the poor health of the few survivors has been noted in several subsequent studies. This data was traded to American scientists at the end of the war in return for safe passage to Argentina for many of these Doctors. This data was then used to calculate minimum daily requirements (MDR) for vitamins and minerals posted by law on all food products. These studies were also used to calculate the dosages for the weight loss drugs when the Pharmaceutical Industry calculated that they could be marketed profitably. Ray Audette Author "NeanderThin" www.NeanderThin.com >Actually, there were studies done on starvation and weight loss ( as >well as several of the weight-loss drugs promoted on Barbara's site) >in concentration camps during W.W.II. Thousand of people were >involved and the results were noted in meticulous German fashion. >Thousands died during these studies and the poor health of the few >survivors has been noted in several subsequent studies. Only a few of the drugs on my site were available during WWII. A study on starvation for weight loss would not have the same results as a study on concentration camp victims and /or WWII POWs. A supervised program would certainly follow patients, give them vitamins, follow vital statistics, etc. as they do on VLCD diets. In addition, a patient voluntarily starving would not be subject to the stress that comes from involuntary captivity, beatings, and countless acts of barbarism experienced and seen on a daily basis. If you're interested, there is intensive follow-up on Vietnam POWs, who were also subject to starvation and torture at the Robert E. Mitchell Center for POW studies in Pensacola, Florida. http://www.nomi.med.navy.mil/Text/Rpow/default.htm Although it's run by the Navy, any Vietnam POW is eligible to participate in the program, even civilians. Doc Mitchell is around 85 or so, and long retired from the Navy, but he still participates in the program. I know quite a few NamPows and FWIW, very few are fat, and many outlived their original "controls" in the program because of the many years of reduced caloric consumption they enjoyed. Because of this they had lower risk of diabetes, heart attack, etc. Story was the reverse for arthritis and joint problems. Mentally, very little difference, and the divorce rate for a NamPow isn't much different than for the general population. NamPows who died in prison mostly died from the torture and not starvation, at least those who were kept in the North. I know at least some (if not all) of the prisoners held in the South were put in cages, and most died from the harsh conditions. I personally know only one "cage guy", who to this day has a nasty case of PTSD. Anyway, if you're looking for data with some amount of modern follow-up, this would be it. But it's still not comparable to a starvation diet for weight loss. Barbara Hirsch, Publisher OBESITY MEDS AND RESEARCH NEWS The latest in obesity research and weight loss drug development http://www.obesity-news.com/ > If you were healthy it would probably be easier to withstand the > assault on your body. At 350 pounds, you're probably not in that > category, and so more likely to have an adverse incident. > > Since there are no studies on starvation as a weight loss tool, there > are no statistics on the morbidity and fatality rate. I am actually completely healthy - heart rate and blood pressure etc are fine (much to my doctors surprise!). As for the comment about the dangers it cant be any more dangerous than being as overweight as I am now so its case of balancing risk and which may be the lesser of two evils. Jay > > If you were healthy it would probably be easier to withstand the > > assault on your body. At 350 pounds, you're probably not in that [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Jay As I mentioned in an earlier post to you, you are missing the "in between." Things don't have to be so drastic -- i.e. it's one way or another (dangerously overweight or dangerously fasting). The "in between" is changing your eating habits and getting more daily exercise (not killer exercise, just getting your body moving more). This is a common trap for those over 100 lbs -- the all or nothing viewpoint. I know because I struggled with it myself. What's wrong with changing your eating habits, which you haven't mentioned except for saying you want to eliminate eating altogether? Getting rid of the foods that are most troubling will help you more than you can imagine. It doesn't have to be feast or famine. Removing the drama from food issues is very helpful and goes a long way toward weight loss and maintenance. Mary M 325-154-148 >This > is a common trap for those over 100 lbs -- the all or nothing viewpoint. I meant to say "over 100 lbs overweight" -- oops. Mary >> If you were healthy it would probably be easier to withstand the >> assault on your body. At 350 pounds, you're probably not in that [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Jay Jay, we can debate forever what is better, starvation or obesity, but we'll miss the point. There are approaches better than crash diets and starvation and obesity. i >> If you were healthy it would probably be easier to withstand the >> assault on your body. At 350 pounds, you're probably not in that [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >Jay Well, whether or not it's dangerous, my concern would be that you won't be able to keep the weight off, as you won't learn anything about how to eat properly. And you're likely to lose a lot more muscle than you would on a more reasonable diet, which will make it yet harder to keep weight off as well as reducing your overall well-being. Chris -- who's lost 122 lbs. in two years by watching calories and exercising 262/140/ (145-150) > Well, whether or not it's dangerous, my concern would be that you > won't be able to keep the weight off, as you won't learn anything > about how to eat properly. Another concern is that starvation might actually be *slower* than a more reasonnable diet. Remember, you have two sides to the equation, calories in, and calories out. When the body enters starvation mode, the basal metabolism of the calories out part is going to drop as low as possible in a natural process to optimize long term survival (usually, this involves dumping a whole lot of lean mass as early as possible). So, the total deficit is not going to be as large as expected. Moreover, lethary will also reduce conscious energy use as much as possible, even in an unconscious way (like, using minimal movement to do anything). On the other hand, a more reasonnable diet will leave the "calories out" part in the normal range. This means that, depending on how good the body is at surviving in starvation mode, the total deficit might actually be higher when you eat some food. That's the logic behind VLC diets - going as low as possible without triggering starvation mode. >> Well, whether or not it's dangerous, my concern would be that you >> won't be able to keep the weight off, as you won't learn anything [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > as > possible without triggering starvation mode. This is why I asked the question about how many calories I need to survive and function on in my original post - when I refer to starvation diet thats more what I am talking about that just taking water for weeks or months. Jay >This is why I asked the question about how many calories I need to survive >and function on in my original post - when I refer to starvation diet thats >more what I am talking about that just taking water for weeks or months. There's no answer to you question. You'd have to have a group of people who did what you propose, under controlled conditions, to come up with the statistics. What we do know is that people who undergo starvation lose a lot of lean body mass, and what you want to lose is fat. So that will reduce your metabolic rate substantially and make it hard for you to maintain any weight loss. Your stress level will rise from the starvation and your body will throw a bunch of free radicals, which will increase your risk of things like heart attack and stroke. But there's no way to give you any statistics, cause they don't exist. So you can either do something that won't work, or you can start on a diet and exercise plan. This is alt.support.diet, not alt.support.starvation. Barbara Hirsch, Publisher OBESITY MEDS AND RESEARCH NEWS The latest in obesity research and weight loss drug development http://www.obesity-news.com/ > How effective is starvation for weight loss? For example, how long would I > need to starve for to lose a noticeable amount of weight? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > TIA Sorry, I can't answer most of your questions, but I can offer a suggestion: Instead of a straight-out fast, why not try something like Optifast? (I'm not pushing Optifast over other such programs -- it's just that Optifast is the only one I could think of. A good friend lost a lot of weight very quickly on Optifast a few years ago.) In case you're not familiar with such programs, they basically consist of very low calorie diets composed almost entirely of flavored protein powder that you mix with water and drink a few times a day. You will lose weight nearly as fast as you would on a water-only fast, but the protein helps you retain muscle, and you will be medically supervised. In addition to the medical supervision, I believe you get some other support -- group sessions with others on the plan, for example, which may or may not appeal to you, or custom designed exercise plans. HTH Anny > Sorry, I can't answer most of your questions, but I can offer a suggestion: > Instead of a straight-out fast, why not try something like Optifast? (I'm > not pushing Optifast over other such programs -- it's just that Optifast is > the only one I could think of. A good friend lost a lot of weight very > quickly on Optifast a few years ago.) What happened to your friend afterwards? i >> the only one I could think of. A good friend lost a lot of weight very >> quickly on Optifast a few years ago.) > >What happened to your friend afterwards? Probably the same thing that happened to Oprah -- and my friend Mark. Barbara Hirsch, Publisher OBESITY MEDS AND RESEARCH NEWS The latest in obesity research and weight loss drug development http://www.obesity-news.com/ > that you mix with water and drink a few times a day. You will lose weight > nearly as fast as you would on a water-only fast, but the protein helps you > retain muscle, and you will be medically supervised. In addition to the > medical supervision, I believe you get some other support -- group sessions > with others on the plan, for example, which may or may not appeal to you, or > custom designed exercise plans. Plus the great thing about Optifast is that you get to gain it all back, and then some, since you didn't bother yourself with fixing the real problem, learning how to eat normal food within limits. pffft. Optifast is a scam. 1% of bodyweight/week oughtta be fast enough for everyone, and is easily doable by cutting out 20-30% of one's daily caloric intake, hardly noticeable if you choose your foods wisely throughout the day. >> that you mix with water and drink a few times a day. You will lose >> weight [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > one's daily caloric intake, hardly noticeable if you choose your foods > wisely throughout the day. I did a VLCD and didn't "gain it all back and then some." The OP didn't seem like someone who is reasonable enough to be patient and wait 2 years to get to goal weight so in his case (morbidly obese), a VLCD could be a way to start the weight loss in *his* case. I don't necessarily recommend it for most people, but there exists a subset of people who can benefit from them. Try to remember your previous posts where you recognized that you were lucky to lose weight rather easily... Jenn > > pffft. Optifast is a scam. 1% of bodyweight/week oughtta be fast > > enough for everyone, and is easily doable by cutting out 20-30% of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > start the weight loss in *his* case. I don't necessarily recommend it for > most people, but there exists a subset of people who can benefit from them. My personal sample size of 2 friends-of-friends says optifast doesn't work. This doesn't mean it can't work, but the fact is any diet change that isn't permanent is likely a waste of time and money. My sister on WW succeeded after a year in losing 20lbs, but gained half of it back after abandoning the system before she caught herself. > Try to remember your previous posts where you recognized that you were lucky > to lose weight rather easily... While I think it is somewhat based on personal experience, I see too much drama-queening about dieting. Eat less, exercise more, avoid empty carbs, seek quality protein and unsaturated fats, and if you've got anything close to a normal system you'll lose weight month-to-month relatively painlessly. >> > pffft. Optifast is a scam. 1% of bodyweight/week oughtta be fast >> > enough for everyone, and is easily doable by cutting out 20-30% of [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > WW succeeded after a year in losing 20lbs, but gained half of it back > after abandoning the system before she caught herself. and a diet that is nothing like normal eating that one would experience on maintenance, does not teach maintenance, by definition. >> Try to remember your previous posts where you recognized that you were lucky >> to lose weight rather easily... [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > got anything close to a normal system you'll lose weight > month-to-month relatively painlessly. I see dieting as a case where inputs produce outputs, e.g eating less produces weight loss and might affect appetite etc. Drama does not change outputs, the key is to see what does not work and change accordingly. i > My personal sample size of 2 friends-of-friends says optifast doesn't > work. Wow, quite scientific. Instead of mouthing on somethiing you obviously don't know much about, why don't you actually listen to those who have been successful with it? Martha >> that you mix with water and drink a few times a day. You will lose weight >> nearly as fast as you would on a water-only fast, but the protein helps you [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > one's daily caloric intake, hardly noticeable if you choose your foods > wisely throughout the day. A crash diet is a crash diet... http://ww4.lhj.com/lhj/story.jhtml?storyid=/templatedata/lhj/story/data/WL_Clini calPrograms_03182002.xml&catref=cat1490018&page=2 `` After three years people regain about 95% of the weight they lost, regardless of the type of diet. In addition, very low-calorie diets have been associated with complications in some people, including chemical abnormalities and irregular heartbeats. Because of their relatively modest long-term success rates and their complications, very low-calorie diets have fallen out of favor. Instead, clinical programs are now inclined to recommend a more moderate low-calorie diet in conjunction with a program of exercise and behavior modification. '' So, the summary of the above (feel free to agree or disagree with it), is that while most people regain after most diets, crash diets are also associated with nasty complications that more modest weight loss plans present less rarely. Ladies Home Journal is not necessarily the foremost authority on weight loss... So take the above with a grain of salt. i I am not sure if your post was meant as a joke or what..but starvation won't work. The best way to lose weight is to diet and excercise. Try the subway diet: footlong turkey sub with veggies, no mayo, no oil, no cheese, etc baked chips, diet pop for twice a day. Walk about 3-5 miles a day. You will see results in a few weeks. Cygnus The Bringer of Balance > How effective is starvation for weight loss? For example, how long would I > need to starve for to lose a noticeable amount of weight? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Jay > Try the subway diet: footlong turkey sub with veggies, > no mayo, no oil, no cheese, etc baked chips, diet pop for twice a day. > Walk about 3-5 miles a day. You will see results in a few weeks. Don't believe everything you see on TV commercials. What you describe is a low-calorie version of the Sumo wrestler diet. The best result one can hope for is to look like Jarred - 30% body fat and an extremly low metabolism. Of course, clinical studies have shown than only less than 5% can expect the results that Jarred got from this plan. One of the benifits of serving millions this crap is that it means that they'll never run out of testimonials. Low fat dieting has been shown to be a hoax! After spending $750 million on long term nutritional research, the U.S. government and Harvard found no correlation between heart disease and saturated animal fat. They did find that increassing animal fat consumption lowered the risk for cancer, heart disease, diabetes and obesity. See Gary Taubes article "The Soft Science of Dietary Fat" ( from Science)at: http://nasw.org/mem-maint/awards/01Taubesarticle1.html Ray Audette Author "NeanderThin" www.NeanderThin.com Actually I did the subway diet before jarrod made it famous. I lost nearly 25 pounds about 4 years ago by eating a 6in sub for lunch and dinner. Unfortunately about 4 years later I put all the weight (and more!) back on. I applied the subway diet again and lost about 30 pounds this year. This time I will continue to monitor my weight twice a day (nite and morning) to keep track of my weight; I didnt do that last time ;-) So the low fat/low calorie diet works for me. Cygnus The Bringer of Balance rso456@airmail.net (Ray Audette) wrote in message > Don't believe everything you see on TV commercials. What you describe > is a low-calorie version of the Sumo wrestler diet. The best result [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Author "NeanderThin" > www.NeanderThin.com |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.