EPTTeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 - Page 148
| Forum Index > Sports |
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
| ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
Aerisky
United States12129 Posts
Also tiny hands + wrists here too checking in ;-; | ||
|
decafchicken
United States20021 Posts
On December 08 2016 11:15 IgnE wrote: Because I wasn't a big guy in high school. It's not like I was a gifted natural football player or something. I made myself a big guy. Same. Was short and fat as an underclassman and tall/skinny fat when i graduated at like 165 lb. Didn't make any varsity sports teams. On December 08 2016 12:14 Aerisky wrote: Holy shit y'all are beasts :O If I ever get serious about gaining weight and getting much stronger I'd have to force feed myself cuz in the past working out 3x a week on SS & eating 3 meals + 2 snacks + protein powder has only upped my weight by 6-8 pounds or so. Must be unreal dedication on your guys' part. Also tiny hands + wrists here too checking in ;-; After about 2 years of eating 4-5k cal a day in college + gym 4-5 days/week I put on ~40 lbs | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6213 Posts
On December 08 2016 08:43 JimmyJRaynor wrote: i'll clarify and boil down my thinking. there exists a limit whereby adding muscle mass is detrimental to your long term health due to the extra work your organs must do to maintain that extra weight. life actuaries overgeneralize this using very old science because the "new science" is not reliable. They state every lb of weight gained beyond a certain average (x) results in a lower life expectancy. Clearly, the initial gain of muscle occurring at the very start of a person's first ever strength training program is either benificial or benign. i highly suspect it improves life expectancy. Clearly, any new muscle Eddie Guerrero was adding to his body in the last 2 years of his life was a bad mistake and had he paid attention to his body he might be alive today. you will get a warning sign you are approaching the too much muscle mass area when your performance in every other sport ( baseball, basketball , hockey, rugby, lacrosse) you play declines and continues to decline many months after u've added the new muscle mass in question. if you play a variety of sports and performance in every sport is declining 6+ months after you've added new mass you've gone too far. "new muscle" will sometimes make ur performance worse for a short time but eventually it should benefit your athletic performance. as soon as "new muscle" stops improving your athletic performance... its probably time to quit trying to add new muscle unless you make a living professionally as a power lifter. the big key in all this : pay attention to the signals your body gives you; don't over complicate things. if u r always slow and lethargic.. pay attention to it. OTOH if you are slam dunking the ball with ease and flying all over the court and extending your shooting range and abso-fucking-lultely kicking ass.. the decision to put on mass was a great one. Do you have any evidence to support this? You do realise that actuaries use averages of the whole population and that when the average human is overweight it's due to fat and not muscle. Your sports example doesn't make any sense to me. There's a huge difference between the optimal amount of muscle mass per sport. If we take rugby those guys are huge. They're way above the average and a lot heavier than that chart. So it's healthy for them to be overweight with muscle mass but not for us...? | ||
zatic
Zurich15328 Posts
On December 08 2016 12:23 decafchicken wrote: Same. Was short and fat as an underclassman and tall/skinny fat when i graduated at like 165 lb. Didn't make any varsity sports teams. That doesn't say anything about genetics though. A different skinny fat decaf with an inferior athletic genetic disposition would not have made the same transformation. | ||
|
Pulimuli
Sweden2766 Posts
But you dont have to be genetically gifted to look like igne i think, just hard work and most people can probably achieve something similar. Give it a decade with proper programming and eating and shit will happen | ||
|
GoTuNk!
Chile4591 Posts
On December 08 2016 19:25 Pulimuli wrote: Its kinda hard to know if you are genetically gifted until you start working out/playing sports/whatever. But you dont have to be genetically gifted to look like igne i think, just hard work and most people can probably achieve something similar. Give it a decade with proper programming and eating and shit will happen Exactly, getting big and strong is not running 100m sub 10s or winning Mr. Olympia. | ||
Jer99
Canada8157 Posts
| ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
| ||
|
decafchicken
United States20021 Posts
On December 08 2016 09:45 decafchicken wrote: From The NLM. Tell me more about this well-established science. In a representative sample of the US population, higher LTPA(leisure time physical activity) levels and lean body mass were associated with lower mortality in those without kidney disease. In CKD(chronic kidney disease), higher LTPA was associated with lower risk of death. There was no association between adiposity measures and death in those with and without CKD except for lower mortality associated with overweight among those without CKD. The data suggests the need to develop programs to facilitate an increase in physical activity in people with and without kidney disease. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4099406/ After accounting for baseline lifestyle factors and medical conditions, a higher risk of mortality was found for men with weight loss (HR 1.84, 95%CI 1.50, 2.26), total lean mass loss (HR 1.78, 95% CI 1.45, 2.19) and total fat mass loss (HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.34, 2.20) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3403719/ All the research I've been able to find shows that lower body mass = higher mortality. Seems that more LBM especially decreases mortality and even overall increased body mass (including people in the overweight BMI) regardless of LBM decreases mortality. | ||
|
FFGenerations
7088 Posts
| ||
|
GoTuNk!
Chile4591 Posts
On December 09 2016 02:58 FFGenerations wrote: 2nd study seems to revolve around men in the last decade of their lives (average 73 years old with the followup around average 76 or 78 years old) fyi afaik (even tho ambulatory). anyone who knows old people probably recognises that frail ones probably don't eat enough and also cope poorly all round Someone here posted a while ago a bunch of links of new research that basically people with more musle mass live longer. | ||
|
decafchicken
United States20021 Posts
On December 09 2016 02:58 FFGenerations wrote: 2nd study seems to revolve around men in the last decade of their lives (average 73 years old with the followup around average 76 or 78 years old) fyi afaik (even tho ambulatory). anyone who knows old people probably recognises that frail ones probably don't eat enough and also cope poorly all round Lol would you prefer a mortality study on 20 year olds and LBM? The 1st study focuses on 40-60 year olds if that's better for you. And frail old people as well as obese people both cope poorly in old age, however the studies show that in general higher weight and higher LBM people have a lower mortality. | ||
|
Aerisky
United States12129 Posts
On December 09 2016 00:05 decafchicken wrote: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4099406/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3403719/ All the research I've been able to find shows that lower body mass = higher mortality. Seems that more LBM especially decreases mortality and even overall increased body mass (including people in the overweight BMI) regardless of LBM decreases mortality. FUCK as a 118 5'10" guy i need to start gaining weight | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
On December 09 2016 06:13 Aerisky wrote: FUCK as a 118 5'10" guy i need to start gaining weight Don't worry. You'll gain weight. Just make sure it's the right kind. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
You're comparing people who sit on their ass all day, and people who walk essentially. The people in this experiment don't workout in the sense that people in this thread do. Doing a study on what I'm saying is difficult, because you have to follow people throughout their life, my argument is that if you weigh 200lbs due to high muscle when you're 20-45, that's going to have a negative impact on your organs that will be seen later in your life. The studies are both very disconnect from what I'm saying. Strength training is very different from what government programs consider as physical activity. So yeah, I think those studies are garbage at getting an understanding of how strength training affects people. For what I'm proposing, I think fully controlled experiments on animals are infinitely more useful than these studies on people, which you guys seem to disagree with. Obtaining valuable empirical evidence is too difficult, and you're better off creating a model and simulating that. | ||
|
FFGenerations
7088 Posts
i just found out i'm only 31 (thought i was 34, maybe 33) | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On December 09 2016 06:40 FiWiFaKi wrote: Those studies are bad and don't consider anything I was saying. You're comparing people who sit on their ass all day, and people who walk essentially. The people in this experiment don't workout in the sense that people in this thread do. Doing a study on what I'm saying is difficult, because you have to follow people throughout their life, my argument is that if you weigh 200lbs due to high muscle when you're 20-45, that's going to have a negative impact on your organs that will be seen later in your life. The studies are both very disconnect from what I'm saying. Strength training is very different from what government programs consider as physical activity. So yeah, I think those studies are garbage at getting an understanding of how strength training affects people. For what I'm proposing, I think fully controlled experiments on animals are infinitely more useful than these studies on people, which you guys seem to disagree with. Obtaining valuable empirical evidence is too difficult, and you're better off creating a model and simulating that. link some of your controlled animal studies i bet i have better bloodwork than you do. or is bloodwork not an appropriate indicator of "organ load" for you? we will have lots of evidence in another decade or so as these chronic deficit dieters start to die off | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
On December 09 2016 07:35 FFGenerations wrote: man you know that feel when you realise you were using 20kg barbell instead of 15kg barbell all this time? i just found out i'm only 31 (thought i was 34, maybe 33) Wat. | ||
| ||
