[quote]bpick86 wrote:
Agreed increased body fat is related to increased health problems, the point to ponder though, is how??
Is it because increased body fat itself causes the complications??
Or is it because increased body fat is a result of several things that do cause complications, bad diet and lack of exercise namely??[/quote]
Option B, definitely. Increased bodyfat is the result of something. Inappropriate diet, lack of exercise, inappropriate exercise, hormonal/glandular disturbance, disease, medication side effect… something causes the body to gain (or hold onto, in the case of “frustrated dieters”) excessive bodyfat.
[quote]LoRez wrote:
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
In the first article they never really define “fit”. To me being 240 lbs as a women automatically removes her from the category of fit. By what standard are these fit obese people judged so that someone thinks that they are not actually out of shape?[/quote]
Because they can do aerobics?[/quote]
Aerobic fitness a.k.a. aerobic endurance is the “classic” method of determining fitness, possibly basic flexibility as well. A basic blood panel (cholesterol, triglycerides, blood sugar, blood pressure, etc.) is probably also considered. Using these standards, I could see how a 240-woman could be considered “fit”, unexpected as it may be.
Is it the most efficient or all-encompassing definition? No, I wouldn’t say so. But “what is ‘fit’?” is a whole 'nother topic that would tie into functional training, health vs. fitness (not the same thing; Dan john has talked about it), and personal goals per individual, and other topics that would deserve their own attention.
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]LoRez wrote:
Pretty soon they’ll be trying to redefine “hot”.[/quote]
See the “Fatkini” thread in GAL.[/quote]
Or on the flip side…