[quote]anonym wrote:
Thanks, fellas. Just glad to see that some here got a little more than “blah” out of the discussion.[/quote]
LOL. Didn’t PX once brag about how good he was at debating?
He doesn’t have a good response to what you wrote, so he writes, “blah” to make it seem like your post isn’t even worthy of a response. What a joke.
Good sutff, anonym.
[quote]anonym wrote:
You’d really have just been better off doing more “pretending not to post much anymore” than to actually throw this out there thinking that it comes across as some sort of bored dismissal. Because, really, you and I both know that this is actually nothing more than a tacit admission of you wishing that just ignored my initial post (like you do all the other logical rebuttals which routinely dismantle your asinine assertions).
[/quote]
What are you talking about? People were acting like any body fat gain at all is a risk factor. That is what is being discussed. You admitted you were NOT discussing this in your first drawn out paragraph…so what are you arguing with me about?
[quote]
Dozens and dozens of posts across multiple threads full of you wheezing and flopping your way through the same old tired song and dance… and NOW you get bored.
Sure thing, brah. Everyone believes you.
I am not going to spell it out for you again because I KNOW that you understand what was meant (it was outlined quite clearly), just as I KNOW that this flimsy nitpicking of yours is nothing more substantial than an embarrassingly puerile attempt at preserving some measure of intellectual clout in this discussion… which is interesting, considering how little you care about what anyone on this site thinks of you.
While you’re totally pathetic when it comes to this sort of thing, I wouldn’t go so far as to chalk it up to mere trolling. I honestly do believe that your refusal to concede defeat, or even skulk away like the coward you are, is just the awkward, pitiable offspring of a primitively misguided confidence in your intellectual prowess and some barely latent self-esteem issues which routinely manifest as a delusional sense of pride and a rabid need to defend your imaginary throne on this website.[/quote]
Wow.
You got issues. You come in arguing with me about something I am NOT discussing. Get that fixed.
[quote]anonym wrote:
a wall of text followed by:
Moderate body fat “less than obesity” IS A RISK FACTOR for disease.[/quote]
Help me out here a bit. You made a great post that showed me basically having a gut can put you at a much greater risk for various disease/medical conditions, but then you said “moderate body fat is a risk factor” instead of “intra-abdominal fat is a risk factor”.
I’m not getting it 
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
a wall of text followed by:
Moderate body fat “less than obesity” IS A RISK FACTOR for disease.[/quote]
Help me out here a bit. You made a great post that showed me basically having a gut can put you at a much greater risk for various disease/medical conditions, but then you said “moderate body fat is a risk factor” instead of “intra-abdominal fat is a risk factor”.
I’m not getting it :/[/quote]
You don’t understand that both of those quotes apply?
Have you read through any of the 20+ articles that have been posted?
Being overweight IS a risk factor.
It’s just that simple.
The discussion is being devolved into much different talking points in order for a certain poster to save face and be right.
Don’t get it twisted.
Basically the definition of not being able to see the first through the trees.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
a wall of text followed by:
Moderate body fat “less than obesity” IS A RISK FACTOR for disease.[/quote]
Help me out here a bit. You made a great post that showed me basically having a gut can put you at a much greater risk for various disease/medical conditions, but then you said “moderate body fat is a risk factor” instead of “intra-abdominal fat is a risk factor”.
I’m not getting it :/[/quote]
You don’t understand that both of those quotes apply?
Have you read through any of the 20+ articles that have been posted?
Being overweight IS a risk factor.
It’s just that simple.
[/quote]
No I don’t understand.
I read the articles he posted, and they all support what he was saying brilliantly, but what they are saying and what he is saying is that abdominal adipose tissue/visceral fat/intra-abdominal fat/abdominal obesity etc are great indicators of health issues.
But then at the end he says “moderate bodyfat” is a risk factor rather than what he was talking about the entire time. I honestly am confused. What am I missing?
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Dear Professor,
I have asked you kindly at least 10 times to show me where you got that quote from Brick.
You “quoted” him and used that to be a condescending dickhead to me in order to prove your point.
I have asked close to a dozen times where you got that quote from.
Are we to take your lack of a response to mean that you did in fact make that quote up?
Does this mean that you were blatantly lying in rest to further your argument and now that you were called on it your true colors of cowardice show?
No response, no ownership of your lying bullshit, nothing.
Is this the conclusion that we are left with?
With how many times you have shouted “your reading comprehension sucks”, “stop lying”, “address what was actually written” and all that I’m surprised that you didn’t take one bit of your own advice.
I am still waiting for a response but I won’t hold my breath.[/quote]
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
a wall of text followed by:
Moderate body fat “less than obesity” IS A RISK FACTOR for disease.[/quote]
Help me out here a bit. You made a great post that showed me basically having a gut can put you at a much greater risk for various disease/medical conditions, but then you said “moderate body fat is a risk factor” instead of “intra-abdominal fat is a risk factor”.
I’m not getting it :/[/quote]
You don’t understand that both of those quotes apply?
Have you read through any of the 20+ articles that have been posted?
Being overweight IS a risk factor.
It’s just that simple.
[/quote]
No I don’t understand.
I read the articles he posted, and they all support what he was saying brilliantly, but what they are saying and what he is saying is that abdominal adipose tissue/visceral fat/intra-abdominal fat/abdominal obesity etc are great indicators of health issues.
But then at the end he says “moderate bodyfat” is a risk factor rather than what he was talking about the entire time. I honestly am confused. What am I missing?[/quote]
This is what the debate hinged on…people saying that simply having “moderate body fat” was a risk factor…when there is no research presented supporting that at all.
I went through his listed references and none supported the risk factor of “moderate body fat less than obesity”.
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
a wall of text followed by:
Moderate body fat “less than obesity” IS A RISK FACTOR for disease.[/quote]
Help me out here a bit. You made a great post that showed me basically having a gut can put you at a much greater risk for various disease/medical conditions, but then you said “moderate body fat is a risk factor” instead of “intra-abdominal fat is a risk factor”.
I’m not getting it :/[/quote]
You don’t understand that both of those quotes apply?
Have you read through any of the 20+ articles that have been posted?
Being overweight IS a risk factor.
It’s just that simple.
[/quote]
No I don’t understand.
I read the articles he posted, and they all support what he was saying brilliantly, but what they are saying and what he is saying is that abdominal adipose tissue/visceral fat/intra-abdominal fat/abdominal obesity etc are great indicators of health issues.
But then at the end he says “moderate bodyfat” is a risk factor rather than what he was talking about the entire time. I honestly am confused. What am I missing?[/quote]
“Moderete bodyfat” (which im assuming he means less than clinical obesity) and “Abdominal adipose tissue/visceral fat/intra-abdominal fat/ etc” are the same thing.
Moderate bodyfat is just a laymans term for those other labels.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
“Moderete bodyfat” (which im assuming he means less than clinical obesity) and “Abdominal adipose tissue/visceral fat/intra-abdominal fat/ etc” are the same thing.
Moderate bodyfat is just a laymans term for those other labels.[/quote]
This would be incorrect. Moderate body fat and intra-abdominal fat are by no means the same thing.
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
a wall of text followed by:
Moderate body fat “less than obesity” IS A RISK FACTOR for disease.[/quote]
Help me out here a bit. You made a great post that showed me basically having a gut can put you at a much greater risk for various disease/medical conditions, but then you said “moderate body fat is a risk factor” instead of “intra-abdominal fat is a risk factor”.
I’m not getting it :/[/quote]
You don’t understand that both of those quotes apply?
Have you read through any of the 20+ articles that have been posted?
Being overweight IS a risk factor.
It’s just that simple.
[/quote]
No I don’t understand.
I read the articles he posted, and they all support what he was saying brilliantly, but what they are saying and what he is saying is that abdominal adipose tissue/visceral fat/intra-abdominal fat/abdominal obesity etc are great indicators of health issues.
But then at the end he says “moderate bodyfat” is a risk factor rather than what he was talking about the entire time. I honestly am confused. What am I missing?[/quote]
It’s all bullshit jsut keep bulking man
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
It’s all bullshit jsut keep bulking man[/quote]
I actually think he politely just asked for an explanation.
In fact the study that I found most interesting seems to practically argue the opposite
Four measurements of fat: body mass index (BMI, kg/m(2)), body fat percentage measured using a dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scanner, waist/hip circumference ratio (WHR), and intra-abdominal adipose tissue area measured using computed tomography (CT) scanning
So they took BMI, BF%, waist/hip measurements, and intra-abdominal adipose tissue measurements.
Those were the four predictors they were testing.
“…only intra-abdominal adipose tissue area significantly predicted the levels of six metabolic risk factors…”
“For young individuals, intra-abdominal fat is the important component of the body fat for six of the eight metabolic risk factors.”
That’s why I am confused.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
“Moderete bodyfat” (which im assuming he means less than clinical obesity) and “Abdominal adipose tissue/visceral fat/intra-abdominal fat/ etc” are the same thing.
Moderate bodyfat is just a laymans term for those other labels.[/quote]
Now I get it thank you.
I don’t think they are the same, but I understand the conclusions drawn now if other people are treating those as synonymous.
I’m not really sure where to go with the conversation on how moderate bodyfat = intra-abdominal adipose tissue though.
[quote]csulli wrote:
I’m not really sure where to go with the conversation on how moderate bodyfat = intra-abdominal adipose tissue though.[/quote]
You don’t.
For instance, I have seen guys who are lean everywhere but have a gut (speaking of sedentary). This is “high intra-abdominal fat”.
Moderate body fat is what most of humanity now falls under.
They are not the same…and if that is what people thought, no wonder there is so much confusion.
Moral of the thread:
Whatever you do, don’t be skinny-fat LOL.
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Dear Professor,
I have asked you kindly at least 10 times to show me where you got that quote from Brick.
You “quoted” him and used that to be a condescending dickhead to me in order to prove your point.
I have asked close to a dozen times where you got that quote from.
Are we to take your lack of a response to mean that you did in fact make that quote up?
Does this mean that you were blatantly lying in rest to further your argument and now that you were called on it your true colors of cowardice show?
No response, no ownership of your lying bullshit, nothing.
Is this the conclusion that we are left with?
With how many times you have shouted “your reading comprehension sucks”, “stop lying”, “address what was actually written” and all that I’m surprised that you didn’t take one bit of your own advice.
I am still waiting for a response but I won’t hold my breath.[/quote][/quote]
Good post
[quote]csulli wrote:
Moral of the thread:
Whatever you do, don’t be skinny-fat LOL.[/quote]
Skinny fat or fat fat.
Both are bad.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
“Moderete bodyfat” (which im assuming he means less than clinical obesity) and “Abdominal adipose tissue/visceral fat/intra-abdominal fat/ etc” are the same thing.
Moderate bodyfat is just a laymans term for those other labels.[/quote]
This would be incorrect. Moderate body fat and intra-abdominal fat are by no means the same thing.[/quote]
There are basically two different kinds of fat.
Subcutaneous fat (the majority if fat) and visceral fat.
Intra abdominal fat is the same thing as visceral fat.
The term “moderate bodyfat” is a blanket statement that covers all types of fat.
So no, I am not incorrect.
No one has ever said “ohh that guy is carrying a good amount of body fat… But only the sub q kind, not visceral fat.”
Lol
Want to stop lying or address my other question for the 1,000 time I ask?
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Dear Professor,
I have asked you kindly at least 10 times to show me where you got that quote from Brick.
You “quoted” him and used that to be a condescending dickhead to me in order to prove your point.
I have asked close to a dozen times where you got that quote from.
Are we to take your lack of a response to mean that you did in fact make that quote up?
Does this mean that you were blatantly lying in rest to further your argument and now that you were called on it your true colors of cowardice show?
No response, no ownership of your lying bullshit, nothing.
Is this the conclusion that we are left with?
With how many times you have shouted “your reading comprehension sucks”, “stop lying”, “address what was actually written” and all that I’m surprised that you didn’t take one bit of your own advice.
I am still waiting for a response but I won’t hold my breath.[/quote][/quote]
Good post[/quote]
Best Post
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Dear Professor,
I have asked you kindly at least 10 times to show me where you got that quote from Brick.
You “quoted” him and used that to be a condescending dickhead to me in order to prove your point.
I have asked close to a dozen times where you got that quote from.
Are we to take your lack of a response to mean that you did in fact make that quote up?
Does this mean that you were blatantly lying in rest to further your argument and now that you were called on it your true colors of cowardice show?
No response, no ownership of your lying bullshit, nothing.
Is this the conclusion that we are left with?
With how many times you have shouted “your reading comprehension sucks”, “stop lying”, “address what was actually written” and all that I’m surprised that you didn’t take one bit of your own advice.
I am still waiting for a response but I won’t hold my breath.[/quote][/quote]
Good post[/quote]
Best Post[/quote]
Forever ignored Post.