Body Fat and Heart Disease

Training
541

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Also everyone using the genetics cop out should start reading about epigenetics and how your life choices can I flue des your genes and the genes you pass to your offspring [/quote]

It would be nice if we could get guarantees though wouldn’t it? not arguing the possibility alone is not reason enough to try, but yeah for most it will never be enough to give up an “unhealthy life style”. [/quote]

I feel bad for them and their offspring. Doesn’t anyone wonder why people continue to get fatter? Why its easier to get fatter with each generation? Genetic profiles are being changed. The food does it. The lack of excessive does it. Getting fat does it ect ect. Why compound the problem? Why not try and fix what you can? I don’t understand this mentality. I don’t get oh I was born this way so fuck it. Why not change it and work as hard you can to combat the issues?

542

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Also everyone using the genetics cop out should start reading about epigenetics and how your life choices can I flue des your genes and the genes you pass to your offspring [/quote]

It would be nice if we could get guarantees though wouldn’t it? not arguing the possibility alone is not reason enough to try, but yeah for most it will never be enough to give up an “unhealthy life style”. [/quote]

I feel bad for them and their offspring. Doesn’t anyone wonder why people continue to get fatter? Why its easier to get fatter with each generation? Genetic profiles are being changed. The food does it. The lack of excessive does it. Getting fat does it ect ect. Why compound the problem? Why not try and fix what you can? I don’t understand this mentality. I don’t get oh I was born this way so fuck it. Why not change it and work as hard you can to combat the issues?[/quote]
But it’s so much easier to just blame genetics than actually do something about it.

543

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]steven alex wrote:
So all this means is that fat people like PX have a higher risk of certain illnesses but at the end of the day its just that, an elevated risk of them having a particular disease not a certainty. Yeah that sounds about right given that whenever you visit the GP your weight is often measured and discussed.

I would imagine PX’s weight and especially his fat levels being of concern and would think it sensible that his doctor recommend he at least attempt to lose some of his fat for health reasons. [/quote]

but that is not in fact what the study said, it said he should be evaluated to see if he has a genetic predisposition. simply losing weight doesn’t guarantee a reduced risk factor for those carrying fat internally.[/quote]
If visceral fat is the bigger risk factor for CVD then how does losing some of that fat not lower your risk?

We are speaking in general here.
Inb4 beating @GENETICS" to death with the natural trainee who only plays basketball and eats Mc Donald’s who is a better basketball player than MJ and is bigger than Ronnie Coleman all while getting healthier as they get fatter.[/quote]

I get your point and so does everyone else. It is not an absolute and requires individuals be evaluated on an individual bases.

There are plenty of health concerns with being overweight. They become more when you are obese. The problem is that the health community in general does not account for lean body mass when making these assumptions. I have been told I am overweight many times, and that I am I nearing obese which is simply not true. All of these without any scientific verification of the information. You are X ft tall and Weigh X amount you have a BMI approaching Obese. You should loose some weight…

look up the definition of obese, it leaves room for may not be of any issue to your health.

Anyway, a more interesting idea to me is if simply body weight, even pure muscle puts one at risk for things like diabetes when approaching 300lbs. That rich piana guy for example. Is he at risk for diabetes or most likely type 2 simply because of his mass? [/quote]
I understand this and that is why it has been stated countless times that we are not using BMI as a basis of anything.
We are purely talking about excessive fat that doesn’t fall into the obese range of 25+%
So more in the 18-24% range which would be fat but not obese.

I do think overall body weight is a health risk.
Carrying extra fat is worse than extra muscle but the added weight in general is taking on body systems for sure.[/quote]
but if the person is carrying almost no visceral fat at 18-24% then are they unhealthy?[/quote]
I find it hard to believe that a person out there is carrying almost no visceral fat but is borderline obese, but yeah, they would still be unhealthy.
Or less healthy than they would be if they were 12%[/quote]

you can never give absolutes like that when it comes to health… There are to many variables.[/quote]

I have yet to see anyone speak in absolutes other than the one.

Also you lose proportionally more visceral fat than sub Q unless you have a pathophysiologic endocrine conditon.

I am still waiting for someone to actually support why losing bf is such a bad thing especially when it comes to health and shit even gaining muscle.
[/quote]

I added a few photos to my hub to show how my fat is distributed and how I look at lower body fat. I have been successful in getting lean, but I think my tendency to store visceral fat has made getting super lean more difficult than it is for others.

I don’t care to argue your point as I don’t think that losing bf is a bad thing when it comes to health.

I will say that increased fat does allow for greater weight to be lifted increasing the likelihood that the person may gain muscle and be stronger when they are leaner. [/quote]

Well I still have yet to see a lean healthy person that has considerable visceral fat. A gut can also come from food, weak abdominals, bad posture ect

And weight lifted does not equal more muscle per se

Also more bf increasing the fat the muscle ratio making it less than ideal
[/quote]

You have not seen a lean person with cardiac vascular health issues? [/quote]
is that what I wrote?[/quote]
yeah, so I know that is not what you wrote exactly, but answer my question. Can you guarantee someone good health if they lose weight?

544

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Also everyone using the genetics cop out should start reading about epigenetics and how your life choices can I flue des your genes and the genes you pass to your offspring [/quote]

It would be nice if we could get guarantees though wouldn’t it? not arguing the possibility alone is not reason enough to try, but yeah for most it will never be enough to give up an “unhealthy life style”. [/quote]

I feel bad for them and their offspring. Doesn’t anyone wonder why people continue to get fatter? Why its easier to get fatter with each generation? Genetic profiles are being changed. The food does it. The lack of excessive does it. Getting fat does it ect ect. Why compound the problem? Why not try and fix what you can? I don’t understand this mentality. I don’t get oh I was born this way so fuck it. Why not change it and work as hard you can to combat the issues?[/quote]
But it’s so much easier to just blame genetics than actually do something about it.[/quote]

It was extremely had for me to loose the weight, and I struggle keeping it in check still. Society does really seem to make access a to unhealthy choice overly available. No excuse but easy to fall in to the trap. There is a chemical component to the dietary issues and it resemble addiction to narcotics in many ways.

545

I don’t guarantee anything ever. I will say much less likely than if that same person added extra bf

546

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Not seeing a lean person with considerable visceral fat =/= not seeing a lean person with cardiac health issues[/quote]

ok, but seeing someone with a higher body fat % does not equal seeing someone with Cardiac health issues.

547

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Not seeing a lean person with considerable visceral fat =/= not seeing a lean person with cardiac health issues[/quote]

ok, but seeing someone with a higher body fat % does not equal seeing someone with Cardiac health issues.

[/quote]

No one has said that. That will be at higher risk…are you saying their risk for disease is not higher than if they were leaner?

548

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Not seeing a lean person with considerable visceral fat =/= not seeing a lean person with cardiac health issues[/quote]

ok, but seeing someone with a higher body fat % does not equal seeing someone with Cardiac health issues.
[/quote]

No one has said that. That will be at higher risk…are you saying their risk for disease is not higher than if they were leaner?[/quote]
This is pointless man.

549

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Not seeing a lean person with considerable visceral fat =/= not seeing a lean person with cardiac health issues[/quote]

ok, but seeing someone with a higher body fat % does not equal seeing someone with Cardiac health issues.

[/quote]

No one has said that. That will be at higher risk…are you saying their risk for disease is not higher than if they were leaner?[/quote]

It depends on their genetic limits…sorry to be such a nit picker but talking general health is for people trying to push their latest drug through FDA approval IMO.

I am moving Home to Texas on Saturday from LA and about to sign off. I will try to check back tonight but depending on schedule may or may not all together. Kind busy with life stuff.

550

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Not seeing a lean person with considerable visceral fat =/= not seeing a lean person with cardiac health issues[/quote]

ok, but seeing someone with a higher body fat % does not equal seeing someone with Cardiac health issues.

[/quote]

No one has said that. That will be at higher risk…are you saying their risk for disease is not higher than if they were leaner?[/quote]

It depends on their genetic limits…sorry to be such a nit picker but talking general health is for people trying to push their latest drug through FDA approval IMO.

I am moving Home to Texas on Saturday from LA and about to sign off. I will try to check back tonight but depending on schedule may or may not all together. Kind busy with life stuff.

[/quote]

What depends on their genetic limit?

SM I agree this has gotten out of control

551

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
What depends on their genetic limit?

SM I agree this has gotten out of control
[/quote]
Everything depends on their genetic limit web though some believe there is no genetic limit (lol lets rehash that thread)

It’s the definition of arguing for the sake of arguing at this point and not being able to see the first through the trees.
Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, it does.

552

[quote]csulli wrote:e
That’s why I am confused.[/quote]

I get where you’re coming from, man. If you want to replace “is” with “can be” for the time being, that’s completely fine. Totally legit for that post and a better ending remark, in retrospect.

Unfortunately, etween a hectic work schedule (some chick called out for the week with a “UTI that requires 6 days of bed rest”) and a dearth of prescription medication, I’m really just not feeling particularly psyched up for much more than that^ at the moment.

If this thread (or 2.0) is still running this weekend, I’ll try to do better than that.

553

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cally wrote:
I’ve never seen a guy with minimal intra-abdonminal fat that was moderately fat in all other areas. These people exist?[/quote]

Unless you have x-ray vision, you haven’t seen ANYONE’s “intra-abdominal fat”.

Knowledge is power.[/quote]

And ignorance is bliss

554

I agree. It is pointless.

But I think citing studies where obese people lower their health risk factors with exercise is pointless when talking to people who are already working out. Most likely to a much higher degree, this makes me think it is also disingenuous. Clearly the cardio risk factors would not be comparable. It is not reasonable to assume that someone trains 5-6 days a week and is even doing moderate cardio has the same risk factors. They can most likely carry a higher body fat while having lower risk factors.

I said like circle jerk though and it was fun. But I’ll leave ya’ll the biscuit.

555

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:
I agree. It is pointless.

But I think citing studies where obese people lower their health risk factors with exercise is pointless when talking to people who are already working out. Most likely to a much higher degree, this makes me think it is also disingenuous. Clearly the cardio risk factors would not be comparable. It is not reasonable to assume that someone trains 5-6 days a week and is even doing moderate cardio has the same risk factors. They can most likely carry a higher body fat while having lower risk factors.

I said like circle jerk though and it was fun. But I’ll leave ya’ll the biscuit. [/quote]

Good posts in this thread…and I agree…it is pointless.

Some of the posters here have an agenda…clearly.

556

Everyone in here still arguing, huh? Awesome.

557

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Some of the posters here have an agenda.[/quote]

Right.

Who doesn’t?

558

He’s obviously trying to insinuate that their “agenda” is to just to argue with him or something like that. I get tired of all of the finger pointing around here. Everyone just loves bickering too much.

559

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Some of the posters here have an agenda.[/quote]

Right.

Who doesn’t?[/quote]

Personally my agenda is to learn and expand my knowledge this place is hard to do that in

560

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Some of the posters here have an agenda.[/quote]

Right.

Who doesn’t?[/quote]

Personally my agenda is to learn and expand my knowledge this place is hard to do that in[/quote]
Agreed.
It’s terribly evident when you look at a thread like this.
People arguing semantics, twisting words and nitpicking every study posted based on one word or phrase.
It would be nice to have a thread where this doesn’t happen but I guess that can’t happen.

Thanks to everyone who actually contributed to this thread.