lol people not knowing the difference between correlation and causation
and correlating BMI with insulin resistance when abdominal obesity is the only thing correlated with it
like I said in the other thread, CR and IF both improve insulin resistance… not necessarily the “weight loss” part
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]steven alex wrote:
If someone reaches a weight of 280 and is consistent in their training and a natural but has no intention of dieting down is it beyond doubt that they couldnt have amassed eighty pounds? The argument is about eighty pounds of gained muscle AFTER dieting isnt it?[/quote]
Dieting or no dieting. No natural has gained that. [/quote]
??/ Wait a second, how is this even allowed to be written without being laughed at?
No natural person on planet Earth has ever gained 80lbs of muscle?
Are you serious?[/quote]
79 is the highest, once u hit 79 ur body stops building muscle and builds only fat
it’s like a glitch in the matrix
unless u use steroids, then it increases to 37PIGolden Ratio
how people got above the magical 50 lb limit no one knows… i’m just surprised the four horsemen didn’t show up once people starting exceeding this number
And remember we are talking about “Normal Weight” which means 185 lbs lean(because 185 + 80 = 265 lb Dorian Yates). It’s not like 130-170 are “Normal Weights” for someone who is 5’10 or anything like that
but yeah lets keep bringing up these limits without the preconditions “X height, Y Bodyfat%, Z weight”… it’s really useful to know these limits that can’t be used or applied by anyone because they are so vague
This thread is priceless.
[quote]marshaldteach wrote:
lol people not knowing the difference between correlation and causation
and correlating BMI with insulin resistance when abdominal obesity is the only thing correlated with it [/quote]
Well I know the difference. I have a life sciences background. But there are some things that should be looked when one (example: me) actually works diabetics and obese.
I don’t go by BMI in regards to TRAINED people. However it’s a good equation to use on untrained for people, because make no mistake about it, people with a BMI of greater than 26 are almost ALWAYS overweight!
I really don’t want to be a dick but some of your posts are scattered.
What is CR? I never heard the acronym. IF I think in this case stands for intermittent fasting. Where did this topic come from>
[quote]marshaldteach wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]steven alex wrote:
If someone reaches a weight of 280 and is consistent in their training and a natural but has no intention of dieting down is it beyond doubt that they couldnt have amassed eighty pounds? The argument is about eighty pounds of gained muscle AFTER dieting isnt it?[/quote]
Dieting or no dieting. No natural has gained that. [/quote]
??/ Wait a second, how is this even allowed to be written without being laughed at?
No natural person on planet Earth has ever gained 80lbs of muscle?
Are you serious?[/quote]
79 is the highest, once u hit 79 ur body stops building muscle and builds only fat
it’s like a glitch in the matrix
unless u use steroids, then it increases to 37PIGolden Ratio
how people got above the magical 50 lb limit no one knows… i’m just surprised the four horsemen didn’t show up once people starting exceeding this number
And remember we are talking about “Normal Weight” which means 170-180 lbs lean(because 170 + 80 = 250-260 lb Dorian Yates). It’s not like 130-170 are “Normal Weights” for someone who is 5’10 or anything like that
but yeah lets keep bringing up these limits without the preconditions “X height, Y Bodyfat%, Z weight”… it’s really useful to know these limits that can’t be used or applied by anyone because they are so vague
[/quote]
130 pounds for a 5’10" man would indicate a BMI of 19, which indicates underweight (<20). 170 IS normal for 5’10" considering the normal bodyweight for an untrained man is 149 to 183. No, these standards ARE NOT the be-all-end-all or set in stone, but they serve as gauges to things we’ve seen over and over again!
Keep babbling. I’m going to a natural pro qualifier this summer. I’m sure I’ll see some heavyweights with 60 or more pounds of LBM.
Care to talk in a coherent fashion when speaking with me? Perhaps then I’ll know what you’re getting at and be able to go back and forth a bit with you.
Actually, take the “I don’t mean to be a dick here” statement above. It’s clear you’re being dismissive and rude in your posts. Perhaps if you care to engage in a intellectual conversation and not dismiss me as some ignorant and uneducated simpleton I’ll do likewise. By the way, I REALLY, REALLY dislike bringing up academic and professional accolades, nor do I wish to be genuflected to because of them, but you’re talking to someone who’s exercised in some form or another since 12 years old, has a master’s in nutrition and exercise physiology, undergrad in nutrition, and dietetic internship, and electives in kinesiology and biomechanics. My thesis professor used to write for THIS site and is the cofounder of the largest sports nutrition organization the world.
I don’t say this to be hostile or arrogant, but I take it you speak to me as if I’m an imbecile. Look at the fashion in which you speak to me.
[quote]marshaldteach wrote:
It’s not like 130-170 are “Normal Weights” for someone who is 5’10 or anything like that [/quote]
I just want fo point this out cos i think you mentioned something similar earlier:
130lbs at 5’10 most definitely is NOT a normal weight.
that is abnormally thin if you are walking around like that you are an absolute fucking rake.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
I really don’t want to be a dick but some of your posts are scattered.
What is CR? I never heard the acronym. IF I think in this case stands for intermittent fasting. Where did this topic come from>
[/quote]
caloric restriction, i only mention it because you mentioned “losing weight” which involves eating less… which would obviously affect insulin sensitivity… much more than losing weight would
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
130 pounds for a 5’10" man would indicate a BMI of 19, which indicates underweight (<20).
Keep babbling. I’m going to a natural pro qualifier this summer. I’m sure I’ll see some heavyweights with 60 or more pounds of LBM. [/quote]
lol, ok, 132 then
good job nitpicking by 2 lbs
but on a serious note how do you use a 185 lb lean dorian yates as a “normal” starting weight?
just curious
[quote]marshaldteach wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
130 pounds for a 5’10" man would indicate a BMI of 19, which indicates underweight (<20).
Keep babbling. I’m going to a natural pro qualifier this summer. I’m sure I’ll see some heavyweights with 60 or more pounds of LBM. [/quote]
lol, ok, 132 then
good job nitpicking by 2 lbs
but on a serious note how do you use a 185 lb lean dorian yates as a “normal” starting weight?
just curious
[/quote]
You’re the one nitpicking, and BMI of 19 is a gangly, cachectic male! Ever seen a man weighing a buck-30 at 5’10"? I have, repeatedly. Tell me how they look. Check your 132 bump-up also.
185 for 5’11" is normal, especially for large framed man such as Dorian.
[quote]marshaldteach wrote:
caloric restriction, i only mention it because you mentioned “losing weight” which involves eating less… which would obviously affect insulin sensitivity… much more than losing weight would
[/quote]
I seriously have no idea what the hell you’re talking about. Either I’m dumber than I thought, or you know more than me.
Care to show me the healthcare population you deal with on a daily basis?
Please, read this sentence again, revise it, and just tell me what it means. Can anyone here help out?
Oh, and the normal UNTRAINED weight for a 5’11" man is 155 to 189, so therefore by this range, 185 is considered normal (clinically speaking, NOT for TRAINED people).
For trained people, BMI and IBW (ideal bodyweight) mean little, expect in cases to indicate underweight.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
130 pounds for a 5’10" man would indicate a BMI of 19, which indicates underweight (<20). 170 IS normal for 5’10" considering the normal bodyweight for an untrained man is 149 to 183. No, these standards ARE NOT the be-all-end-all or set in stone, but they serve as gauges to things we’ve seen over and over again!
Keep babbling. I’m going to a natural pro qualifier this summer. I’m sure I’ll see some heavyweights with 60 or more pounds of LBM.
Care to talk in a coherent fashion when speaking with me? Perhaps then I’ll know what you’re getting at and be able to go back and forth a bit with you.
Actually, take the “I don’t mean to be a dick here” statement above. It’s clear you’re being dismissive and rude in your posts. Perhaps if you care to engage in a intellectual conversation and not dismiss me as some ignorant and uneducated simpleton I’ll do likewise. By the way, I REALLY, REALLY dislike bringing up academic and professional accolades, nor do I wish to be genuflected to because of them, but you’re talking to someone who’s exercised in some form or another since 12 years old, has a master’s in nutrition and exercise physiology, undergrad in nutrition, and dietetic internship, and electives in kinesiology and biomechanics. My thesis professor used to write for THIS site and is the cofounder of the largest sports nutrition organization the world.
I don’t say this to be hostile or arrogant, but I take it you speak to me as if I’m an imbecile. Look at the fashion in which you speak to me. [/quote]
lol
I didn’t say you were an imbecile, I was just saying the way you guys bring up these numbers is funny
The 50 or 80 lb limits(first it was 50?) that people keep mentioning have no evidence or anything… they were just picked out of a hat, or a shoebox… that is what I am making fun of.
yeah you can use DY as an example, but if you start him at 130 then he gained 135 lb of LBM, if you start him at 200 then he only gained 65
all I ask is you put your statements in context? Obviously how much LBM you gain depends on where you start
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
But no science points to a direct relationship with insulin and fat gain. You can not say 1lbs of gain equals x amt of insulin resistance. Obesity is not the same as “:fat gain”. It is a condition that involves many factors.
[/quote]
I know right. All we have are thousands and thousands of obese and overweight people with abnormal glucose and lipid values that improve when they lose the weight and the diabetics who need less insulin and oral meds when they lose weight and exercise. Clearly we shouldn’t pay attention to this.
[/quote]
I’m no dr … But I def know this.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Oh, and the normal UNTRAINED weight for a 5’11" man is 155 to 189, so therefore by this range, 185 is considered normal (clinically speaking, NOT for TRAINED people).
For trained people, BMI and IBW (ideal bodyweight) mean little, expect in cases to indicate underweight. [/quote]
How much would you say Dorian weighed in at at his best contest shape, meaning low digits
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Oh, and the normal UNTRAINED weight for a 5’11" man is 155 to 189, so therefore by this range, 185 is considered normal (clinically speaking, NOT for TRAINED people).
For trained people, BMI and IBW (ideal bodyweight) mean little, expect in cases to indicate underweight. [/quote]
are you using the british BMI charts by any chance?
apparently 130-175 is “normal” for 5’10
but anyway you are basically nitpicking what is defined as ‘normal’ because you never decided to be specific when you were stating your ‘limit’
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a thread so dedicated to shit that meant absolutely nothing with respect to training.
Why anyone would care, in a practical sense, whether someone can theoretically add 80 lbs of muscle to a body is about as senseless as anything I’ve read.
I managed to just about not think about that theoretical limitation the whole time I wreaked absolute havoc on my back today. In fact, in the fleeting moment that it did enter into my conscious, I immedately visualized two slabs of 50 lb lats hanging off of my spine. That was some monster shit right there.
Then, I rowed.
Theoretically add 80 lbs of muscle? Motherfucker, I’m gonna row this motherfucking heavy ass motherfucking weight 20 motherfucking times. And then do it again with more motherfucking weight. Then I’m gonna do it again. 50.mother.fucking.pound.slabs.of.beef.lats.hanging.off.my.spine.
I got your 80 lbs of muscle… Right here…
Can’t add 80lbs of muscle? WTF? IT’S STILL MY MOTHER.FUCKING.SET
Thank you CT Fletcher
You know who doesn’t give a fuck about whether a theoretical person can add a theoretical 80lbs of muscle? CT Motherfucking Fletcher and everyone else who hasn’t posted in this thread.
Quick, somebody start a thread about a theoretical homogeneous cube that models a 175 lbs person of indeterminate height and argue about how introducing a theoritical heterogeneous material will affect his theoretical insulin level so I can ignore that mother.fucking.thread, too.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a thread so dedicated to shit that meant absolutely nothing with respect to training.
Why anyone would care, in a practical sense, whether someone can theoretically add 80 lbs of muscle to a body is about as senseless as anything I’ve read.
I managed to just about not think about that theoretical limitation the whole time I wreaked absolute havoc on my back today. In fact, in the fleeting moment that it did enter into my conscious, I immedately visualized two slabs of 50 lb lats hanging off of my spine. That was some monster shit right there.
Then, I rowed.
Theoretically add 80 lbs of muscle? Motherfucker, I’m gonna row this motherfucking heavy ass motherfucking weight 20 motherfucking times. And then do it again with more motherfucking weight. Then I’m gonna do it again. 50.mother.fucking.pound.slabs.of.beef.lats.hanging.off.my.spine.
I got your 80 lbs of muscle… Right here…
Can’t add 80lbs of muscle? WTF? IT’S STILL MY MOTHER.FUCKING.SET
Thank you CT Fletcher
You know who doesn’t give a fuck about whether a theoretical person can add a theoretical 80lbs of muscle? CT Motherfucking Fletcher and everyone else who hasn’t posted in this thread.
Quick, somebody start a thread about a theoretical homogeneous cube that models a 175 lbs person of indeterminate height and argue about how introducing a theoritical heterogeneous material will affect his theoretical insulin level so I can ignore that mother.fucking.thread, too.
[/quote]
Yea but I can add 80lb of muscle. Just trying to prove a point bro.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a thread so dedicated to shit that meant absolutely nothing with respect to training.
Why anyone would care, in a practical sense, whether someone can theoretically add 80 lbs of muscle to a body is about as senseless as anything I’ve read.
I managed to just about not think about that theoretical limitation the whole time I wreaked absolute havoc on my back today. In fact, in the fleeting moment that it did enter into my conscious, I immedately visualized two slabs of 50 lb lats hanging off of my spine. That was some monster shit right there.
Then, I rowed.
Theoretically add 80 lbs of muscle? Motherfucker, I’m gonna row this motherfucking heavy ass motherfucking weight 20 motherfucking times. And then do it again with more motherfucking weight. Then I’m gonna do it again. 50.mother.fucking.pound.slabs.of.beef.lats.hanging.off.my.spine.
I got your 80 lbs of muscle… Right here…
Can’t add 80lbs of muscle? WTF? IT’S STILL MY MOTHER.FUCKING.SET
Thank you CT Fletcher
You know who doesn’t give a fuck about whether a theoretical person can add a theoretical 80lbs of muscle? CT Motherfucking Fletcher and everyone else who hasn’t posted in this thread.
Quick, somebody start a thread about a theoretical homogeneous cube that models a 175 lbs person of indeterminate height and argue about how introducing a theoritical heterogeneous material will affect his theoretical insulin level so I can ignore that mother.fucking.thread, too.
[/quote]
I actually felt like lifting while reading this.
Alright, SteelyD, you have a good point–as usual. I only wish I could be as carefree and laid back. However, looking back on it, I was just trying to have a conversation on topics I like. But yeah, got carried away. Sorry about that.
express yourself man
I liked the chart bluecollartr8n posted in his thread. It basically showed that guys near 3 lbs/inch and lean looked incredible
I AM A WEIGHTLIFTER!! I LIFT SHIT!!!
This is all anyone needs right here.
80 lb limit, my ass. Fuck interstitial muscle fat n shit!
SHUT UP AND LIFT, MOTHERFUCKERS!
