The Body Weight Factor

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I just wanted to point out that it appears that everyone does agree that the original post was right in that.

[quote]Should a skinny newb interested in making the most gains possible ever work on getting his body weight up to aid in strength gains?
[/quote]

It seems we agree that yes, increased body weight does help increase strength so spending time focusing on that mass when the gal is to be the biggest possible seems to be the way to go… [/quote]

LOL. Well if you gain muscle, your BW goes up so uh…not much to argue there.

Unless you actually meant BF instead of BW in your OP.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

You weren’t keeping fat in check when you ballooned up to around 300 lbs. And how can you tell how much muscle you gained if you never get your BF% checked? A lot of “big guys” think they are carrying a lot more muscle than they really are.[/quote]

You know, good post!

I don’t really care. This is about how I look and how I feel and the way this affects my life.

A number means nothing to me because I already reached the goal of being a really muscular individual way bigger than most.

It doesn’t matter what you “think” or what anyone else 'thinks". I don’t need to know the exact amount of muscle I gained to know I reached that goal.[/quote]

Right, everyone has individual goals which is why it’s tiresome to hear people say they have made more “progress” than guys who have goals to have some size and leanness.

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

Right, everyone has individual goals which is why it’s tiresome to hear people say they have made more “progress” than guys who have goals to have some size and leanness.[/quote]

?? I am not even sure what this means.

It seems like another way argue who is best…when this forum is for people with the goal of being big as well as leaner and not just lean.

I don’t see that many really big people here the likes of Steely or others like Fatty Fat.

If I gained more muscle than someone else, I tend to see that as progress. I am by no means decrying being lean in itself.

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

You weren’t keeping fat in check when you ballooned up to around 300 lbs. And how can you tell how much muscle you gained if you never get your BF% checked? A lot of “big guys” think they are carrying a lot more muscle than they really are.[/quote]

You know, good post!

I don’t really care. This is about how I look and how I feel and the way this affects my life.

A number means nothing to me because I already reached the goal of being a really muscular individual way bigger than most.

It doesn’t matter what you “think” or what anyone else 'thinks". I don’t need to know the exact amount of muscle I gained to know I reached that goal.[/quote]

Right, everyone has individual goals which is why it’s tiresome to hear people say they have made more “progress” than guys who have goals to have some size and leanness.[/quote]

Or that guys who lost BF and improved their blood work get dismissed as either an anomaly or “it was something other than BF. It’s not a significant factor”.

Way too insecure when you feel it’s a personal attack when someone says “Hey, you know what, insulin sensitivity increases when you lose BF!” Should be good new, right? How you can argue against this to the degree it has been just to defend your own path (I’m sure we’ll hear differently though) is beyond me.

I’m sure there are many here lately who see through it.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

I have even more science stuff to google now…

It is nice to see some actual science come out in these debates for a change.

Shame it seems to be getting ignored[/quote]

It wasn’t ignored.

He was mentioning what is seen in overweight and obese people.

Once again, I made the point that we are discussing trained individuals.

We already agree that OBESITY can cause hormonal changes alone.[/quote]

and the explanation for the twinkie guy? I must’ve missed that

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

I have even more science stuff to google now…

It is nice to see some actual science come out in these debates for a change.

Shame it seems to be getting ignored[/quote]

It wasn’t ignored.

He was mentioning what is seen in overweight and obese people.

Once again, I made the point that we are discussing trained individuals.

We already agree that OBESITY can cause hormonal changes alone.[/quote]

and the explanation for the twinkie guy? I must’ve missed that[/quote]

I guess you did.

I know this is subjective, but how can one claim to gain size while keeping bodyfat in check when that person is fat? That makes no sense.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

Right, everyone has individual goals which is why it’s tiresome to hear people say they have made more “progress” than guys who have goals to have some size and leanness.[/quote]

?? I am not even sure what this means.

It seems like another way argue who is best…when this forum is for people with the goal of being big as well as leaner and not just lean.

I don’t see that many really big people here the likes of Steely or others like Fatty Fat.

If I gained more muscle than someone else, I tend to see that as progress. I am by no means decrying being lean in itself.
[/quote]

Because some people don’t have the goal of being full house.

If you leaned out you probably wouldn’t be much bigger than some of those guys you think you are so far above in terms of “progress.”

in fact I think I missed where any science was used to disprove anonym’s posts.

Funny that. I looked again just there but couldn’t find it.

[quote]cueball wrote:

Or that guys who lost BF and improved their blood work get dismissed as either an anomaly or “it was something other than BF. It’s not a significant factor”.
[/quote]

No one said it is not a significant factor. It was said that you can not make a direct CAUSATION between fat and insulin resistance especially in a trained individual. That is because the CONDITION of being overweight involves many factors other than just body fat.

Just clearing that up for you since you seem to see words that are not written.

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
in fact I think I missed where any science was used to disprove anonym’s posts.

Funny that. I looked again just there but couldn’t find it.[/quote]

No one has to disprove what he wrote. No one disagrees that OBESITY causes hormonal changes.

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

I have even more science stuff to google now…

It is nice to see some actual science come out in these debates for a change.

Shame it seems to be getting ignored[/quote]

It wasn’t ignored.

He was mentioning what is seen in overweight and obese people.

Once again, I made the point that we are discussing trained individuals.

We already agree that OBESITY can cause hormonal changes alone.[/quote]

and the explanation for the twinkie guy? I must’ve missed that[/quote]

Here ya go:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

To make it clear for you, no specifics of that man were even posted, not his weight, his daily activity or his routine. One man eating Twinkies and seeing positive changes to blood work does not mean that Twinkies are safe or that simply losing fat is all it takes.

Once again, hearsay about one man now counts as a study?[/quote]

He’s a hearsay anomaly.

[quote]cueball wrote:

He’s a hearsay anomaly.[/quote]

Uh, he is until you post some specifics about him.

That is why I mentioned the lady who smoked…that you seemed to misunderstand.

One person seeing a certain result is not proof of anything especially when it is hearsay.

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:
It would be nice to have a conversation where all points are addressed, even those that may not fit into someone’s view.

For instance: the twinkie guy did nothing else but lose fat. His blood work improved. Showing BF to be a major factor.

Otherwise, it would seem that some here who cry about staying on topic and having an actual debate, are being dis-ingenuous. [/quote]

THIS OH GOD THIS[/quote]

Best Post[/quote]

Maximum Postus Ignorus[/quote]

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:
It would be nice to have a conversation where all points are addressed, even those that may not fit into someone’s view.

For instance: the twinkie guy did nothing else but lose fat. His blood work improved. Showing BF to be a major factor.

Otherwise, it would seem that some here who cry about staying on topic and having an actual debate, are being dis-ingenuous. [/quote]

THIS OH GOD THIS[/quote]

Best Post[/quote]

Maximum Postus Ignorus[/quote]

[/quote]

You didn’t ignorus my POSTUS!

/happy day

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

He’s a hearsay anomaly.[/quote]

Uh, he is until you post some specifics about him.

That is why I mentioned the lady who smoked…that you seemed to misunderstand.

One person seeing a certain result is not proof of anything especially when it is hearsay.[/quote]

There are more than one example in this thread alone. So, no more hearsay anomaly. Cool.

Inb4 "But, but, but, he changed how he exercised!!!11! This discredits the BF loss as the most significant factor!!11!

Whatever.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I just wanted to point out that it appears that everyone does agree that the original post was right in that.

[quote]Should a skinny newb interested in making the most gains possible ever work on getting his body weight up to aid in strength gains?
[/quote]

It seems we agree that yes, increased body weight does help increase strength so spending time focusing on that mass when the gal is to be the biggest possible seems to be the way to go… [/quote]

In other words…

“Hey everyone, I just wanted to point out that it appears the OP was right. And who was that? Oh yes, it was me. So I guess all I’m saying I was right and everyone else is wrong and I never really wanted a debate in the first place.”

[quote]Professor X wrote:
He was mentioning what is seen in overweight and obese people.[/quote]

Overweight, as in, carrying more body fat than is optimal yet not quite enough to be considered obese.

Are you implying many “full housers” aren’t at a high enough body fat to qualify for this label? Or many of the people on this forum bulking up right now?

But, in case you missed my clarification: fasting plasma NEFA has been seen to be significantly and positively correlated not only with body fat percentage, but also surrogate markers of adiposity (waist circumference, waist-hip ratio, sum skinfold thickness, etc.)

So, if you can manage to keep up without relying on ONLY the obese, we can move forward, though just to be clear I am completely certain you were talking out of you ass with the “studies we’ve seen” comment.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Once again, I made the point that we are discussing trained individuals.[/quote]

We already agree that OBESITY can cause hormonal changes alone.[/quote]

Look. We already know about the biochemical and endocrine aspects of fat tissue; numerous examples have been given in this thread. We also know that most (not all) of these biochemical and endocrine aspects have negative effects on insulin sensitivity, and have defined various mechanisms by which they exert their effects. We also know that these negative biochemical and endocrine aspects are strongly correlated with adipose tissue in a positive fashion.

Are you arguing against this? If not, then what?

You already agree that obesity leads to hormonal changes yet don’t want to admit that we ALSO know being overweight does, as well (overweight people aren’t free from T2D or insulin resistance, and the prevalence of these conditions is seen to decrease alongside BMI/body fat). Do you feel there is some “line in the sand” where, if you’re on one side, you are A-OK, but once you step over… blammo! Obesity! Hormonal changes!

Do you genuinely not feel that there is a sliding scale here, that this sort of thing doesn’t just crop up past a certain threshold but rather develops insidiously over years of increasing fat gain?

You argue about “trained” athletes… so, OK: for any individual athlete at a given level of largely immutable daily activity and behavior, do you honestly feel that no change WHATSOEVER in his/her insulin sensitivity could be quantitatively determined if he/she went from full house to lean? Forget moving from clinical disorder to healthful state, because from what I remember all those big guys who leaned out and reported better results were never diseased to begin with… they just optimized their sensitivity.

If you DO feel that there is some specific point where it all goes to shit… then, let’s here where you think it is. If you don’t, then I really can’t see how you can argue against the benefits of dropping body fat on insulin sensitivity, not just because the literature shows improved metrics coinciding with decreased BMI/body fat, but also because numerous successful and respected posters have shared their documented evidence as well as their personal and professional anecdotes attesting to this.

Ya know what? Let’s not bother moving forward. This thread sucks.

BEST THREAD

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
He was mentioning what is seen in overweight and obese people.[/quote]

Overweight, as in, carrying more body fat than is optimal yet not quite enough to be considered obese.

Are you implying many “full housers” aren’t at a high enough body fat to qualify for this label? Or many of the people on this forum bulking up right now?

But, in case you missed my clarification: fasting plasma NEFA has been seen to be significantly and positively correlated not only with body fat percentage, but also surrogate markers of adiposity (waist circumference, waist-hip ratio, sum skinfold thickness, etc.)

So, if you can manage to keep up without relying on ONLY the obese, we can move forward, though just to be clear I am completely certain you were talking out of you ass with the “studies we’ve seen” comment.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Once again, I made the point that we are discussing trained individuals.[/quote]

We already agree that OBESITY can cause hormonal changes alone.[/quote]

Look. We already know about the biochemical and endocrine aspects of fat tissue; numerous examples have been given in this thread. We also know that most (not all) of these biochemical and endocrine aspects have negative effects on insulin sensitivity, and have defined various mechanisms by which they exert their effects. We also know that these negative biochemical and endocrine aspects are strongly correlated with adipose tissue in a positive fashion.

Are you arguing against this? If not, then what?

You already agree that obesity leads to hormonal changes yet don’t want to admit that we ALSO know being overweight does, as well (overweight people aren’t free from T2D or insulin resistance, and the prevalence of these conditions is seen to decrease alongside BMI/body fat). Do you feel there is some “line in the sand” where, if you’re on one side, you are A-OK, but once you step over… blammo! Obesity! Hormonal changes!

Do you genuinely not feel that there is a sliding scale here, that this sort of thing doesn’t just crop up past a certain threshold but rather develops insidiously over years of increasing fat gain?

You argue about “trained” athletes… so, OK: for any individual athlete at a given level of largely immutable daily activity and behavior, do you honestly feel that no change WHATSOEVER in his/her insulin sensitivity could be quantitatively determined if he/she went from full house to lean? Forget moving from clinical disorder to healthful state, because from what I remember all those big guys who leaned out and reported better results were never diseased to begin with… they just optimized their sensitivity.

If you DO feel that there is some specific point where it all goes to shit… then, let’s here where you think it is. If you don’t, then I really can’t see how you can argue against the benefits of dropping body fat on insulin sensitivity, not just because the literature shows improved metrics coinciding with decreased BMI/body fat, but also because numerous successful and respected posters have shared their documented evidence as well as their personal and professional anecdotes attesting to this.

Ya know what? Let’s not bother moving forward. This thread sucks.[/quote]

Post Coitus