The Body Weight Factor

Training
1021

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:
Obesity-associated activation of NF-�??�??�?�ºB heightens inflammatory responses that exacerbate insulin resistance.[/quote]

How many times have I written that OBESITY causing insulin resistance isn’t being debated at all?

Why did you post this? [/quote]

but don’t you think there must be a sliding scale? Do you really think that when you’re ripped, you’re insulin sensitive, then you get a little heavier, still insulin sensitive, full house now, still insulin sensitive, then you get fat and all of a sudden you’re insulin resistant?

Surely it must come on gradually with the weight gain?[/quote]

The point I have made for about 30 pages is that the PROBLEM is making the statement that body fat ALONE causes changes in insulin resistance. This leads to more laymen changing that into, "Hey guys, I gained 5lbs of fat therefore my “insulin sensitivity is worse”. This would be a false way of seeing the data.

I have had several people show me nothing but studies about OBESE people like they can’;t understand this point at all…and after this many pages, it is getting ridiculous for this much resistance to what I am saying.

It isn’t so much a “sliding scale” as it is an entire CONDITION of being overweight or obese.

This leads to decreased mobility, decreased metabolism, decrease conditioning and is usually related to a poor diet and/or changes in training.

You cant relate obesity related studies to a population of people who literally act nothing like a sedentary fat person.

If you gain too much body weight, yes mobility and conditioning can be affected which is how I would view this and NOT just “body fat”.[/quote]

I’m not sure if when you use caps like that if you are just trying to emphasise key points or if it’s you getting pissed off…

Anyway I think I get what you’re saying. Things like the decrease in mobility, decreased metabolism etc are the cause, and while those would also come on gradually along with the fat gain, suggesting that the insulin resistance would also come on gradually, the fact that the weight training population trains means their mobility, metabolism etc stay good so it does not effect them in the same way as it would a sedentary person. That way a weight training individual can carry more fat without the negative effects that would be indicated for a sedentary person.

Have I got that right? That actually sounds fair enough.

1022

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

I’m not sure if when you use caps like that if you are just trying to emphasise key points or if it’s you getting pissed off…[/quote]

Nothing here is pissing me off. I highlight words for emphasis…seeing as I have written the exact same thing for 30-40 pages and people are still missing it.

[quote]

Anyway I think I get what you’re saying. Things like the decrease in mobility, decreased metabolism etc are the cause, and while those would also come on gradually along with the fat gain, suggesting that the insulin resistance would also come on gradually, the fact that the weight training population trains means their mobility, metabolism etc stay good so it does not effect them in the same way as it would a sedentary person. That way a weight training individual can carry more fat without the negative effects that would be indicated for a sedentary person.

Have I got that right? That actually sounds fair enough.[/quote]

That is exactly what I have been saying over and over. That is why you may sense some frustration.

These studies being posted are done on OBESE people. It has become habit or the norm for personal trainers to take that and turn it into, “oh no, if you gain fat at all your insulin sensitivity is affected”…which is simply not true. It is NOT that simple.

Yet people still believe it…and using that as some reason to avoid working on size as a younger lifter is a mistake.

It is like some extreme fear of fat gain…when many of us see little problem losing body fat once we are carrying more muscle mass and no one is telling people to get that fat in the first place.

1023

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:
Obesity-associated activation of NF-�??�??�??�?�ºB heightens inflammatory responses that exacerbate insulin resistance.[/quote]

How many times have I written that OBESITY causing insulin resistance isn’t being debated at all?

Why did you post this? [/quote]

but don’t you think there must be a sliding scale? Do you really think that when you’re ripped, you’re insulin sensitive, then you get a little heavier, still insulin sensitive, full house now, still insulin sensitive, then you get fat and all of a sudden you’re insulin resistant?

Surely it must come on gradually with the weight gain?[/quote]

The point I have made for about 30 pages is that the PROBLEM is making the statement that body fat ALONE causes changes in insulin resistance. This leads to more laymen changing that into, "Hey guys, I gained 5lbs of fat therefore my “insulin sensitivity is worse”. This would be a false way of seeing the data.

I have had several people show me nothing but studies about OBESE people like they can’;t understand this point at all…and after this many pages, it is getting ridiculous for this much resistance to what I am saying.

It isn’t so much a “sliding scale” as it is an entire CONDITION of being overweight or obese.

This leads to decreased mobility, decreased metabolism, decrease conditioning and is usually related to a poor diet and/or changes in training.

You cant relate obesity related studies to a population of people who literally act nothing like a sedentary fat person.

If you gain too much body weight, yes mobility and conditioning can be affected which is how I would view this and NOT just “body fat”.[/quote]

I’m not sure if when you use caps like that if you are just trying to emphasise key points or if it’s you getting pissed off…

Anyway I think I get what you’re saying. Things like the decrease in mobility, decreased metabolism etc are the cause, and while those would also come on gradually along with the fat gain, suggesting that the insulin resistance would also come on gradually, the fact that the weight training population trains means their mobility, metabolism etc stay good so it does not effect them in the same way as it would a sedentary person. That way a weight training individual can carry more fat without the negative effects that would be indicated for a sedentary person.

Have I got that right? That actually sounds fair enough.[/quote]

Note that he has no evidence or study for this belief.

Also note that having a better sensitivity at the same bodyfat level of someone else is meaningless. What matters is optimizing yourself. For the individual, training or not, you would still expect improvement leaning out. So, yeah, you might be better off than a lazy couch potato, BUT that doesn’t necessarily make it optimal. And it DOESN’T mean you wouldn’t increase sensitivity by getting leaner as a trained person.

That sort of comparison is only useful in excusing yourself, not optimizing it.

1024

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:
Obesity-associated activation of NF-�??�??�??�??�?�ºB heightens inflammatory responses that exacerbate insulin resistance.[/quote]

How many times have I written that OBESITY causing insulin resistance isn’t being debated at all?

Why did you post this? [/quote]

but don’t you think there must be a sliding scale? Do you really think that when you’re ripped, you’re insulin sensitive, then you get a little heavier, still insulin sensitive, full house now, still insulin sensitive, then you get fat and all of a sudden you’re insulin resistant?

Surely it must come on gradually with the weight gain?[/quote]

The point I have made for about 30 pages is that the PROBLEM is making the statement that body fat ALONE causes changes in insulin resistance. This leads to more laymen changing that into, "Hey guys, I gained 5lbs of fat therefore my “insulin sensitivity is worse”. This would be a false way of seeing the data.

I have had several people show me nothing but studies about OBESE people like they can’;t understand this point at all…and after this many pages, it is getting ridiculous for this much resistance to what I am saying.

It isn’t so much a “sliding scale” as it is an entire CONDITION of being overweight or obese.

This leads to decreased mobility, decreased metabolism, decrease conditioning and is usually related to a poor diet and/or changes in training.

You cant relate obesity related studies to a population of people who literally act nothing like a sedentary fat person.

If you gain too much body weight, yes mobility and conditioning can be affected which is how I would view this and NOT just “body fat”.[/quote]

I’m not sure if when you use caps like that if you are just trying to emphasise key points or if it’s you getting pissed off…

Anyway I think I get what you’re saying. Things like the decrease in mobility, decreased metabolism etc are the cause, and while those would also come on gradually along with the fat gain, suggesting that the insulin resistance would also come on gradually, the fact that the weight training population trains means their mobility, metabolism etc stay good so it does not effect them in the same way as it would a sedentary person. That way a weight training individual can carry more fat without the negative effects that would be indicated for a sedentary person.

Have I got that right? That actually sounds fair enough.[/quote]

Note that he has no evidence or study for this belief.

Also note that having a better sensitivity at the same bodyfat level of someone else is meaningless. What matters is optimizing yourself. For the individual, training or not, you would still expect improvement leaning out. So, yeah, you might be better off than a lazy couch potato, BUT that doesn’t necessarily make it optimal. And it DOESN’T mean you wouldn’t increase sensitivity by getting leaner as a trained person.

That sort of comparison is only useful in excusing yourself, not optimizing it.
[/quote]
exactly

a lean guy who trains
a full house guy who trains the same

who is going to have better insulin sensitivity? the lean guy
yay

1025

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Note that he has no evidence or study for this belief.[/quote]

?? You don’t have any studies showing that small changes in fat alone in an otherwise healthy person who trains regularly with no other changes to training or diet shows significant changes in insulin resistance.

[quote]

Also note that having a better sensitivity at the same bodyfat level of someone else is meaningless. What matters is optimizing yourself. [/quote]

Very true…which is why one person can be very healthy at one certain percentage and another may not.

That is why looking at a number alone is a mistake

For the person NOT training, they do not have the functional system of someone who does.

[quote]

So, yeah, you might be better off than a lazy couch potato, BUT that doesn’t necessarily make it optimal. And it DOESN’T mean you wouldn’t increase sensitivity by getting leaner as a trained person.[/quote]

It doesn’t mean you would either.

1026

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

exactly

a lean guy who trains
a full house guy who trains the same

who is going to have better insulin sensitivity? the lean guy
yay[/quote]

Really? You don’t understand that individuals are more complex than that and the leaner guy could have diabetes?

My uncle was diagnosed with diabetes and he has been thin and lean his whole life. How do you explain that?

1027

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Nothing here is pissing me off. I highlight words for emphasis…seeing as I have written the exact same thing for 30-40 pages and people are still missing it.

[/quote]

well I got it, so that’s one at least :wink:

I think you make a good point about the things like mobility and metabolism not being affected in the weight training population in the same way as the sedentary population, but I think the fat gain must still make a difference.

The way I think it works (broscience alert!) is that the mobility decrease makes a difference, the metabolism decrease makes a difference, and the fat gain makes a difference. If you eliminate the mobility and metabolism decrease, then there is less of an effect, but the fat gain will still have an effect. I dunno, just seems logical to me. I guess the question remains as to how much of a difference…

I think that DD posting his improvement in fasted glucose supports this. He was/is a big dude so we can assume his mobility and metabolism were probably up to snuff, but losing fat still helped his insulin sensitivity.

Interesting stuff.

1028

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Note that he has no evidence or study for this belief.[/quote]

?? You don’t have any studies showing that small changes in fat alone in an otherwise healthy person who trains regularly with no other changes to training or diet shows significant changes in insulin resistance.

[/quote]
Bullshit made up crap again huh? we are back to the small changes and fat alone story again huh? Yes, there is studies for what has been claimed. You’ve continually ignored it though, possibly because you keep inventing story to argue against.

[quote]

Health is a spectrum. there is no healthy or unhealthy. Optimization by nature implies small adjustments in a continuous system to incrementally make things better.

still waiting on those studies chief.

[quote]

exactly, hence you bringing it up is little more than a lame excuse you apparently have to tell yourself.

You really shouldn’t go full retard…

1029

would you suggest your uncle to get his body weight up?

take my example with twins…

I’m not sure why I have to make training/diet suggestions for all these newbs, and now diabetics lol. Let’s stop using guys who suck at being bigger/stronger/leaner to prove our points.

1030

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

exactly

a lean guy who trains
a full house guy who trains the same

who is going to have better insulin sensitivity? the lean guy
yay[/quote]

Really? You don’t understand that individuals are more complex than that and the leaner guy could have diabetes?

My uncle was diagnosed with diabetes and he has been thin and lean his whole life. How do you explain that?[/quote]

LOL. yeah, this diseased guy disproves optimization of hormones for a trained individual.

I knew a guy that drank OJ. Bam, he got herpes. So, don’t drink OJ.

Full retard.

1031

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

exactly

a lean guy who trains
a full house guy who trains the same

who is going to have better insulin sensitivity? the lean guy
yay[/quote]

Really? You don’t understand that individuals are more complex than that and the leaner guy could have diabetes?

My uncle was diagnosed with diabetes and he has been thin and lean his whole life. How do you explain that?[/quote]

Of course it is more complex than just being lean since there is a lot of chemistry(or lack of) behind the scenes. That is not to say that being lean can have a significant effect on insulin sensitivity.

African Americans are genetically predisposed to have a much higher risk of diabetes. You can’t say that doesn’t have some effect even though he was lean.

1032

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Bullshit made up crap again huh? we are back to the small changes and fat alone story again huh? Yes, there is studies for what has been claimed. You’ve continually ignored it though, possibly because you keep inventing story to argue against.
[/quote]

Please post the studies.

Thank you for that info.

Of what? The reason most of you are finding studies on obese people is because they do NOT do many studies on people like us. Where do we find the study of people who all want to look like Ronnie Coleman who train daily and eat 6 meals a day?

[quote]

exactly, hence you bringing it up is little more than a lame excuse you apparently have to tell yourself.

You really shouldn’t go full retard…[/quote]

You sure do try to send insults a lot.

They don’t sound very witty though.

I would work on originality and basic concept if I were you.

Just trying to help.

1033

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

exactly

a lean guy who trains
a full house guy who trains the same

who is going to have better insulin sensitivity? the lean guy
yay[/quote]

Really? You don’t understand that individuals are more complex than that and the leaner guy could have diabetes?

My uncle was diagnosed with diabetes and he has been thin and lean his whole life. How do you explain that?[/quote]

LOL. yeah, this diseased guy disproves optimization of hormones for a trained individual.

I knew a guy that drank OJ. Bam, he got herpes. So, don’t drink OJ.

Full retard.[/quote]

?? Wait…why didn’t you respond the same when someone mentioned some guy who ate Twinkies?

You seem to only hate it when I alone do that.

Strange.

1034

[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:

Of course it is more complex than just being lean since there is a lot of chemistry(or lack of) behind the scenes. That is not to say that being lean can have a significant effect on insulin sensitivity.

African Americans are genetically predisposed to have a much higher risk of diabetes. You can’t say that doesn’t have some effect even though he was lean.
[/quote]

That isn’t the point. The point is that you can NOT claim that a leaner guy has better insulin sensitivity than someone carrying more fat with that as the only variable…yet you had no problem with that when browndisaster wrote it.

Why?

1035

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

exactly

a lean guy who trains
a full house guy who trains the same

who is going to have better insulin sensitivity? the lean guy
yay[/quote]

Really? You don’t understand that individuals are more complex than that and the leaner guy could have diabetes?

My uncle was diagnosed with diabetes and he has been thin and lean his whole life. How do you explain that?[/quote]

LOL. yeah, this diseased guy disproves optimization of hormones for a trained individual.

I knew a guy that drank OJ. Bam, he got herpes. So, don’t drink OJ.

Full retard.[/quote]

?? Wait…why didn’t you respond the same when someone mentioned some guy who ate Twinkies?

You seem to only hate it when I alone do that.

Strange.[/quote]

Because he wasn’t diseased. really? aren’t you a doctor?

Not to mention you rejected that because it was just one guy and he didn’t train. But you post an anecdote about a single guy with a disease who doesn’t train and demand reckoningâ?¦
Classic.

Not to mention the fact that what has been posted is that sensitivity is a continuum for the individual rendering even your anecdote of comparison of one diseased individual to some other non diseased individual even more dumb.

1036

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

exactly

a lean guy who trains
a full house guy who trains the same

who is going to have better insulin sensitivity? the lean guy
yay[/quote]

Really? You don’t understand that individuals are more complex than that and the leaner guy could have diabetes?

My uncle was diagnosed with diabetes and he has been thin and lean his whole life. How do you explain that?[/quote]

Simple, his pancreas packed up. How exactly is that relevant?!

1037

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Because he wasn’t diseased. really? aren’t you a doctor?

Not to mention you rejected that because it was just one guy and he didn’t train. But you post an anecdote about a single guy with a disease who doesn’t train and demand reckoningÃ?¢?Ã?¦
Classic.[/quote]

How do you know he doesn’t train?

I didn’t write that at all. Further, again, how can you claim my making a statement about one man is “full retard” but when someone does that in support of your own stance, you have no insults for it?

Wouldn’t the Twinkie man be “full retard”?

Uh, I didn’t make that relation.

Again, why so many insults?

Are you ok?

1038

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Because he wasn’t diseased. really? aren’t you a doctor?

Not to mention you rejected that because it was just one guy and he didn’t train. But you post an anecdote about a single guy with a disease who doesn’t train and demand reckoningÃ?¢?Ã?¦
Classic.[/quote]

How do you know he doesn’t train?

I didn’t write that at all. Further, again, how you claim my making a statament about one man is “full retard” but when someone does that in support of your own stance, you have no insults for it?

Wouldn’t the Twinkie man be “full retard”?

Uh, I didn’t make that relation.

Again, why so many insults?

Are you ok?[/quote]

You must have missed the first statement of my post. He wasn’t diseased. And yes you did. I feel no need to be polite to trolls.

1039

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

exactly

a lean guy who trains
a full house guy who trains the same

who is going to have better insulin sensitivity? the lean guy
yay[/quote]

Really? You don’t understand that individuals are more complex than that and the leaner guy could have diabetes?

My uncle was diagnosed with diabetes and he has been thin and lean his whole life. How do you explain that?[/quote]

Simple, his pancreas packed up. How exactly is that relevant?!
[/quote]

How is it relevant?

browndistaster stated that someone leaner than someone fatter has better insulin resistance./

Do you not see the problem with that without me explaining it?

1040

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

You must have missed the first statement of my post. He wasn’t diseased. And yes you did. I feel no need to be polite to trolls.[/quote]

My uncle wasn’t “diseased” his whole life UNTIL he was diagnosed with diabetes. That was only mentioned because someone said being leaner alone means you have better insulin resistance.

Since he was very thin his whole life, he never should have got diabetes from that logic, right?

Wow…it is like some of you miss the outright obvious.