Ectomorph, mesomorph, endomorph....

mperrott2205

I don't believe in classifying people in somatypes. There are too many variables to classify anyone person to a body type and be absolutely wrong about it.

Here's what we do know. Really thin people have a tendency to undereat. Really overweight people have a tendency to overeat.
People who are in the normal range, eat enough.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Have you ever come across a person who can eat all day long and never gain weight or a person who does all the right things, but can't lose weight? Or the guy who burgers and fries but some how manages to build muscle anyway aside from his unhealthy lifestyle?

No.

SomewhatCool

Threads like this = the reason why I love MFP.

Personally, I think stomatotypes are a load of BS. Where's the logic in that? Everybody's body is different; however, some of you seem to want to classify EVERYBODY. ON. EARTH. into three different categories. As I just said, everyone is different. Some people may lose weight(in fat OR muscle) quicker or slower than others, but that's purely because of their own diet choices which sets the basis for their metabolism. In the end, though, everybody loses weight at a caloric deficit. Everybody gains weight at a caloric surplus.

aylajane

This has been an interesting discussion, but I find it very frustrating to keep reading the exchange between OP and the ACE instructor... Because they AGREE and the OP just dont seem to realize it?

ACE instructor: Barring hormonal issues, eating above TDEE will cause weight to increase, eating below TDEE will cause weight to decrease. The rate of increase/decrease depends on how much above/below TDEE consistently.

OP: But everyone's TDEE is different.***

*** OP - this is not a contradiction to his statement. He never says everyone has the same TDEE. In that regard, you are right that everyone is different - they all have different TDEE's determined by all kinds of things like exercise, eating habits, existing muscle mass and fat store. But as the ACE instructor said - eating above **your** TDEE or below **your** TDEE will cause weight to increase or decrease. Not some constant number for everyone of a certain height and weight.

Also, you cant follow "everyone's TDEE is different" with "so the same thing will not work for everyone". As the ACE instructor said, consuming more calories than you expend will cause increased weight and consuming less will cause decrease in weight - that is true for everyone (possibly barring homonal issues). He never said that HOW you expend or consume those calories have to be the same! I can lift weights so I build more muscle and increase my resting BMR, or I can do cardio for an hour a day instead. My personality may determine which of those I will actually DO, but if the net result at the end of the day is that my TDEE is now 200 kc higher than it would have been, the result is the same. My shape will obviously be different since one builds muscle, and muscle will take longer to build up, etc...

Anyway, please just realize you are not really arguing with each other, more like talking past each other...

ninerbuff

This has been an interesting discussion, but I find it very frustrating to keep reading the exchange between OP and the ACE instructor... Because they AGREE and the OP just dont seem to realize it?

ACE instructor: Barring hormonal issues, eating above TDEE will cause weight to increase, eating below TDEE will cause weight to decrease. The rate of increase/decrease depends on how much above/below TDEE consistently.

OP: But everyone's TDEE is different.***

*** OP - this is not a contradiction to his statement. He never says everyone has the same TDEE. In that regard, you are right that everyone is different - they all have different TDEE's determined by all kinds of things like exercise, eating habits, existing muscle mass and fat store. But as the ACE instructor said - eating above **your** TDEE or below **your** TDEE will cause weight to increase or decrease. Not some constant number for everyone of a certain height and weight.

Also, you cant follow "everyone's TDEE is different" with "so the same thing will not work for everyone". As the ACE instructor said, consuming more calories than you expend will cause increased weight and consuming less will cause decrease in weight - that is true for everyone (possibly barring homonal issues). He never said that HOW you expend or consume those calories have to be the same! I can lift weights so I build more muscle and increase my resting BMR, or I can do cardio for an hour a day instead. My personality may determine which of those I will actually DO, but if the net result at the end of the day is that my TDEE is now 200 kc higher than it would have been, the result is the same. My shape will obviously be different since one builds muscle, and muscle will take longer to build up, etc...

Anyway, please just realize you are not really arguing with each other, more like talking past each other...

Where it comes into disagreement is that the OP feels that eating certain ways applies when it comes to somatotyping. I'll disagree on this point because regardless of body type, adding muscle, losing weight, maintaining weight all have the same approaches (talking about energy increase/decrease/sustained).

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

MinimalistShoeAddict

This is clearly a controversial area. Most scientists today dismiss somatotyping at least as it relates to intelligence and others traits Dr. Sheldon was attempting to connect to body types..

"W. H. Sheldon, a researcher who believed that there was a relationship between body shape and intelligence and other traits..... Mr. Sheldon has since died, and his work has long been dismissed by most scientists as quackery. But it was apparently respected from the 1940's through the 1960's, because highly regarded colleges like Yale, Wellesley, Harvard, Princeton, Vassar and Swarthmore allowed him access to their students."

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/01/21/us/nude-photos-are-sealed-at-smithsonian.html

"The reigning school of the time, presided over by E. A. Hooton of Harvard and W. H. Sheldon" -- who directed an institute for physique studies at Columbia University -- "held that a person's body, measured and analyzed, could tell much about intelligence, temperament, moral worth and probable future achievement. The inspiration came from the founder of social Darwinism, Francis Galton, who proposed such a photo archive for the British population."

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/01/15/magazine/the-great-ivy-league-nude-posture-photo-scandal.html?pagewanted=all

cafeaulait7

Oops, another term I use about myself that I didn't know was controversial.

I have big muscles naturally compared to many of my peers. I always have, since childhood. No, I didn't work for them (or not like you'd expect). That makes my brother angry, because he has skinny legs and has to work very hard to build them. My sister has even more muscles than me, but she was always very athletic. If you look at my mom's side of the family, lots of our folks have big frames and more muscle than the average bear

Whatever that's called, I have it. I haven't noticed that I need any special diet or anything, but I do have to remember my lean body mass when figuring out my BMR. I starve on plans designed only for women of my height.

Y'all aren't saying that some families don't naturally pass down different physical traits related to frames, muscles, where they store fat, metabolisms, etc, are you? Because that would be silly. No, not everyone works really hard for how muscular they are, and yes lots of skinny people eat more than you'd expect (or be able to eat yourself and maintain). They've inherited frame differences or metabolisms that help explain it, right?

I can see where the actual theory as given is bunk, but I don't think we should go too far the other way, either. Genetics does play a role in what your body is like, right?

tigersword

Nobody said genetics don't play a role in body type. However, somatotypes don't exist. There's no such thing. Genetic variation is actually very, very small when it comes to biology, and it's mostly superficial, appearance related.