Of refeeds and diet breaks

1113114116118119148

Replies

  • mph323
    mph323 Posts: 3,565 Member
    Psychgrrl wrote: »
    @mph323 How much does the technician really know about what’s healthiest for you regarding weight range and body fat?

    You’re a lean, mean weight-lifting machine! :smiley: I think it’s awesome!

    Thanks! <3
  • HDBKLM
    HDBKLM Posts: 466 Member
    Thanks @anubis609 I get it now. I appreciate the thoroughness of your response!
  • alteredsteve175
    alteredsteve175 Posts: 2,725 Member
    mph323 wrote: »

    I'm dying here! Without knowing the context, unless you used it in the sentence "Since you are older than dirt, here's my suggestion..." that seems a little...extreme.

    Thanks for the chuckle, @mph323. :DOlder Than Dirt is my screen name in a couple of fantasy football leagues. I embrace it as well.

  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    I can only view optimal bf% from a metabolic standpoint, though that may include cardiovascular and oncology, depending on someone's definition. The optimal range of body fat is going to largely play into one's overall well-being, outlook on life, subjective happiness, etc. That said, when people are in the lean/athletic range of body fat, they actually have a bit of a buffer to better handle some of the more deleterious effects of disease development since their bodies are primed for adapting to any changes in either direction. Compare the prevalence of disease development of a lean athlete to that of a normal weight, sedentary individual. More often than not, epidemiological studies will favor the lean athlete for longevity in mortality rates, but epidemiological studies aren't accurate in the sense that so many factors are at play and taking apart one or two causes are not indicative of others. They're just a tool to "try" and include as much of the population as possible without being nitpicky.

    http://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/9/9/1009/pdf

    So, I wouldn't haphazardly advise someone to just gain more body fat without context. But I also couldn't recommend anyone to lose more if they don't need to. You can always maintain your current body fat and just focus on enjoying life in a healthy and active way.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,235 Member
    edited January 2018
    While these guys found that low overweight BMIs were good for longevity, especially in more recent decades:
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/1555137
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2520627

    These guys published, in the summer of 2016, a "stick to normal bmi levels" review study:
    thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(16)30175-1/abstract
  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    Those are good studies, but BMI =/= bf%. I can use myself as an example. I'm overweight in my BMI calculation (176.8 lbs and 5'9"), but 12.2% skulpt measured (which is probably 16-17% bf at the moment).

    Also, epidemiology / all-cause mortality rates have a wild range of factors from gender, socioeconomic status, activity level, environment, genetic predisoposition, cultural difference, diet, and other multivariate factors that can contribute to that result. Which is why it's nice to use as a discussion model but need to be specified in contextual application. Even my own citation which used actual bf% cutoffs wasn't very strong in supporting evidence to recommend whether someone should gain or lose fat if measured at the border of lean/average range.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,235 Member
    @anubis609 I think that all I have concluded from the above studies is that it is too close to call anytime you have a combined lean mass and body fat amount around the high normal level. Plus or minus a couple of points.

    In other words other considerations maybe more important at that point of time.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    mph323 wrote: »
    @anubis609 and @PAV8888 thanks for the links and the observations. You guys shook some thoughts loose in my head! Here's a couple -

    All my closest relatives have died from the results of lifestyle choices (alcohol, tobacco) or complications of old age (my dad's pushing 90 and still goes to the gym and lifts 3 days a week), and I don't have any health markers that would pre-disposition me to anything in particular. I don't have any reason to tailor my weight/body fat goals to avoid any specific disease. I get to choose!

    I've never in my life reached a weight goal and said "Score! Now to enjoy the results of my hard work!". I notice I'm not doing that now either, I'm stressing over what the next goal should be. The next goal should be learning how to maintain this healthy body in a way that becomes second nature, and experimenting with all the fun things I can do now that I'm lighter and stronger!

    And oh that can be so difficult to have that as a goal.

    Like I have a hard time keeping to an eating goal if the workouts aren't happening.
    Then again that could be a problem of liking to eat more.
    Or I keep attempting the "feed a cold" theory since that's what I get.
  • bmeadows380
    bmeadows380 Posts: 2,981 Member
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    While these guys found that low overweight BMIs were good for longevity, especially in more recent decades:
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/1555137
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2520627

    These guys published, in the summer of 2016, a "stick to normal bmi levels" review study:
    thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(16)30175-1/abstract

    I find humor in all the studies on mortality rates. what I mean is that in the end, our mortality rate is going to be 100% :) I know that the best goal we can have is to live as long as we can and in the best health that we can, so of course, keeping an eye on things that are detrimental to our health is a good idea. I just find it humorous and rather ironic that some folks will spend all their time obsessing over over little thing that will possibly, maybe affect a .0X% of their mortality rate in the next 10 years instead of just enjoying their lives.

    That's not pointed at any one person; I'm just making a random, general statement based upon comments I see on various articles and the way various articles are often sensationalized. I just think that instead of stressing out over the minuscule things, that most people would be far happier if they'd deal with the big issues in life and then enjoy their lives - you know, enjoy the forest instead of focusing on the trees..... lol

    But that's just me waxing philosophical! And of course, I'm just as guilty as most other folks. for instance, just this morning, I was temporarily irked because most days, I eat right at or slightly over my calorie limit, but since I'm at or over, that means I don't get the "and was under her calorie goal" message when I close my diary. I know, its really stupid to let it irk me, even if it only lasts for 5 seconds or so, but I'm a rules follower, and I have this initial knee-jerk reaction when it comes to things my mind has perceived as "the rules" so when my brain sees something and categorizes it as a rule that I failed to achieve, I get a sense of guilt. Rationally, I know this is ridiculous; but emotions rarely care about being rational......Of course, that statement follows back on to why so many folks stress over the minors :) So I'm just as guilty as everyone else!

    anubis609 wrote: »
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    @anubis609 I think that all I have concluded from the above studies is that it is too close to call anytime you have a combined lean mass and body fat amount around the high normal level. Plus or minus a couple of points.

    In other words other considerations maybe more important at that point of time.

    Wholeheartedly agree.

    In other news, I'm apparently a glutton for punishment. I mosey into various keto threads (or literally get "summoned" on occasion) and the misinformation is astounding. I'd rather practice Olympic lifts for 4 hours. Is that so much to ask for?

    oh, so you caught that you were mentioned in the "keto means not counting calories" thread! *grins*

    I saw this thread this morning that you guys might find interesting:

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10635955/lyle-mcdonald-legit-or-fos
  • mph323
    mph323 Posts: 3,565 Member
    heybales wrote: »
    mph323 wrote: »
    @anubis609 and @PAV8888 thanks for the links and the observations. You guys shook some thoughts loose in my head! Here's a couple -

    All my closest relatives have died from the results of lifestyle choices (alcohol, tobacco) or complications of old age (my dad's pushing 90 and still goes to the gym and lifts 3 days a week), and I don't have any health markers that would pre-disposition me to anything in particular. I don't have any reason to tailor my weight/body fat goals to avoid any specific disease. I get to choose!

    I've never in my life reached a weight goal and said "Score! Now to enjoy the results of my hard work!". I notice I'm not doing that now either, I'm stressing over what the next goal should be. The next goal should be learning how to maintain this healthy body in a way that becomes second nature, and experimenting with all the fun things I can do now that I'm lighter and stronger!

    And oh that can be so difficult to have that as a goal.

    Like I have a hard time keeping to an eating goal if the workouts aren't happening.
    Then again that could be a problem of liking to eat more.
    Or I keep attempting the "feed a cold" theory since that's what I get.

    Exactly! I re-thought that a little and signed up yesterday for a metric century in April that I did last year when I was 10 lbs heavier, and really struggled. I'm counting on the fear of putting myself through that again to replace the thrill of watching the scale go down.

    And yeah, getting injured or sick would be problematical, cause ya gotta fuel that recovery, right?
  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    edited January 2018
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    While these guys found that low overweight BMIs were good for longevity, especially in more recent decades:
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/1555137
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2520627

    These guys published, in the summer of 2016, a "stick to normal bmi levels" review study:
    thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(16)30175-1/abstract

    I find humor in all the studies on mortality rates. what I mean is that in the end, our mortality rate is going to be 100% :) I know that the best goal we can have is to live as long as we can and in the best health that we can, so of course, keeping an eye on things that are detrimental to our health is a good idea. I just find it humorous and rather ironic that some folks will spend all their time obsessing over over little thing that will possibly, maybe affect a .0X% of their mortality rate in the next 10 years instead of just enjoying their lives.

    That's not pointed at any one person; I'm just making a random, general statement based upon comments I see on various articles and the way various articles are often sensationalized. I just think that instead of stressing out over the minuscule things, that most people would be far happier if they'd deal with the big issues in life and then enjoy their lives - you know, enjoy the forest instead of focusing on the trees..... lol

    But that's just me waxing philosophical! And of course, I'm just as guilty as most other folks. for instance, just this morning, I was temporarily irked because most days, I eat right at or slightly over my calorie limit, but since I'm at or over, that means I don't get the "and was under her calorie goal" message when I close my diary. I know, its really stupid to let it irk me, even if it only lasts for 5 seconds or so, but I'm a rules follower, and I have this initial knee-jerk reaction when it comes to things my mind has perceived as "the rules" so when my brain sees something and categorizes it as a rule that I failed to achieve, I get a sense of guilt. Rationally, I know this is ridiculous; but emotions rarely care about being rational......Of course, that statement follows back on to why so many folks stress over the minors :) So I'm just as guilty as everyone else!

    anubis609 wrote: »
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    @anubis609 I think that all I have concluded from the above studies is that it is too close to call anytime you have a combined lean mass and body fat amount around the high normal level. Plus or minus a couple of points.

    In other words other considerations maybe more important at that point of time.

    Wholeheartedly agree.

    In other news, I'm apparently a glutton for punishment. I mosey into various keto threads (or literally get "summoned" on occasion) and the misinformation is astounding. I'd rather practice Olympic lifts for 4 hours. Is that so much to ask for?

    oh, so you caught that you were mentioned in the "keto means not counting calories" thread! *grins*

    I saw this thread this morning that you guys might find interesting:

    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10635955/lyle-mcdonald-legit-or-fos

    I forget which form of social media I get tagged in sometimes lol. It's highly possible I've engaged the same people on mfp/fb/instagram/twitter without knowing.

    And to your statement, yes, the absolute cause for mortality is birth. Haha. Controllable risk factors just enhance or worsen the journey, but from a philosophical perspective, there is merit in making it as meaningful as possible.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    anubis609 wrote: »
    I think the women's book becomes available in the next couple of hours for anyone who was waiting on it.

    Yes, I just hugged you for telling us about the book :lol:
  • Terebynthia
    Terebynthia Posts: 75 Member
    Cool! I feel a loot reward coming on :dizzy:
  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    I think the women's book becomes available in the next couple of hours for anyone who was waiting on it.

    Yes, I just hugged you for telling us about the book :lol:

    I get free hugs for announcing his release? I'll have to tag him in something completely ridiculous as thanks :tongue:
  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    Prepare your wallets. It's live!

    http://store.bodyrecomposition.com
  • Nony_Mouse
    Nony_Mouse Posts: 5,646 Member
    anubis609 wrote: »
    Prepare your wallets. It's live!

    http://store.bodyrecomposition.com

    Eek!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    Lyle's breaking the internet. Apparently his announcement sent the site into errors for some people lol. Good luck. There are signed and regular versions.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,011 Member
    anubis609 wrote: »
    Lyle's breaking the internet. Apparently his announcement sent the site into errors for some people lol. Good luck. There are signed and regular versions.

    Yeah, I got an error the first couple of times.


    But, but, but... Is it more expensive than the other books because it's pink?!? Dammit :lol:
  • Nony_Mouse
    Nony_Mouse Posts: 5,646 Member
    anubis609 wrote: »
    Lyle's breaking the internet. Apparently his announcement sent the site into errors for some people lol. Good luck. There are signed and regular versions.

    I want the signed version dammit!! But an extra $40 on top for postage, plus conversion to NZD, plus may as well have Kindle version as well...
  • Nony_Mouse
    Nony_Mouse Posts: 5,646 Member
    Decisions like this stress me out
  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    Lyle's breaking the internet. Apparently his announcement sent the site into errors for some people lol. Good luck. There are signed and regular versions.

    Yeah, I got an error the first couple of times.


    But, but, but... Is it more expensive than the other books because it's pink?!? Dammit :lol:

    It’s expensive because it’s long af lol. Plus he’s donating $5 to a foundation for women so there’s that. But I got the signed + pdf version. Just because I like 2 copies of stuff haha
  • Nony_Mouse
    Nony_Mouse Posts: 5,646 Member
    anubis609 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    anubis609 wrote: »
    Lyle's breaking the internet. Apparently his announcement sent the site into errors for some people lol. Good luck. There are signed and regular versions.

    Yeah, I got an error the first couple of times.


    But, but, but... Is it more expensive than the other books because it's pink?!? Dammit :lol:

    It’s expensive because it’s long af lol. Plus he’s donating $5 to a foundation for women so there’s that. But I got the signed + pdf version. Just because I like 2 copies of stuff haha

    Yeah I got signed plus Kindle, with spency shipping to NZ. And managed to order two copies thanks to an internal server error message! If I'd waited a couple of minutes before hitting purchase again the confirmation email would have come through :\. So now I have the fun of working out how to reverse that (email to Lyle has been dispatched).
  • anubis609
    anubis609 Posts: 3,966 Member
    Yeah he doesn't have a problem with refunding. He should get that sorted for you.
  • Nony_Mouse
    Nony_Mouse Posts: 5,646 Member
    I'm probably not the only one it happened to...