Which is more dangerous?

Meerataila

Which is more dangerous, being someone with too little muscle mass, or someone with too little fat?

Take two people. One is ten pounds underweight but is what they call 'skinny fat', the other is ten pounds underweight and not skinny fat. The skinny fat person has enough body fat to maintain physical health but not enough muscle mass for her age and height. The other has enough muscle mass, but not enough body fat for good health.

I guess you could even have a third person: One with five pounds less muscle and five pounds less fat than is necessary to maintain proper health.

Let us assume they suffer no nutrition deficiency, they simply refuse to maintain a normal weight. Skinny fat refuses to be physically active in order to gain muscle, regular skinny won't eat enough to gain more fat, person in the middle won't work out for muscle and won't gain five pounds of fat, either.

Of the three, who is in the most danger of an early death? I am going to assume the one not carrying enough body fat, and that the one with five pounds less of each than is needed is still in more immediate danger from not having enough body fat. And the one with not enough muscle mass will probably live longer but risks bone density issues and the danger of bone breakage if she falls.

But I'm not sure, maybe there are other medical issues involved. Does anyone know?

WBB55

I'm gonna go with skinny fat, not due to body composition, but due to not exercising regularly.

Meerataila

I'm gonna go with skinny fat, not due to body composition, but due to not exercising regularly.

What would likely be the cause of death?

WBB55

Stroke or heart failure, I'd think, from not having regular exercise. My answer totally has nothing to do with body composition, though. And more about the health of the heart and blood vessels. Totally a wild guess though.

QuietBloom

Nobody knows the answer to that definitively. Having enough fat is crucial for hormone regulation, which in turn governs all our systems. I would think the one who refuses to eat enough runs the highest risk of ill health.

ElliottTN

Which is more dangerous, being someone with too little muscle mass, or someone with too little fat?

Take two people. One is ten pounds underweight but is what they call 'skinny fat', the other is ten pounds underweight and not skinny fat. The skinny fat person has enough body fat to maintain physical health but not enough muscle mass for her age and height. The other has enough muscle mass, but not enough body fat for good health.

I guess you could even have a third person: One with five pounds less muscle and five pounds less fat than is necessary to maintain proper health.

Let us assume they suffer no nutrition deficiency, they simply refuse to maintain a normal weight. Skinny fat refuses to be physically active in order to gain muscle, regular skinny won't eat enough to gain more fat, person in the middle won't work out for muscle and won't gain five pounds of fat, either.

Of the three, who is in the most danger of an early death? I am going to assume the one not carrying enough body fat, and that the one with five pounds less of each than is needed is still in more immediate danger from not having enough body fat. And the one with not enough muscle mass will probably live longer but risks bone density issues and the danger of bone breakage if she falls.

But I'm not sure, maybe there are other medical issues involved. Does anyone know?

Even if your question wasn't riddled with assumptions it would still be impossible to say. You throw even more of a wild card in there when you talk about one falling...are taking in random environmental factors at that point? What about possible genetic conditions? Hell, what if one just got cancer.

Maybe the question should be: If you had two clone test tube babies that were under 24 hour control of every moment and every movement of their lives with a controlled diet to cause X amount of weight difference in the two, who would live longer? Still no clue though.

Anniebotnen

An interesting theoretical question with no real answer based on the information provided. My guess would be thar the regular skinny person who exercises would live longer than the other two. There have been studies showing that very lean people live longer than fatter people, and that fitter individuals tend to live longer than unfit individuals, regardless of bodyfat levels.

Which does not answer the question regarding which one would die first.

ETA. In rereading our post, I noticed that you did not say that regular skinny exercises, only that the other two don't, so assumption on my part...

Meerataila

Nursing home patients with little to no fat are in the worst shape. Their quality of life is the lowest compared to the rest of the patients. Their mobility is poor and so is their skin integrity. Psychologically they're either ornery or withdrawn. These are the ones who won't eat or who want to live exclusively on tea and toast.

Patients who eat the protein on their meal tray or better yet, eat at least half of what's on their meal tray do better in every way. Even if they have too much fat on them, they also maintain some muscle mass. The skinny ones almost never do. The meatier ones maintain their mobility longer, have less skin breakdown, have fewer infections and heal faster from the colds they get. They live longer and live better.

Thanks all!

I think from this post and the others that the answer to my question is way more complicated to answer than I thought it would be.

I forgot that having more body fat does mean having more muscle because the body has to carry around that fat.

What if we take two nourished but underweight 25 year olds, one is underweight due to lack of muscle mass, one is underweight due to lack of body fat. Then I wonder who is in most danger of imminent death? And from what likely cause?

DeguelloTex

Probably neither is in imminent danger of dying.

If you're talking about someone with an eating disorder and low body fat is just one part of that, then that person is probably more at risk of dropping dead. If you're talking about someone who otherwise has his ducks in a row, he's probably not because it is extremely difficult to maintain that kind of low body fat over anything but very short periods of time.

Iwishyouwell

Many of the world's healthiest, oldest citizens are slightly underweight, with "too little muscle mass". One of the more consistent habits seen amongst the world's centenarians is a tendency to eat below normal levels and maintain very slight bodies, while remaining active.

There is more and more research being done surrounding the benefits of calorie restriction (eating slightly under recommended levels, not starvation).