Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Which animal is the most fit?

2

Replies

  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,997 Member
    edited August 2017
    Do you think the sloth is more fit than most humans?

    How long do you think you could hang upside down from a tree branch while sleeping?

    Not longer than a sloth, I'm sure. LOL!

  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,997 Member
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Without our brains we would have been extinct a long time ago :).

    Probably so. Even w/a brain, arguably less adaptable than ours, so went the Neanderthals.

  • JeromeBarry1
    JeromeBarry1 Posts: 10,179 Member
    VO2 isn't the only important thing. Since humans have the ability to shed heat through sweat and other critters don't, humans are effective hunters. Prey tire before we do.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    Even in the best shape, human beings are the least "fit" of all living things by almost any means of measurement or comparison.

    Our only "advantage" comes from how we use our brains to overcome our physical deficiencies. Otherwise, we'd be very low on the food chain.

    You can get a bit of variation in VO2 max if you change your diet.... Eat more like a sled dog. LCD vs higher carb diet. ;) Diet can offer some advantage if measuring fitness by VO2 max.

    From the FASTER study:
    FASTER-Fat-Ox-data-chart.bmp
    http://www.vespapower.com/the-emerging-science-on-fat-adaptation/

    A vote for flying pigs!
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    Even in the best shape, human beings are the least "fit" of all living things by almost any means of measurement or comparison.

    Our only "advantage" comes from how we use our brains to overcome our physical deficiencies. Otherwise, we'd be very low on the food chain.

    You can get a bit of variation in VO2 max if you change your diet.... Eat more like a sled dog. LCD vs higher carb diet. ;) Diet can offer some advantage if measuring fitness by VO2 max.

    From the FASTER study:
    FASTER-Fat-Ox-data-chart.bmp
    http://www.vespapower.com/the-emerging-science-on-fat-adaptation/

    It doesn't readily translate into performance in all cases, though, because low carb can impair exercise economy.
    Http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1113/JP273230/abstract


    I would give the feats of strength to the blue whale in terms of gross strength. I was fascinated with them as a child.
  • VeronicaA76
    VeronicaA76 Posts: 1,116 Member
    Ants: The carpenter ant can lift 1,000 times it's body weight. That's the equivalent of a 180lb person lifting a Boeing 747!!! Now that's heavy lifting.
  • VeronicaA76
    VeronicaA76 Posts: 1,116 Member
    ccrdragon wrote: »
    The Arctic tern flies 24,000 miles every year between the northern and southern hemispheres. I think that takes the endurance mark.

    Makes any endurance runner look down right lazy.
  • johnwelk
    johnwelk Posts: 396 Member
    edited August 2017
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    Even in the best shape, human beings are the least "fit" of all living things by almost any means of measurement or comparison.

    Our only "advantage" comes from how we use our brains to overcome our physical deficiencies. Otherwise, we'd be very low on the food chain.

    You can get a bit of variation in VO2 max if you change your diet.... Eat more like a sled dog. LCD vs higher carb diet. ;) Diet can offer some advantage if measuring fitness by VO2 max.

    From the FASTER study:
    FASTER-Fat-Ox-data-chart.bmp
    http://www.vespapower.com/the-emerging-science-on-fat-adaptation/

    Except that the study you quoted doesn't say what you think it says. They weren't studying V02 max as a function of diet. They didn't measure fitness by V02 max. They were studying fat oxidation at 64% of V02 max.

    And last I checked most MFP members aren't sled dogs.
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    Motorsheen wrote: »
    every other animal is hoping for 2nd place......


    6352e0cc2e7e66fce28b3448b2f2abb8--honey-badger-the-badger.jpg

    e7447cf7c779d80e7509fa70f76584bd--dachshund-humor-dachshund-love.jpg
  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    Even in the best shape, human beings are the least "fit" of all living things by almost any means of measurement or comparison.

    Our only "advantage" comes from how we use our brains to overcome our physical deficiencies. Otherwise, we'd be very low on the food chain.

    Even a human with the intelligence of a raccoon could outdo a 'possum. Or a raccoon for that matter.
  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,019 Member
    edited August 2017
    johnwelk wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    Even in the best shape, human beings are the least "fit" of all living things by almost any means of measurement or comparison.

    Our only "advantage" comes from how we use our brains to overcome our physical deficiencies. Otherwise, we'd be very low on the food chain.

    You can get a bit of variation in VO2 max if you change your diet.... Eat more like a sled dog. LCD vs higher carb diet. ;) Diet can offer some advantage if measuring fitness by VO2 max.

    From the FASTER study:
    FASTER-Fat-Ox-data-chart.bmp
    http://www.vespapower.com/the-emerging-science-on-fat-adaptation/

    Except that the study you quoted doesn't say what you think it says. They weren't studying V02 max as a function of diet. They didn't measure fitness by V02 max. They were studying fat oxidation at 64% of V02 max.

    And last I checked most MFP members aren't sled dogs.

    Just threw it out there to point out that VO2 max is not THE measure of fitness. It is just one part of it. The men tested were all about equally fit elite endurance athletes.

    What about insects? Those things can migrate thousands of kilometres and their strength is impressive. Monarch butterfly? Ants?
  • johnwelk
    johnwelk Posts: 396 Member
    edited August 2017
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    johnwelk wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    Even in the best shape, human beings are the least "fit" of all living things by almost any means of measurement or comparison.

    Our only "advantage" comes from how we use our brains to overcome our physical deficiencies. Otherwise, we'd be very low on the food chain.

    You can get a bit of variation in VO2 max if you change your diet.... Eat more like a sled dog. LCD vs higher carb diet. ;) Diet can offer some advantage if measuring fitness by VO2 max.

    From the FASTER study:
    FASTER-Fat-Ox-data-chart.bmp
    http://www.vespapower.com/the-emerging-science-on-fat-adaptation/

    Except that the study you quoted doesn't say what you think it says. They weren't studying V02 max as a function of diet. They didn't measure fitness by V02 max. They were studying fat oxidation at 64% of V02 max.

    And last I checked most MFP members aren't sled dogs.

    Just threw it out there to point out that VO2 max is not THE measure of fitness. It is just one part of it. The men tested were all about equally fit elite endurance athletes.
    Let's pretend for a moment that this was actually true, (but you, I and the rest of the people reading this thread know it's not what you actually meant when you posted this study) the FASTER study didn't show "VO2 max is not THE measure of fitness, " as they were not comparing measures of fitness.

    So let's be honest and take a look at what you originally posted about the faster study:
    You can get a bit of variation in VO2 max if you change your diet.... Eat more like a sled dog. LCD vs higher carb diet. ;) Diet can offer some advantage if measuring fitness by VO2 max.
    Hmm... Seems to me you're really trying to imply that a keto diet can increase your V02 max. And that the FASTER study supports that. Which it doesn't.
  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,019 Member
    edited August 2017
    johnwelk wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    johnwelk wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    Even in the best shape, human beings are the least "fit" of all living things by almost any means of measurement or comparison.

    Our only "advantage" comes from how we use our brains to overcome our physical deficiencies. Otherwise, we'd be very low on the food chain.

    You can get a bit of variation in VO2 max if you change your diet.... Eat more like a sled dog. LCD vs higher carb diet. ;) Diet can offer some advantage if measuring fitness by VO2 max.

    From the FASTER study:
    FASTER-Fat-Ox-data-chart.bmp
    http://www.vespapower.com/the-emerging-science-on-fat-adaptation/

    Except that the study you quoted doesn't say what you think it says. They weren't studying V02 max as a function of diet. They didn't measure fitness by V02 max. They were studying fat oxidation at 64% of V02 max.

    And last I checked most MFP members aren't sled dogs.

    Just threw it out there to point out that VO2 max is not THE measure of fitness. It is just one part of it. The men tested were all about equally fit elite endurance athletes.
    Let's pretend for a moment that this was actually true, (but you, I and the rest of the people reading this thread know it's not what you actually meant when you posted this study) the FASTER study didn't show "VO2 max is not THE measure of fitness, " as they were not comparing measures of fitness.

    So let's be honest and take a look at what you originally posted about the faster study:
    You can get a bit of variation in VO2 max if you change your diet.... Eat more like a sled dog. LCD vs higher carb diet. ;) Diet can offer some advantage if measuring fitness by VO2 max.
    Hmm... Seems to me you're really trying to imply that a keto diet can increase your V02 max. And that the FASTER study supports that. Which it doesn't.



    I said diet can cause variation in VO2 Max. If vo2 Max is your measure of fitness, then it would look like being fat adapted helps you use energy longer/better. I did not say that is how you measure fitness.

  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    johnwelk wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    johnwelk wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    Even in the best shape, human beings are the least "fit" of all living things by almost any means of measurement or comparison.

    Our only "advantage" comes from how we use our brains to overcome our physical deficiencies. Otherwise, we'd be very low on the food chain.

    You can get a bit of variation in VO2 max if you change your diet.... Eat more like a sled dog. LCD vs higher carb diet. ;) Diet can offer some advantage if measuring fitness by VO2 max.

    From the FASTER study:
    FASTER-Fat-Ox-data-chart.bmp
    http://www.vespapower.com/the-emerging-science-on-fat-adaptation/

    Except that the study you quoted doesn't say what you think it says. They weren't studying V02 max as a function of diet. They didn't measure fitness by V02 max. They were studying fat oxidation at 64% of V02 max.

    And last I checked most MFP members aren't sled dogs.

    Just threw it out there to point out that VO2 max is not THE measure of fitness. It is just one part of it. The men tested were all about equally fit elite endurance athletes.
    Let's pretend for a moment that this was actually true, (but you, I and the rest of the people reading this thread know it's not what you actually meant when you posted this study) the FASTER study didn't show "VO2 max is not THE measure of fitness, " as they were not comparing measures of fitness.

    So let's be honest and take a look at what you originally posted about the faster study:
    You can get a bit of variation in VO2 max if you change your diet.... Eat more like a sled dog. LCD vs higher carb diet. ;) Diet can offer some advantage if measuring fitness by VO2 max.
    Hmm... Seems to me you're really trying to imply that a keto diet can increase your V02 max. And that the FASTER study supports that. Which it doesn't.



    I said diet can cause variation in VO2 Max. If vo2 Max is your measure of fitness, then it would look like being fat adapted helps you use energy longer/better. I did not say that is how you measure fitness.

    And @johnwelk pointed out that the study does not show that.

    I'd also note that a discussion about which animal is the most fit has nothing to do with whether or not keto has an effect on VO2 Max. So if your point was that VO2 Max can be affected by diet, it was off topic and comes across as yet another hijacking of a thread by the church of ketology.
  • NorthCascades
    NorthCascades Posts: 10,968 Member
    Agree about the rudeness of having a fun and educational thread hijacked by keto preaching. I also don't appreciate false info bring presented as if it were real.
  • johnwelk
    johnwelk Posts: 396 Member
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    johnwelk wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    johnwelk wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    Even in the best shape, human beings are the least "fit" of all living things by almost any means of measurement or comparison.

    Our only "advantage" comes from how we use our brains to overcome our physical deficiencies. Otherwise, we'd be very low on the food chain.

    You can get a bit of variation in VO2 max if you change your diet.... Eat more like a sled dog. LCD vs higher carb diet. ;) Diet can offer some advantage if measuring fitness by VO2 max.

    From the FASTER study:
    FASTER-Fat-Ox-data-chart.bmp
    http://www.vespapower.com/the-emerging-science-on-fat-adaptation/

    Except that the study you quoted doesn't say what you think it says. They weren't studying V02 max as a function of diet. They didn't measure fitness by V02 max. They were studying fat oxidation at 64% of V02 max.

    And last I checked most MFP members aren't sled dogs.

    Just threw it out there to point out that VO2 max is not THE measure of fitness. It is just one part of it. The men tested were all about equally fit elite endurance athletes.
    Let's pretend for a moment that this was actually true, (but you, I and the rest of the people reading this thread know it's not what you actually meant when you posted this study) the FASTER study didn't show "VO2 max is not THE measure of fitness, " as they were not comparing measures of fitness.

    So let's be honest and take a look at what you originally posted about the faster study:
    You can get a bit of variation in VO2 max if you change your diet.... Eat more like a sled dog. LCD vs higher carb diet. ;) Diet can offer some advantage if measuring fitness by VO2 max.
    Hmm... Seems to me you're really trying to imply that a keto diet can increase your V02 max. And that the FASTER study supports that. Which it doesn't.



    I said diet can cause variation in VO2 Max. If vo2 Max is your measure of fitness, then it would look like being fat adapted helps you use energy longer/better. I did not say that is how you measure fitness.

    Your still wrong, no matter how many times you repeat it, it still won't say what you want it to say. So either you were purposely trying to mislead us and got caught, or you just don't understand what you read but thought it somehow agreed with your fixed narrative and decided post it anyway. Either way it doesn't make you look good and your best bet is stop digging yourself in deeper and fess up.
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    What about keto + vitamin D?