Obesity and Ozempic and more (1 Viewer)

[Sand]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

My VO2is between 39-40 (58 years old), so not too bad. My resting HR is around 48-52. Funny thing is, yesterday went for my bi-annual physical. BP was 114/64. O2 was 98%. Pulse was 48. Nurse did it twice asking if the low HR was normal...

My resting HR is around 45. I get the same thing at the doctor - distinct impression that this is way out of the ordinary.

 

[Terminalxylem]

... a great example of opinions of healthy food being all over the map.

This. So much this.

This is something of a side topic for this thread, but I will just lay out a few topics that have popped up in this thread so far.

Water: No one doubts that plain water is healthful. But past that? It's hammerlocked now that "Eight 8 oz glasses of pure H2O a day!" is simply untrue as stated, correct? Supposedly now, it's some quantity of non-carbonated, non-sugary beverages, correct? Black coffee. Tea. Broth. Watery foods like watermelon. All that adds up as your necessary water intake, right? And related to water intake ...

Artificial sweeteners: Crystal Light in water OK? No? Yes? Very hard for the layman to distinguish between "pure woo" and "cutting-edge, locked-in, accepted-by-all hard science". I thought Diet Cokes (for example) were bad for other reasons besides the artificial sweetener they contain. When did artificial sweeteners become the devil? Does it have something to do with tricking the body that you've had real sugar and affecting insulin or other hormones? If so, how conclusive have the studies been? Also again, how firm and accepted is the science by (say) stodgy old scientific organizations? Woo here. Hard science there. Gray area in between. Where does "Artificial sweeteners are bad, m'kay?" fall?

Eggs: The layman's target of choice when talking about how science reporting confuses the heck out of everyone not hip-deep in the field. I believe that today, they're understood to be generally fine. But the cholesterol angle is hard to suss. In the 1980s? Cholesterol BAD! Today? Some good, some bad ... watch my YouTube video to learn more!

...

So ... yeah. Common sense! Everyone knows this stuff! Why isn't it easy for everyone? C'mon now.

Water recs aren't experimentally validated tmk. They also aren't consistent between medical societies, or person-to-person (body water is a function of size/weight), and day-to-day needs vary according to level of exertion, humidity, and water content of food.

But, it's calorie free and provides a degree of satiety. Plus many medications and disease states, including aging, can impair your body's ability to regulate free water balance. So a young healthy person can likely use thirst as their guide, while 8-9 cups a day is a good ballpark figure for the general population. Barring severe heart/kidney failure, or some brain disorders, that amount is certainly safe, at least.

Artificial sweeteners promote insulin spikes and don't limit satiety. And some are thought to be carcinogenic, but in the amounts one is likely to consume, cancer risk is likely overblown.

As I said, I'm pretty neutral on eggs, and eat them in moderation (a few a week, not daily, but that's probably OK, too). They get hyped in modern pop-nutrition because they are protein dense.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

I’m low 50s sometimes in the high 40s. No clue on VO2 max

high 40s is excellent, efficient system. VO2 max will be aerobic threshold, ie how long can you chase the antelope.

Well crap, I'm not chasing any antelopes. Artificial hip and the other one needs to be replaced. Nice knowing you guys...

just think how skinny you'll get because you can't catch the antelope!

 

[3C's]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

I’m low 50s sometimes in the high 40s. No clue on VO2 max

high 40s is excellent, efficient system. VO2 max will be aerobic threshold, ie how long can you chase the antelope.

Well crap, I'm not chasing any antelopes. Artificial hip and the other one needs to be replaced. Nice knowing you guys...

just think how skinny you'll get because you can't catch the antelope!

About 5 years ago my daughter's dog (Belgian Mal) bolted out my front door and I ran after that dog for 30 minutes, barefoot. I caught him but I think he let me so I'm not sure if I count that as catching the antelope or not.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Term still thinks I’m a fatty though.

That's alright. There's some ultra-marathoners out there somewhere that would think you're BOTH lazy slobs.

I don’t think he’s a fatty, but like most of us, he could probably lose a few pounds and improve his overall health. I say that, in part, because he’s having problems with a major weigh-bearing joint in his body. Moreover, I feel pretty sure he won’t take offense at my 20% fat-shaming.

Admittedly, whenever I hear someone decry BMI due to their excess muscle mass, I fight to roll my eyes. In my experience, most of those people aren’t elite athletes. BMI being “useless” is right up there with “drinking alcohol in moderation is healthy” as the worst regurgitated pop health advice imo.

ETA I don’t care that some people are able to live a healthier lifestyle than I. It’s not a competition. I'm just trying to do the best I can.

And FWIW, I don’t think ultramarathoners, or musclebound guys are achieving the right balance, and may be shortening their healthspan by virtue of their willingness to suffer too much.

 

[bigbottom]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

I have an Apple Watch and log workouts on it regularly. But in my Health app, my last VO2 reading is from 2019. Not sure what I’m doing wrong.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

Term still thinks I’m a fatty though.

That's alright. There's some ultra-marathoners out there somewhere that would think you're BOTH lazy slobs.

I don’t think he’s a fatty, but like most of us, he could probably lose a few pounds and improve his overall health. I say that, in part, because he’s having problems with a major weigh-bearing joint in his body. Moreover, I feel pretty sure he won’t take offense at my 20% fat-shaming.

Admittedly, whenever I hear someone decry BMI due to their excess muscle mass, I fight to roll my eyes. In my experience, most of those people aren’t elite athletes. BMI being “useless” is right up there with “drinking alcohol in moderation is healthy” as the worst regurgitated pop health advice imo.

ETA I don’t care that some people are able to live a healthier lifestyle than I. It’s not a competition. I'm just trying to do the best I can.

And FWIW, I don’t think ultramarathons, or musclebound guys are achieving the right balance, and may be shortening their healthspan by virtue of their willingness to suffer too much.

:reported:

 

[DA RAIDERS]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

I have an Apple Watch and log workouts on it regularly. But in my Health app, my last VO2 reading is from 2019. Not sure what I’m doing wrong.

apparently it only registers outside and either walking or running. i think @culdeus

 

[massraider]

O)ther than the flavor to the coffee

Mmmmm hmmmm

 

[AAABatteries]

I'm not sure how they could be more simple or transparent.

I repeat: You can't use yourself as the default person when thinking about how tackle this stuff.

Again, It's not on the consumer to be transparent.

It's on the producer of the food.

How do you think they can be more transparent in how they label the food?

Working for one of the largest CPGs in the world I can promise you that these companies are only as transparent as required (in most cases) and even then they do play tricks with the labels. Granted part of their "trick" is to assume that people are lazy, dumb or just don't care and they would be right in a lot of cases.

The other thing I will point out is that one reason it's a good idea to avoid the middle aisles is because even if you get the label, the vast majority of us have no idea what trisodium phosphate, calcium carbonate, monoglycerides, niacinamide, calcium pantothenate and pyridoxine hydrochloride are.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

My VO2is between 39-40 (58 years old), so not too bad. My resting HR is around 48-52. Funny thing is, yesterday went for my bi-annual physical. BP was 114/64. O2 was 98%. Pulse was 48. Nurse did it twice asking if the low HR was normal...

My resting HR is around 45. I get the same thing at the doctor - distinct impression that this is way out of the ordinary.

Yeah, obviously there’s selection bias in play, but the number of people volunteering resting HR below 50 and vO2 max above 50 in these threads is astonishing. Both of those values are in the upper 5% of fitness for middle aged dudes.

And to pile on fat-shaming @DA RAIDERS, 99 is the upper end of “normal” for resting HR. Kinda like 21% is considered high normal for middle aged men (there’s controversy here, but play along).

But I’d never pick that HR as a target for CV fitness, especially if someone was having chest pain.

 

[AAABatteries]

serious question what is the stock you should buy that would rise from ozompic sales or other similar drugs because the way americans live in the just take a pill for it mindset this thing has to be a rocketship take that to the bank brohans

I believe Eli Lilly.

 

[Mister CIA]

The other thing I will point out is that one reason it's a good idea to avoid the middle aisles is because even if you get the label, the vast majority of us have no idea what trisodium phosphate, calcium carbonate, monoglycerides, niacinamide, calcium pantothenate and pyridoxine hydrochloride are.

I think you just posted bread recipe.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

serious question what is the stock you should buy that would rise from ozompic sales or other similar drugs because the way americans live in the just take a pill for it mindset this thing has to be a rocketship take that to the bank brohans

Eli Lilly. And too late.

 

[belljr]

O)ther than the flavor to the coffee

Mmmmm hmmmm

I'm very hungry LOL. 2 days in a row I've hit my calorie goal and stopped

 

[Sand]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

My VO2is between 39-40 (58 years old), so not too bad. My resting HR is around 48-52. Funny thing is, yesterday went for my bi-annual physical. BP was 114/64. O2 was 98%. Pulse was 48. Nurse did it twice asking if the low HR was normal...

My resting HR is around 45. I get the same thing at the doctor - distinct impression that this is way out of the ordinary.

Yeah, obviously there’s selection bias in play, but the number of people volunteering resting HR below 50 and vO2 max above 50 in these threads is astonishing. Both of those values are in the upper 5% of fitness for middle aged dudes.

And to pile on fat-shaming @DA RAIDERS, 99 is the upper end of “normal” for resting HR. Kinda like 21% is considered high normal for middle aged men (there’s controversy here, but play along).

But I’d never pick that HR as a target for CV fitness, especially if someone was having chest pain.

Sadly my watch estimates by VO2Max at only 46, so a total slacker over here. I do intend on boosting that by summer's end. I keep getting interrupted from a consistent training regimen - that damn w*rk thing.

As far as HR being indicative or CV fitness I saw Miguel Indurain (world class cyclist) reported resting heart rate in the high 20s. Phelps mid thirties. That's insane.

As a serious question, wouldn't your HR range (max-min) be a better indicator of CV fitness? I know max goes down by age.

 

[3C's]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

My VO2is between 39-40 (58 years old), so not too bad. My resting HR is around 48-52. Funny thing is, yesterday went for my bi-annual physical. BP was 114/64. O2 was 98%. Pulse was 48. Nurse did it twice asking if the low HR was normal...

My resting HR is around 45. I get the same thing at the doctor - distinct impression that this is way out of the ordinary.

Yeah, obviously there’s selection bias in play, but the number of people volunteering resting HR below 50 and vO2 max above 50 in these threads is astonishing. Both of those values are in the upper 5% of fitness for middle aged dudes.

And to pile on fat-shaming @DA RAIDERS, 99 is the upper end of “normal” for resting HR. Kinda like 21% is considered high normal for middle aged men (there’s controversy here, but play along).

But I’d never pick that HR as a target for CV fitness, especially if someone was having chest pain.

Yeah, my vo2 from Oura is much lower than 50 but labeled as "high" for my age by Oura. I feel like a slacker comparatively. My HR right now is in the mid 70s but I just got back from a 2 hour bike ride.

 

[culdeus]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

I have an Apple Watch and log workouts on it regularly. But in my Health app, my last VO2 reading is from 2019. Not sure what I’m doing wrong.

apparently it only registers outside and either walking or running. i think @culdeus

That's correct. It's a stupid FDA thing.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

My VO2is between 39-40 (58 years old), so not too bad. My resting HR is around 48-52. Funny thing is, yesterday went for my bi-annual physical. BP was 114/64. O2 was 98%. Pulse was 48. Nurse did it twice asking if the low HR was normal...

My resting HR is around 45. I get the same thing at the doctor - distinct impression that this is way out of the ordinary.

Yeah, obviously there’s selection bias in play, but the number of people volunteering resting HR below 50 and vO2 max above 50 in these threads is astonishing. Both of those values are in the upper 5% of fitness for middle aged dudes.

And to pile on fat-shaming @DA RAIDERS, 99 is the upper end of “normal” for resting HR. Kinda like 21% is considered high normal for middle aged men (there’s controversy here, but play along).

But I’d never pick that HR as a target for CV fitness, especially if someone was having chest pain.

Sadly my watch estimates by VO2Max at only 46, so a total slacker over here. I do intend on boosting that by summer's end. I keep getting interrupted from a consistent training regimen - that damn w*rk thing.

As far as HR being indicative or CV fitness I saw Miguel Indurain (world class cyclist) reported resting heart rate in the high 20s. Phelps mid thirties. That's insane.

As a serious question, wouldn't your HR range (max-min) be a better indicator of CV fitness? I know max goes down by age.

I have a friend with resting HR in the 30s, who once measured a sleeping rate of 11 beats per minute! He’s young, and an exceptional athlete, but that’s too slow.

I know HR range, variability and recovery time are all metrics of fitness. But I don’t think any have as much data supporting their utility as vO2 max.

FTR my resting HR in high 50s/low 60s, and last vO2 max, per iwatch was 50. I’d like to get into the resting HR < age < vO2 max club, but doubt I can get my HR low enough.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

serious question what is the stock you should buy that would rise from ozompic sales or other similar drugs because the way americans live in the just take a pill for it mindset this thing has to be a rocketship take that to the bank brohans

Eli Lilly. And too late.

FWIW, saw an article suggesting these five stocks to play this trend:

LLY
NVO
AMGN
VKTX
GPCR

 

[DA RAIDERS]

Resting rate today 55

 

[DA RAIDERS]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

My VO2is between 39-40 (58 years old), so not too bad. My resting HR is around 48-52. Funny thing is, yesterday went for my bi-annual physical. BP was 114/64. O2 was 98%. Pulse was 48. Nurse did it twice asking if the low HR was normal...

My resting HR is around 45. I get the same thing at the doctor - distinct impression that this is way out of the ordinary.

Yeah, obviously there’s selection bias in play, but the number of people volunteering resting HR below 50 and vO2 max above 50 in these threads is astonishing. Both of those values are in the upper 5% of fitness for middle aged dudes.

And to pile on fat-shaming @DA RAIDERS, 99 is the upper end of “normal” for resting HR. Kinda like 21% is considered high normal for middle aged men (there’s controversy here, but play along).

But I’d never pick that HR as a target for CV fitness, especially if someone was having chest pain.

Looked at the year average for resting heart rate. 57

 

[Pip's Invitation]

I was at a cardiometabolic health conference over the weekend. During the obesity panel, someone asked the doctors whether, if a patient is started on Wegovy, they should be on it for life. All of the doctors said yes, as did some in the audience.

Not only because of the weight rebound issue, but because of its other cardiometabolic benefits. You don’t take people off their blood pressure and cholesterol drugs. They see this as the same idea.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

My VO2is between 39-40 (58 years old), so not too bad. My resting HR is around 48-52. Funny thing is, yesterday went for my bi-annual physical. BP was 114/64. O2 was 98%. Pulse was 48. Nurse did it twice asking if the low HR was normal...

My resting HR is around 45. I get the same thing at the doctor - distinct impression that this is way out of the ordinary.

Yeah, obviously there’s selection bias in play, but the number of people volunteering resting HR below 50 and vO2 max above 50 in these threads is astonishing. Both of those values are in the upper 5% of fitness for middle aged dudes.

And to pile on fat-shaming @DA RAIDERS, 99 is the upper end of “normal” for resting HR. Kinda like 21% is considered high normal for middle aged men (there’s controversy here, but play along).

But I’d never pick that HR as a target for CV fitness, especially if someone was having chest pain.

Looked at the year average for resting heart rate. 57

That’s great, but I was trying to use an analogy, comparing a HR in the 90s to body fat % of 20. Though both are considered high “normal”, neither is ideal.

 

[Doug B]

During the obesity panel, someone asked the doctors whether, if a patient is started on Wegovy, they should be on it for life. All of the doctors said yes, as did some in the audience.

I wonder if dosage would change over time? After some time or some metrics met, if a reduced “maintenance” dosage might be indicated?

 

[DA RAIDERS]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

My VO2is between 39-40 (58 years old), so not too bad. My resting HR is around 48-52. Funny thing is, yesterday went for my bi-annual physical. BP was 114/64. O2 was 98%. Pulse was 48. Nurse did it twice asking if the low HR was normal...

My resting HR is around 45. I get the same thing at the doctor - distinct impression that this is way out of the ordinary.

Yeah, obviously there’s selection bias in play, but the number of people volunteering resting HR below 50 and vO2 max above 50 in these threads is astonishing. Both of those values are in the upper 5% of fitness for middle aged dudes.

And to pile on fat-shaming @DA RAIDERS, 99 is the upper end of “normal” for resting HR. Kinda like 21% is considered high normal for middle aged men (there’s controversy here, but play along).

But I’d never pick that HR as a target for CV fitness, especially if someone was having chest pain.

Looked at the year average for resting heart rate. 57

That’s great, but I was trying to use an analogy, comparing a HR in the 90s to body fat % of 20. Though both are considered high “normal”, neither is ideal.

I understood. I was double checking my claim of low 50s. 50s would be more accurate.

And if my body composition is equivalent to a resting heart rate of 90, I’m doomed. Give me all the pills and staple my stomach @nd remove half of it while you’re at it. I can’t imagine that 19.5% bf is equivalent to a resting 90 hr. Maybe I just don’t understand.

 

[Pip's Invitation]

During the obesity panel, someone asked the doctors whether, if a patient is started on Wegovy, they should be on it for life. All of the doctors said yes, as did some in the audience.

I wonder if dosage would change over time? After some time or some metrics met, if a reduced “maintenance” dosage might be indicated?

The FDA-approved dose of Wegovy is 2.4 mg. For Ozempic, which is the same drug (semaglutide) with a different indication (diabetes), it's 1 mg. In theory a doctor could elect to switch a patient from Wegovy to Ozempic if they fit the indication for it as well, but I haven't yet heard anything about that being tried in reality.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Right on cue, the New England Journal released a review of diets today. Can't link full text article, but these are their conclusions:

Although many diets have been developed with the initial aim of controlling body weight, dietary composition also has important health effects that are independent of the effects on adiposity. An overall inspection of the literature suggests that plant-based diets with a moderate lipid content, characterized by the consumption of vegetables, fruits, whole-grain cereals, legumes or pulses, nuts, and unsaturated fats, with low-to-moderate amounts of poultry and seafood and low quantities of red meat and sugar, may offer substantial health benefits. The Mediterranean diet may be an option, at least for some population groups.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

My VO2is between 39-40 (58 years old), so not too bad. My resting HR is around 48-52. Funny thing is, yesterday went for my bi-annual physical. BP was 114/64. O2 was 98%. Pulse was 48. Nurse did it twice asking if the low HR was normal...

My resting HR is around 45. I get the same thing at the doctor - distinct impression that this is way out of the ordinary.

Yeah, obviously there’s selection bias in play, but the number of people volunteering resting HR below 50 and vO2 max above 50 in these threads is astonishing. Both of those values are in the upper 5% of fitness for middle aged dudes.

And to pile on fat-shaming @DA RAIDERS, 99 is the upper end of “normal” for resting HR. Kinda like 21% is considered high normal for middle aged men (there’s controversy here, but play along).

But I’d never pick that HR as a target for CV fitness, especially if someone was having chest pain.

Looked at the year average for resting heart rate. 57

That’s great, but I was trying to use an analogy, comparing a HR in the 90s to body fat % of 20. Though both are considered high “normal”, neither is ideal.

I understood. I was double checking my claim of low 50s. 50s would be more accurate.

And if my body composition is equivalent to a resting heart rate of 90, I’m doomed. Give me all the pills and staple my stomach @nd remove half of it while you’re at it. I can’t imagine that 19.5% bf is equivalent to a resting 90 hr. Maybe I just don’t understand.

I don't think it's that dire. Still, I'll wager you'll feel better a few pounds lighter, with a lower body fat %.

 

[Oracle]

10-12% is not normal

12-15% is more along the lines of normal.

Fat is a critical component to the longevity of the human race

10-12 is a lower, healthy bf percentage, not uncommon among young males, and some older recreational athletes. I think @DA RAIDERS identifies as the latter, which is why I picked that as a goal. I wanted to show the target weight he believed unrealistic wasn’t completely off the mark. I mean, he weighed that much when he was younger, so clearly it’s possible.

Actually, it’s always interesting hearing people dismiss target weights, often followed by “I haven’t weighed that much since college!?!” Ummmm, OK, how do you think body composition should change from young adulthood to middle age? We don’t typically gain muscle or bone mass after college, so what’s left?

Also, can you expound upon the longevity comment?

10% body fat is simply not "healthy" for today, it is more of a workout warrior. Here is a good article on fat and the evolution of the human race: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...ns-piled-pounds-lost-muscle-mass-evolved.html

When I say longevity, I mean the human race would have died out without fat (as noted above). Fat is where we store our energy. We require stored energy to be able to endure chasing our prey, day after day, tiring them out, then eating them. Carbs are great for quickly converting energy, but arent the right solution for continuing the human race.

Agree some fat is essential for survival, but I don’t think the optimal amount for modern living conditions is known. But yes, I was describing low-end %, to a poster who has repeatedly mentioned his commitment to regular exercise, while settling on ~20% body fat. Essentially, the body fat I’d expect from a workout warrior.

Strongly disagree about the importance of carbohydrates for continuing our race. Most of the healthiest food are carbohydrate-rich (fruits and veggies), but the hyper-protein, “good fat” keto craze has thrown out that factoid with the bath water of processed foods.

Every diet of long-lived populations includes at least half its calories from carbohydrates. Traditional Okinawans, at one point the longest live people on the planet, consume over 80%, with roughly 2/3 of their calories coming a single, carbohydrate-rich food: sweet potatoes.

Carbs are important. We /should/ be getting our carbs from fiber rich foods. Instead though, we are getting our carbs from processed grain and sugar. That is bad, very bad.

We should be eating some lean protein in 1-2 handful amounts and getting the rest of our nutrients from fiber rich foods like whole fruit and vegetables.

I’m not even sure a couple handfuls of lean protein (per day, presumably) is necessary. Okinawans eat less than 10% of their calories from protein, with roughly 10:1 carbohydrate to protein ratio.

I realize they are an extreme, but using them as an example is much less of a stretch than saying carbohydrates (again, not sugary, processed garbage) aren’t the right solution for continuing the human race.

Is the “10% of their calories from protein” statement from a recent study? I lived in Oki from 2012-2017 and would have guessed that the average protein intake was considerably more than 10%. It seemed like meat was a large part of their diet. Especially pork…

 

[notoriousbill]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

I have an Apple Watch and log workouts on it regularly. But in my Health app, my last VO2 reading is from 2019. Not sure what I’m doing wrong.

Are the workouts outside? Only way I get a reading is if I run or walk.

 

[bigbottom]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

I have an Apple Watch and log workouts on it regularly. But in my Health app, my last VO2 reading is from 2019. Not sure what I’m doing wrong.

Are the workouts outside? Only way I get a reading is if I run or walk.

Yeah, a ton of them are outside walks. Maybe they need to be outside runs. I will jog occasionally, but mostly they are 4 mile walks at a brisk pace so I log them on my watch as walks. I’ll try it out. Thanks.

 

[Terminalxylem]

10-12% is not normal

12-15% is more along the lines of normal.

Fat is a critical component to the longevity of the human race

10-12 is a lower, healthy bf percentage, not uncommon among young males, and some older recreational athletes. I think @DA RAIDERS identifies as the latter, which is why I picked that as a goal. I wanted to show the target weight he believed unrealistic wasn’t completely off the mark. I mean, he weighed that much when he was younger, so clearly it’s possible.

Actually, it’s always interesting hearing people dismiss target weights, often followed by “I haven’t weighed that much since college!?!” Ummmm, OK, how do you think body composition should change from young adulthood to middle age? We don’t typically gain muscle or bone mass after college, so what’s left?

Also, can you expound upon the longevity comment?

10% body fat is simply not "healthy" for today, it is more of a workout warrior. Here is a good article on fat and the evolution of the human race: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...ns-piled-pounds-lost-muscle-mass-evolved.html

When I say longevity, I mean the human race would have died out without fat (as noted above). Fat is where we store our energy. We require stored energy to be able to endure chasing our prey, day after day, tiring them out, then eating them. Carbs are great for quickly converting energy, but arent the right solution for continuing the human race.

Agree some fat is essential for survival, but I don’t think the optimal amount for modern living conditions is known. But yes, I was describing low-end %, to a poster who has repeatedly mentioned his commitment to regular exercise, while settling on ~20% body fat. Essentially, the body fat I’d expect from a workout warrior.

Strongly disagree about the importance of carbohydrates for continuing our race. Most of the healthiest food are carbohydrate-rich (fruits and veggies), but the hyper-protein, “good fat” keto craze has thrown out that factoid with the bath water of processed foods.

Every diet of long-lived populations includes at least half its calories from carbohydrates. Traditional Okinawans, at one point the longest live people on the planet, consume over 80%, with roughly 2/3 of their calories coming a single, carbohydrate-rich food: sweet potatoes.

Carbs are important. We /should/ be getting our carbs from fiber rich foods. Instead though, we are getting our carbs from processed grain and sugar. That is bad, very bad.

We should be eating some lean protein in 1-2 handful amounts and getting the rest of our nutrients from fiber rich foods like whole fruit and vegetables.

I’m not even sure a couple handfuls of lean protein (per day, presumably) is necessary. Okinawans eat less than 10% of their calories from protein, with roughly 10:1 carbohydrate to protein ratio.

I realize they are an extreme, but using them as an example is much less of a stretch than saying carbohydrates (again, not sugary, processed garbage) aren’t the right solution for continuing the human race.

Is the “10% of their calories from protein” statement from a recent study? I lived in Oki from 2012-2017 and would have guessed that the average protein intake was considerably more than 10%. It seemed like meat was a large part of their diet. Especially pork…

Yeah, contemporary Okinawans have slowly adapted some Western eating patterns, but most of the stuff I've read refers to their traditional diet, studied around 2000, or earlier. And they were looking at dietary habits of the very elderly, specifically.

But none of the so-called "blue zones" eat low carbohydrate, high animal protein/fat diets. People who do that, like Inuits and Masai, don't live nearly as long.

 

[massraider]

Right on cue, the New England Journal released a review of diets today. Can't link full text article, but these are their conclusions:

Although many diets have been developed with the initial aim of controlling body weight, dietary composition also has important health effects that are independent of the effects on adiposity. An overall inspection of the literature suggests that plant-based diets with a moderate lipid content, characterized by the consumption of vegetables, fruits, whole-grain cereals, legumes or pulses, nuts, and unsaturated fats, with low-to-moderate amounts of poultry and seafood and low quantities of red meat and sugar, may offer substantial health benefits. The Mediterranean diet may be an option, at least for some population groups.

And if one could take a poll of reasonable nutritionists and scientists a decade ago, they would say something similar. The one caveat I would add is don't overdo it on fruit. Eating a bunch of natural sugar is better than HFCS, but it still sends signals to your body craving more sugar. It's still sugar.

It's not this incredible difficult puzzle.

 

[massraider]

I was at a cardiometabolic health conference over the weekend. During the obesity panel, someone asked the doctors whether, if a patient is started on Wegovy, they should be on it for life. All of the doctors said yes, as did some in the audience.

Not only because of the weight rebound issue, but because of its other cardiometabolic benefits. You don’t take people off their blood pressure and cholesterol drugs. They see this as the same idea.

That's upsetting.

You only need to be on the drug forever if you don't change eating habits.

You don't go off the drug, and fat magically reappears. If you go off the drug, and eat well, you won't get obese again.

This is my concern. Ozempic could be an amazing tool to jump start long team health and weight management. Instead, it will be the ONLY tool many people use

 

[matttyl]

Right on cue, the New England Journal released a review of diets today. Can't link full text article, but these are their conclusions:

Although many diets have been developed with the initial aim of controlling body weight, dietary composition also has important health effects that are independent of the effects on adiposity. An overall inspection of the literature suggests that plant-based diets with a moderate lipid content, characterized by the consumption of vegetables, fruits, whole-grain cereals, legumes or pulses, nuts, and unsaturated fats, with low-to-moderate amounts of poultry and seafood and low quantities of red meat and sugar, may offer substantial health benefits. The Mediterranean diet may be an option, at least for some population groups.

I wonder why these type of studies continue to use the terminology “may offer substantial health benefits.” I assume they are talking about the individual with a statement like that - but for a decent sized average population, why can’t/won’t they state “WILL offer substantial health benefits”?

I mean I’m sure people still won’t listen/pay attention, but it would be something.

 

[Doug B]

Ozempic could be an amazing tool to jump start long team health and weight management. Instead, it will be the ONLY tool many people use

Top-of-the-mountain view ... the bolded isn't necessarily problematic, is it?

Disclosure of priors: I don't think "drug" is a bad word, though it is a loaded one. I also don't think doing something "naturally" is necessarily the "best way" to accomplish certain results (where an "ideal way" may exist separate from "best way").

 

[Doug B]

I wonder why these type of studies continue to use the terminology “may offer substantial health benefits.” I assume they are talking about the individual with a statement like that - but for a decent sized average population, why can’t/won’t they state “WILL offer substantial health benefits”?

I can tell you from experience that hedging language kneecaps all kinds of health information. "May" is frequently interpreted as "at best, we have a semi-supported hunch, but it might not be true". And then people throw out "They're always changing diet advice!", and go on eating/doing what they want.

 

[notoriousbill]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

I have an Apple Watch and log workouts on it regularly. But in my Health app, my last VO2 reading is from 2019. Not sure what I’m doing wrong.

Are the workouts outside? Only way I get a reading is if I run or walk.

Yeah, a ton of them are outside walks. Maybe they need to be outside runs. I will jog occasionally, but mostly they are 4 mile walks at a brisk pace so I log them on my watch as walks. I’ll try it out. Thanks.

It should work for walks. Hmmm Not sure what or why it's not working.

 

[Pip's Invitation]

I was at a cardiometabolic health conference over the weekend. During the obesity panel, someone asked the doctors whether, if a patient is started on Wegovy, they should be on it for life. All of the doctors said yes, as did some in the audience.

Not only because of the weight rebound issue, but because of its other cardiometabolic benefits. You don’t take people off their blood pressure and cholesterol drugs. They see this as the same idea.

You only need to be on the drug forever if you don't change eating habits.

The doctors seem to disagree with that premise, because they don't see it as purely a weight-loss drug.

 

[Pip's Invitation]

Ozempic could be an amazing tool to jump start long team health and weight management. Instead, it will be the ONLY tool many people use

Top-of-the-mountain view ... the bolded isn't necessarily problematic, is it?

Disclosure of priors: I don't think "drug" is a bad word, though it is a loaded one. I also don't think doing something "naturally" is necessarily the "best way" to accomplish certain results (where an "ideal way" may exist separate from "best way").

It's a view that reflects the old way of thinking -- that obesity is entirely the patient's fault and is due solely to their poor lifestyle choices and lack of willpower. When in fact, obesity is much more complicated than that.

 

[JAA]

Term still thinks I’m a fatty though.

That's alright. There's some ultra-marathoners out there somewhere that would think you're BOTH lazy slobs.

I don’t think he’s a fatty, but like most of us, he could probably lose a few pounds and improve his overall health. I say that, in part, because he’s having problems with a major weigh-bearing joint in his body. Moreover, I feel pretty sure he won’t take offense at my 20% fat-shaming.

Admittedly, whenever I hear someone decry BMI due to their excess muscle mass, I fight to roll my eyes. In my experience, most of those people aren’t elite athletes. BMI being “useless” is right up there with “drinking alcohol in moderation is healthy” as the worst regurgitated pop health advice imo.

ETA I don’t care that some people are able to live a healthier lifestyle than I. It’s not a competition. I'm just trying to do the best I can.

And FWIW, I don’t think ultramarathoners, or musclebound guys are achieving the right balance, and may be shortening their healthspan by virtue of their willingness to suffer too much.

BMI is useless

Resting HR and VO2 max

 

[JAA]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

I have an Apple Watch and log workouts on it regularly. But in my Health app, my last VO2 reading is from 2019. Not sure what I’m doing wrong.

Are you sure you are alive?

 

[JAA]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

My VO2is between 39-40 (58 years old), so not too bad. My resting HR is around 48-52. Funny thing is, yesterday went for my bi-annual physical. BP was 114/64. O2 was 98%. Pulse was 48. Nurse did it twice asking if the low HR was normal...

My resting HR is around 45. I get the same thing at the doctor - distinct impression that this is way out of the ordinary.

Yeah, obviously there’s selection bias in play, but the number of people volunteering resting HR below 50 and vO2 max above 50 in these threads is astonishing. Both of those values are in the upper 5% of fitness for middle aged dudes.

And to pile on fat-shaming @DA RAIDERS, 99 is the upper end of “normal” for resting HR. Kinda like 21% is considered high normal for middle aged men (there’s controversy here, but play along).

But I’d never pick that HR as a target for CV fitness, especially if someone was having chest pain.

Exactly why I didnt choose some random HR.

Everyone has a resting HR. Also, VO2 max is not a specific HR, but HR over time.

 

[JAA]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

My VO2is between 39-40 (58 years old), so not too bad. My resting HR is around 48-52. Funny thing is, yesterday went for my bi-annual physical. BP was 114/64. O2 was 98%. Pulse was 48. Nurse did it twice asking if the low HR was normal...

My resting HR is around 45. I get the same thing at the doctor - distinct impression that this is way out of the ordinary.

Yeah, obviously there’s selection bias in play, but the number of people volunteering resting HR below 50 and vO2 max above 50 in these threads is astonishing. Both of those values are in the upper 5% of fitness for middle aged dudes.

And to pile on fat-shaming @DA RAIDERS, 99 is the upper end of “normal” for resting HR. Kinda like 21% is considered high normal for middle aged men (there’s controversy here, but play along).

But I’d never pick that HR as a target for CV fitness, especially if someone was having chest pain.

Sadly my watch estimates by VO2Max at only 46, so a total slacker over here. I do intend on boosting that by summer's end. I keep getting interrupted from a consistent training regimen - that damn w*rk thing.

As far as HR being indicative or CV fitness I saw Miguel Indurain (world class cyclist) reported resting heart rate in the high 20s. Phelps mid thirties. That's insane.

As a serious question, wouldn't your HR range (max-min) be a better indicator of CV fitness? I know max goes down by age.

Max cannot be used, and why VO2 max is most important.

Everyone one has a different Max HR. Me for example, I have an incredibly inefficient heart. It takes my heart so much more effort to pump than my buddy M. Ive seen my HR go to 209/210bpm multiple occasions. I could go outside now and work hard enough in like 15 minutes and see it hit 200. That is a stupid HR, and many look at my like Im dying. Maybe I am, but I don't think so. I can race at 190 HR for long-ish periods of time. Its my range. My buddy M though, I dont think he has seen 170 before. He just about twice the cyclist that I am, though I am a bit of a better runner than him, we are about even on the swim.

Ive read about this topic ad nauseum because of my stupid HR. Yes, there is a bell curve for people, which is where the formulas come from. However, there is no right or wrong heart. My heart has to work harder, its prolly smaller genetically somehow. Where if you look at professional triathlete Lionel Sanders, he worksout at like 110bpm. My aerobic efforts start at like 125/130bpm.

Im conclusion, Max HR is only useful to determine your workout zones. Your workout zones are then used to drive VO2 max calculations.

 

[JAA]

Sub 20% guy…..

I know you all are just jabbing at each other a bit, but it's kind of a demonstration of what I just posted about: Thin guy negging on somewhat-less-thin guy over body-fat percentage. Both of you probably look like a starving underwear models in a room full of obese people.

Related: In the world of "people who are serious about fitness" ... how serious are the "idea wars" about best diet, best fitness ideas, etc. Does it ever get to the point of profound disrespect? Do the "Mediterranean diet" guys think the Keto guys are loons?

I think humans should focus on resting heart rate and VO2 max. IMHO those are the only 2 metrics which should count. Waaaaaaaay to many different body structures out there, none of which are "wrong".

My VO2is between 39-40 (58 years old), so not too bad. My resting HR is around 48-52. Funny thing is, yesterday went for my bi-annual physical. BP was 114/64. O2 was 98%. Pulse was 48. Nurse did it twice asking if the low HR was normal...

My resting HR is around 45. I get the same thing at the doctor - distinct impression that this is way out of the ordinary.

Yeah, obviously there’s selection bias in play, but the number of people volunteering resting HR below 50 and vO2 max above 50 in these threads is astonishing. Both of those values are in the upper 5% of fitness for middle aged dudes.

And to pile on fat-shaming @DA RAIDERS, 99 is the upper end of “normal” for resting HR. Kinda like 21% is considered high normal for middle aged men (there’s controversy here, but play along).

But I’d never pick that HR as a target for CV fitness, especially if someone was having chest pain.

Looked at the year average for resting heart rate. 57

That’s great, but I was trying to use an analogy, comparing a HR in the 90s to body fat % of 20. Though both are considered high “normal”, neither is ideal.

I understood. I was double checking my claim of low 50s. 50s would be more accurate.

And if my body composition is equivalent to a resting heart rate of 90, I’m doomed. Give me all the pills and staple my stomach @nd remove half of it while you’re at it. I can’t imagine that 19.5% bf is equivalent to a resting 90 hr. Maybe I just don’t understand.

I don't think it's that dire. Still, I'll wager you'll feel better a few pounds lighter, with a lower body fat %.

I would chime in and say you should spend 0 seconds looking at any scale unless you are worrying about power-to-weight calculations for climbing. Weight is a useless measurement unless you want to get dipped in a pool to get a true reading, not of your fat, but of your exoskeletal mass. This value can help you determine your actual desired weight. Backing into desired weight with height is silly.

I would like to make a hot take since im getting punchy here: 99% of MD doctors have no clue about athletic physical fitness. 99% of MD doctors know how to treat severely ill people and make them almost normal. They have no clue how to take athletes and make them stronger athletes.

 

[massraider]

Ozempic could be an amazing tool to jump start long team health and weight management. Instead, it will be the ONLY tool many people use

Top-of-the-mountain view ... the bolded isn't necessarily problematic, is it?

Disclosure of priors: I don't think "drug" is a bad word, though it is a loaded one. I also don't think doing something "naturally" is necessarily the "best way" to accomplish certain results (where an "ideal way" may exist separate from "best way").

It's a view that reflects the old way of thinking -- that obesity is entirely the patient's fault and is due solely to their poor lifestyle choices and lack of willpower. When in fact, obesity is much more complicated than that.

No. It doesn't reflect that view.
That's a position that keeps getting assigned in this thread, and while I understand why, it doesn't make it any less frustrating.

I am on record in this forum several times regarding the corporate garbage food that gets pushed in this country. It is, BY FAR, the biggest issue in terms of tackling this problem. OK? You won't find any "just stop eating" posts from me anywhere. What the FDA allows, the sugar lobby, the corn industry, the shady labeling practices, our completely inactive children.....it's a problem with many sources, and what our leaders allow to happen in the US food industry is the biggest cause of this epidemic.

Multi-pronged solution to a multi-pronged problem seems like a good plan to me.

But you can see how this is gonna play out. People who have a hard time with maintaining a healthy diet are going to lose weight on this drug, and be less unhealthy. That's great. it's a net positive. I agree it's a net positive.

Then what? People will still be eating garbage, not getting nutrients, they will be skinny fat, and will still develop long term health problems associated with poor diet. It will probably happen less because of these drugs, and that's great. And some people will choose to eat healthier when they lose weight, clearly. But people who don't like dieting, and don't want to change their diet, are they more likely to make hard changes after they lose weight? Doubtful.

And the push to make real changes in our food system will be lessened.

Especially if everytime you bring up dietary changes you get shouted down

 

[Sparky Polastri]

Right on cue, the New England Journal released a review of diets today. Can't link full text article, but these are their conclusions:

Although many diets have been developed with the initial aim of controlling body weight, dietary composition also has important health effects that are independent of the effects on adiposity. An overall inspection of the literature suggests that plant-based diets with a moderate lipid content, characterized by the consumption of vegetables, fruits, whole-grain cereals, legumes or pulses, nuts, and unsaturated fats, with low-to-moderate amounts of poultry and seafood and low quantities of red meat and sugar, may offer substantial health benefits. The Mediterranean diet may be an option, at least for some population groups.

I wonder why these type of studies continue to use the terminology “may offer substantial health benefits.” I assume they are talking about the individual with a statement like that - but for a decent sized average population, why can’t/won’t they state “WILL offer substantial health benefits”?

I mean I’m sure people still won’t listen/pay attention, but it would be something.

because the evidence isn't there to make the jump and if there is strong evidence, the best you're going to get is "Will offer substantial health benefits in most people" etc. there's also the legal angle, lawsuits and such.

 

[JAA]

Ozempic could be an amazing tool to jump start long team health and weight management. Instead, it will be the ONLY tool many people use

Top-of-the-mountain view ... the bolded isn't necessarily problematic, is it?

Disclosure of priors: I don't think "drug" is a bad word, though it is a loaded one. I also don't think doing something "naturally" is necessarily the "best way" to accomplish certain results (where an "ideal way" may exist separate from "best way").

It's a view that reflects the old way of thinking -- that obesity is entirely the patient's fault and is due solely to their poor lifestyle choices and lack of willpower. When in fact, obesity is much more complicated than that.

How do you define obesity?

If you are using BMI to define obesity, sure. If it's something else, I would be very interested to hear the genetic disposition to obesity or some other nurture event. If you want to apply socio-economic contribution to obesity, Im all in agreement.

 

[JAA]

Ozempic could be an amazing tool to jump start long team health and weight management. Instead, it will be the ONLY tool many people use

Top-of-the-mountain view ... the bolded isn't necessarily problematic, is it?

Disclosure of priors: I don't think "drug" is a bad word, though it is a loaded one. I also don't think doing something "naturally" is necessarily the "best way" to accomplish certain results (where an "ideal way" may exist separate from "best way").

It's a view that reflects the old way of thinking -- that obesity is entirely the patient's fault and is due solely to their poor lifestyle choices and lack of willpower. When in fact, obesity is much more complicated than that.

No. It doesn't reflect that view.
That's a position that keeps getting assigned in this thread, and while I understand why, it doesn't make it any less frustrating.

I am on record in this forum several times regarding the corporate garbage food that gets pushed in this country. It is, BY FAR, the biggest issue in terms of tackling this problem. OK? You won't find any "just stop eating" posts from me anywhere. What the FDA allows, the sugar lobby, the corn industry, the shady labeling practices, our completely inactive children.....it's a problem with many sources, and what our leaders allow to happen in the US food industry is the biggest cause of this epidemic.

Multi-pronged solution to a multi-pronged problem seems like a good plan to me.

But you can see how this is gonna play out. People who have a hard time with maintaining a healthy diet are going to lose weight on this drug, and be less unhealthy. That's great. it's a net positive. I agree it's a net positive.

Then what? People will still be eating garbage, not getting nutrients, they will be skinny fat, and will still develop long term health problems associated with poor diet. It will probably happen less because of these drugs, and that's great. And some people will choose to eat healthier when they lose weight, clearly. But people who don't like dieting, and don't want to change their diet, are they more likely to make hard changes after they lose weight? Doubtful.

And the push to make real changes in our food system will be lessened.

Especially if everytime you bring up dietary changes you get shouted down

1000%