Costco Aetna Health Insurance now available in CA

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredyclassic]Consider weight/ muscle gain.

Some of us are hard gainers.

Eat a lot work out hard slow growth.

Others are born well muscled. Eat junk and grow fast.

You remember big guys in Hs…born thick muscled big bones.

Grow like weeds.

That said. Skinny little bast ards like me can add muscle. We just have to work 3x harder than the naturals.

I bet it works reverse too. We are not all created equal for muscle gain or weight loss etc. But no way some slim fellow can go and acquire a football body with just work and foid.

Hard gainers are what they call guys like me…

We have different kinds of bodies but no one has to be all weak or all fat.

That said I’d prefer to be big. Just naturally big. But I’m not.[/quote]

Exactly. And there are people out there who can eat 4,000 calories a day and not gain weight (and not intentionally work out much), while others will gain weight by eating 1,800 calories per day.

Of our three kids, two were born with more fat and no muscle definition at all. One was born muscular — literally had six-pack abs as a baby. The muscular one eats the most, by far, but is still very much in the “normal” weight range and has no fat deposits. The others eat less, but have never had defined muscles anywhere on their bodies, and all get the same amount of exercise.

I’m calling total BS on the “diet and exercise” nonsense. It might take years, maybe decades, before science catches up with reality, but I’m willing to bet that we will find that genetics, hormones, and environmental factors are every bit as important as diet and exercise.

[scaredyclassic]

Why can’t I get thick stout proud legs. Why must I suffer the indignity of strutting about on these chicken legs?

It is what it is.

Spindly though actually much improved forearms.

Skinny little neck.

Flattish buttocks.

Yeesh.

At least I have sound knees. Also certain back muscles seem to respond better to training than most of me.

The body is mysterious.

I was not meant to be muscly. I think I was meant to balance the books.

[scaredyclassic]

One thing is clear and proven: you will never gain weight in your penis.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CA renter]
Really? You think that today’s foods have no more added/synthetic chemicals in them than foods from 100+ years ago? No higher concentrations of chemicals that are considered toxic or possibly carcinogenic?

[/quote]

I didn’t say that. I said that the “vast majority of added chemicals are already in foods we eat”. If manufacturers take sugar from a beet and put it in soda, we’re just changing the mix. All “synthetic” chemicals are exactly the same as their naturally occurring counterparts. The two most toxic to human chemicals that have ever been identified are “natural”. (botulinum and tetanospasmin) Only one man made toxin has ever been developed that’s 1 millionth as toxic.

Some concentrations have changed. In the US population, our diets ARE a problem. But it’s not the natural/synthetic that’s the problem.

(And just exactly who decided what was “intended” to be eaten? Somebody built our bodies and decided that we should be sucking milk from a cows teat?)

[Anonymous]

Of course all of agriculture is “unnatural.” It has been for centuries or more.

Almost nothing we eat, meat or vegetable, existed before people started selective breeding. It’s all genetically engineered.

Even our pets are unnatural.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=SK in CV] But it’s not the natural/synthetic that’s the problem.
[/quote]

We are just chemical machines, so logically, that might seem true… but I’m not so sure….

I prefer “natural”, unprocessed food. It could simply be that unprocessed food is healthier because it contains less concentration of harmful ingredients, and more concentration of ingredients that would be destroyed in the manufacturing process.

Of course different concentrations affect our bodies differently. Some concentrations are more addictive.

Also, certain mix of ingredients render them more harmful, or more beneficial when consumed at the same time.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=scaredyclassic]One thing is clear and proven: you will never gain weight in your penis.[/quote]

haha.. Sometimes at the gym, guys with big stomachs like to walk around naked. i’m like gross…

shrinkage is more like it. Some people can’t even see their penis when they look down.

http://www.webmd.com/men/guide/life-cycle-of-a-penis
In some cases, abdominal fat all but buries the penis,” says Ronald Tamler, MD, PhD, co-director of the Men’s Health Program at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York City. “One way I motivate my overweight patients is by telling them that they can appear to gain up to an inch in size simply by losing weight.

In addition to this apparent shrinkage (which is reversible) the penis tends to undergo an actual (and irreversible) reduction in size. The reduction — in both length and thickness — typically isn’t dramatic but may be noticeable. “If a man’s erect penis is 6 inches long when he is in his 30s, it might be 5 or 5-and-a-half inches when he reaches his 60s or 70s,” Goldstein says.

What causes the penis to shrink? At least two mechanisms are involved. One is the slow deposit of fatty substances (plaques) inside tiny arteries in the penis, which impairs blood flow to the organ. This process, known as atherosclerosis, is the same one that contributes to blockages inside the coronary arteries — a leading cause of heart attack.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=CA renter] I’m calling total BS on the “diet and exercise” nonsense. It might take years, maybe decades, before science catches up with reality, but I’m willing to bet that we will find that genetics, hormones, and environmental factors are every bit as important as diet and exercise.[/quote]

Ok… let’s say you’re right.

What would the solutions look like once those discoveries are made decades from now?

Do people eat the same amount of calories but still remain thin?

you could fix the genetics and hormonal “problems” with new drugs to increase metabolism or decrease energy absorption.

You can invent new drugs to lower cravings. This actually results in changes in diet.

You can change environmental factors to increase activity. But you can do that right now — exercise.

You “fix” the food so that it contains fewer calories or is not absorbed. This can actually be done right now by changing diet, such as substituting insoluble fibers to add bulk to the food.

Also, be mindful that innovation in food means more processed, “unnatural” food, like a cupcake with only 50 calories.

Genetic and hormonal solutions mean more “unnatural” intervention in our bodies. And as you know there are always unintended consequences.

[quote=CA renter]
Of our three kids, two were born with more fat and no muscle definition at all. One was born muscular — literally had six-pack abs as a baby. The muscular one eats the most, by far, but is still very much in the “normal” weight range and has no fat deposits. The others eat less, but have never had defined muscles anywhere on their bodies, and all get the same amount of exercise.
[/quote]

Of the other 2 kids who eat less, how much less?

maybe you should log their food intake to see exactly how much. With data you can judge much better.

I know it’s hard to cook different menus, but perhaps they shouldn’t be eating the same kinds of food. It doesn’t seem fair, but it is what it is.

If you have kids who have different levels of intelligence, you’d have to give extra help or tutoring to deficient ones. Same principle applies with food.

[bearishgurl]

brian, your most recent post is spot on.

CAR, I have one kid who was always heavier than the other(s) all during K-12 and who I thought had the same diet as the rest of us …. until I realized when they were elem-school age that they were “sneaking” cheese slices and other fairly caloric things out of the frig daily, lol …. anything NOT eaten in moderation will pile on the calories.

They’re in their late 20’s now and after running after buses and Caltrain and also walking dogs (or dogs walking them, lol) up/down SF’s steep hills for 10+ years, shopping at a newer nearby Whole Foods (and taking their lunch to work) and getting their own personal (military-type) trainer down the street in recent years, they’re looking pretty buff of late 🙂

Achieving sensible weight and, ultimately, fitness CAN happen, even to someone who has heavy bones and was “thick” all of their lives. 90% of the psychological effort in achieving this goal is “just getting down to the gym for `face time'” and “just `doing it’.” Sometimes kids have to grow up and get sick of their shape enough to take action on it. No one else can do it for them.

Yes, genes DO play a role in a persons shape, bone density and metabolism. I’m not that short but I’m built like a female version of scaredy cat, and, like him, I’m looking quite a bit more “buff” in my old age. I didn’t get that way by sitting here typing blog posts for ya’ll to munch on (as much as I like to :))

[scaredyclassic]

But if we could gain weight in our penises, men would eat whatever it takes.

The Penis Diet.

[scaredyclassic]

I may have told this story before, but my dedication to adding a bit of muscle dates back to a day sometime in 2010 when I was having extreme difficulty wrestling a 40 lb bad of dog food out of the trunk of my car.

I got a glimpse into the future and it was not pretty.

I have always had thinnish arms but I could see they were starting to look like what I consider “old man arms”. Not fully there by any means, but the writing was on the wall. Thin, white bony appendages, with some loose age-marked skin dangling off the bone—is this really where I wanted to be in 10 or so years? Humiliated to roll my sleeves up, let alone take my shirt off?

No! No!

I wanted thick meaty forearms with rippling muscles and powerful tendons, capable of squeezing, gripping and choking the life out of others.

Fast forward a few years. My forearms now are in my view definitely not an embarrassment, but not wonderful. I can only imagine that they would be much thinner and weaker had I done nothing. But I w as starting with bad material, skinny little bony twigs and a predisposition to stay that way. Some men just have a nice chunk of a forearm as teens, and that’s the way they are.

. It’s not that they eat more or exercise more. They are meaty. Nice meaty muscly fellows. I have gone through periods in the last few years where I ingest tons of protein, way more than necessary, and work out super hard, and get little bitty results. And im grateful for those. Seriously. But others might do the same thing and be gifted with an awe inspiring bod.

My forearms, even with special attention and care, add muscle at a very very slow rate. There are many men who with no effort at all, started with far more impressive forearms, claves, buttock, neck, quadricep than I might ever possess even if I dedicated my life to those muscle’s development. My calves. Ach! My calves are shameful. Muscly, sort of, in a stringy way, like a non-USDA approved piece of meat, and strong enough to get me around and about, but shameful and unmanly looking to me.

My goal is to just try to at worst stop any muscle loss going forward, and to gain an ounce of muscle here and there when possible.

This sounds easy, but adding a bit of muscle requires a very high level of perceived exertion on my part.

[CA renter]

scaredy, we’ve known a few people with the same problem that you have. One guy at my husband’s work eats crazy amounts of food and even “snacks” on those huge burritos in between meals, just to try to gain some weight and muscle. No luck.

Some friends of ours has a young son, about 8 years old, whose every muscle ripples as he moves. Not a large kid, but so incredibly muscular. That kid eats his parents out of house and home. He’s got some kind of food in his hand all day long, literally. Doesn’t work out, obviously, since he’s eight, and doesn’t even know that he looks different from most other kids. Lucky kid. It’s just how he was born. I’m willing to bet he will never be “fat” in his whole, entire life, no matter how much he eats.

BTW, based on the pic you’ve posted, I’d say you’ve done an amazing job with your muscle-building program. That’s a very cool story. Fun to know that we’ve been here all along to share your journey with you. 🙂

[CA renter]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=CA renter] I’m calling total BS on the “diet and exercise” nonsense. It might take years, maybe decades, before science catches up with reality, but I’m willing to bet that we will find that genetics, hormones, and environmental factors are every bit as important as diet and exercise.[/quote]

Ok… let’s say you’re right.

What would the solutions look like once those discoveries are made decades from now?

Do people eat the same amount of calories but still remain thin?

you could fix the genetics and hormonal “problems” with new drugs to increase metabolism or decrease energy absorption.

You can invent new drugs to lower cravings. This actually results in changes in diet.

You can change environmental factors to increase activity. But you can do that right now — exercise.

You “fix” the food so that it contains fewer calories or is not absorbed. This can actually be done right now by changing diet, such as substituting insoluble fibers to add bulk to the food.

Also, be mindful that innovation in food means more processed, “unnatural” food, like a cupcake with only 50 calories.

Genetic and hormonal solutions mean more “unnatural” intervention in our bodies. And as you know there are always unintended consequences.

[/quote]

I think we need to start by taking *out* the stuff that’s bad for us: in our food, in our water, in our personal care products, in the packaging we use for our food, in our soil/environment, etc. Let’s start there, and see what needs to be done after that.

And, yes, we might need to give some people a type of speed if we’re that insistent on their losing weight. As I’ve mentioned before, I think that some of these people will feel no different from “normal” people when they are using speed because their natural metabolism (energy level, etc.) is so much slower than average.

As for my kids’ eating habits, the thinner one eats about 30-50% more than the other two. No need to document it because I see it everyday. Even our friends comment on it.

Also meant to respond to your comment about heavier people only being able to outperform less-fit, normal-weight people on physical tasks. I’m not just talking about lifting weights, but hiking, swimming, skiing, biking, playing tennis, basketball, etc.; then there’s work like cutting trees, digging trenches, etc. There are a lot of “overweight” people who are incredibly fit, and a whole lot of under/normal-weight people who are incredibly unfit.

[scaredyclassic]

[img_assist|nid=18184|title=The back|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=56|height=100]

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=CA renter]I think we need to start by taking *out* the stuff that’s bad for us: in our food, in our water, in our personal care products, in the packaging we use for our food, in our soil/environment, etc. Let’s start there, and see what needs to be done after that.

And, yes, we might need to give some people a type of speed [/quote]

Ok, so while we wait for policy action and pharmacological solutions, there’s no personal initiative that’s possible?

As far as cleaning our environment, how is that going to happen? “sick” people don’t seem to be calling for any change at all (like cancer patients are calling for more research).

If we are worried about hormonal changes due to chemicals in our food, then we should be avoiding packaged items at all costs. That’s individual action we can take. Think of a paper cup of coffee. The cut is manufactured somewhere with bleaching agents, adhesives, etc… Add high heat and there will surely be leaching. Same goes for food boxes, etc… Minute amounts of chemicals won’t kill us, but repeated use might affect some people who are most sensitive.

[Author]

Posts