New topic
Printabletackam said: J0eyC0c0 said: matt said:
There really isn't. Bodybuilders and other athletes have mastered dieting and sure protein to fat conversion is poor, while carb to fat is pretty high (GI and GL indexes and all that shit), but in the end it all boils down to intake vs use. Many ectomorphs argue they eat a lot, but still don't gain weight. Their problem is they have a faster metabolism, so they burn more than other people during the same activities. In order to gain weight they simply need to consume more calories. There is no absolute maintenance level. It's varies greatly between people (sex, size, ativities, age, metabolism etc etc), but one thing is the same; maintance + cal = gain. maintenance - cal = loss. Ofcourse there are also people who have screwed up their metabolism through bad dieting methods and a small percentage with physiological problems, but way too many people claim to be part of the latter group. [This message was edited Thu Jul 29 19:56:31 2004 by J0eyC0c0] Well, yeah. I think the important part is, it's not merely dependant upon calories IN, because we all burn calories at different rates. This fat chick (Matt is over my shoulder cringing at that turn of phrase, but it's true  ) simply doesn't eat that much.
I think that some ectomorph folks couldn't eat enough to gain weight wihtout making themselves puke, and some fat folks can't eat a small enough amount to lose weight without feeling constantly sick. So why don't we measure health by parameters that actually matter? And why don't we try to see beauty through eyes other than those of Ken and Barbie? Just sayin'.  "A Watcher scoffs at gravity!" | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
