........and uplift has the last laugh.

blindboy's picture
blindboy started the topic in Monday, 17 Mar 2014 at 6:17pm
blindboy's picture
blindboy's picture
blindboy commented Monday, 17 Mar 2014 at 6:18pm

Seriously!

mundies's picture
mundies's picture
mundies commented Monday, 17 Mar 2014 at 7:46pm

Now that is funny. Thanks blindboy.

mundies

southey's picture
southey's picture
southey commented Monday, 17 Mar 2014 at 9:49pm

This maybe the case BB . But how do they attribute it ...
Is there a seperation of people who stay active and eat various foods , as opposed to those that monitor / heavily regulate what they eat to stay within BMI categories ...

I know women in general that moderate food intake to stay " in the lower size " of the healthy BMI range tend to exercise less which is obvioulsy not going to help maintain bone density and we all know teh skeletal system is one of the first signs of decaying health in seniors ....
Infact , in the very elderly ( Uppy included ) this is not old news ...
However , trying to maintain 100kgs- 110 kgs plus into your seventies is not what i would call ideal .... of course unless your name is Towman & Uppy ....

" SA's Reserve Capacity "

blindboy's picture
blindboy's picture
blindboy commented Monday, 17 Mar 2014 at 10:27pm

It is a simple correlation southey. The greater your muscle mass the lower your risk of death. So they are not trying to establish the exact mechanism in this study. Nor are they suggesting it is a 100% correlation but as an overall predictor of longevity it is better than the BMI. Naturally all the other factors such as diet, drug use and genetics are still going to have an impact. I think it is useful simply because it points out that the old one size fits all aerobic exercise programs are not the full story as you age. Muscle up while you still can!

mundies's picture
mundies's picture
mundies commented Monday, 17 Mar 2014 at 10:31pm

Extreme bulking up = unsustainable. Long term strength / cardio work plus good diet plus enough sleep (every parent with kids below 5 are fucked) = everythings gonna more than likely be OK. Keeping it up on an ongoing basis is probably the main issue when entering later years.

mundies

mundies's picture
mundies's picture
mundies commented Monday, 17 Mar 2014 at 10:34pm

I wonder if they have excluded the extra massive crew who have used steroids? Would be interesting to see their exclusion criteria and whether they have accounted for unreported drug use. Probably a small proportion of the population anyway if they have a good sample size.

mundies

uplift's picture
uplift's picture
uplift commented Monday, 17 Mar 2014 at 11:22pm

'However , trying to maintain 100kgs- 110 kgs plus into your seventies is not what I would call ideal'

So what. Who cares what you would call it. Your clients? Hilarious. You wouldn't have a clue how to do that anyway (unless we include the weight of all your back braces and highchairs and shit)

There's only one way. Optimum anabolic hormones. Easy, but, the scourge of the general population, aging or not, as overall the case is the opposite. The dream of athletes. Some are doomed by choice though. Marathoners. Doomed. Nutrition disasters abound too. Low fat, no saturated fat, cholesterol terror, doomed. Carb mania, doomed. As I have discussed, the biggest bungle in training and nutrition, is not asking, 'what will be the hormone response of this?' Hormones, and there are literally zillions of them, run everything. Good and bad. Absolutely, utterly every bodily function. Everything. Including fucked backs, knees etc. And recovery. Recovery rules.

Interestingly, thoughts dramatically affect hormones. Relentlessly. A shape surges under you, boom, adrenalin surges... hormones burst on to the scene in a myriad of ways. But, bungle, its just a dolphin. You, your bungle, your mind told your body otherwise so it did as it was told. Like it always does. Consciously, or subconsciously. That can be used effectively. Seems simple.

But, oh the tangles. Old man soufle's farked knees, and them farkin muscals dun me in son! What a knot.

southey's picture
southey's picture
southey commented Tuesday, 18 Mar 2014 at 10:31am

what i was getting at BB , is whether they actually dissected the numbers into people that naturally held large amounts of muscle bulk as opposed to those that didn't , and started " bulking up " ...
at the end of the day i don't care what anyone says , generally longevity is a gene or multiple genes' that are passed down ....
don't worry Uppity , there's plenty of good genes in my hereditary ....
said old man , is 70 next year .He just started getting a couple of grey hairs last year , and i reckon myself and my sons probably caused most of them .
and as you go back in time it gets better .... literally dozens of lineage who lived well into their nineties .
Infact at some stage my direct (PATERNAL) Great x3 grand father was the oldest man in the colony , including surviving one of the longest ( convict ) trips out here , a seven year hard labour sentence , eventually walking a large young family and 500 stock down into VIC , etc etc etc ....

Anyway , you keep tellin' yourself 'roids are good .... at some stage the drugs start tellin you themselves'... right .....!!!

" SA's Reserve Capacity "