How do you define fit?

**chuckman** · 12-30-10, 16:10

Originally Posted by 120mm

Yeah, well, whatever. If your average fatass weighed less, he'd be more "fit" and/or capable.

Skinny that doesn't work out, yeah. Skinny that does a large variety of fitness exercise kicks fatasses 10 for 10.

I've been both of those guys, and let me tell you, I was lying to myself when I thought I had a gut, was strong and had great endurance.

Generally, I agree. Occasionally there are exceptions, but they are exceptions and not the rule. A buddy of mine, we were corpsmen together, he went to BUDS. He was 20, 21% bodyfat. He performed to standard, and actually outperformed most of his colleagues when it was cold because of his BF. Again, an exception.

I know a ton of skinnies who can't run from here to there without dying, or do 10 push-ups, but I know more fat people who are un-fit than skinny people.

**120mm** · 12-30-10, 20:51

Originally Posted by chuckman

Generally, I agree. Occasionally there are exceptions, but they are exceptions and not the rule. A buddy of mine, we were corpsmen together, he went to BUDS. He was 20, 21% bodyfat. He performed to standard, and actually outperformed most of his colleagues when it was cold because of his BF. Again, an exception.

I know a ton of skinnies who can't run from here to there without dying, or do 10 push-ups, but I know more fat people who are un-fit than skinny people.

Lots of variables, here. Hard is hard. A dude that can gut out things is tough, period.

There are some definite negatives to being thin; You mentioned the cold. When I was that guy with the gut, I was temp insensitive. Now, I freeze my ass off. But it's just easier to do about anything else, which means I can accomplish with ease what I used to have to "gut out". That means when "gut out" time comes, I got a hell of a lot more reserves.

The two other downsides to skinny are food intake (my mates get nervous around meal times, as I think they suspect I will kill, clean, cook and eat them if I cannot eat right away) and believe it or not, sitting.

I got no more cushion in my ass, in other words.

**FMJ556** · 12-30-10, 22:45

Dunno if this has been discussed but an intriguing observation about weight is the so called "Obesity Paradox":

"However, recent studies have shown that obese people with chronic diseases have a better chance of survival than normal-weight individuals do. This finding has been called the obesity paradox."

link

**120mm** · 12-31-10, 00:48

Originally Posted by FMJ556

Dunno if this has been discussed but an intriguing observation about weight is the so called "Obesity Paradox":

link

Ah, yes. Nothing like junk/pop "science".

So, for those with chronic diseases, the obese have a better survival rate. Let's look at that using logic.

I would venture that being obese leads to a higher incidence of chronic disease. I would also venture that obese people have more diagnosed chronic disease, primarily because it affects them more dramatically than non-obese.

I would then take an educated guess that the most non-obese people who are diagnosed with chronic diseases have more serious diseases or more advanced/dramatic forms of them. Frankly, I know non-obese people that carry around chronic diseases that don't bother to get medical treatment because it just doesn't affect them that much.

From a personal standpoint, I had a couple of so-called chronic conditions that just magically disappeared when I lost my 80 pounds, for instance.

I'd like to see what they mean by "chronic disease". A skinny guy will die of chronic heart disease, but a fatass will survive with so-called "chronic knee pain" (which is really caused by being a fatass) and both could count for a "1" in the survive/doesn't survive category.

**FMJ556** · 12-31-10, 08:50

I wouldn't say it is "junk science". Seems like the association between obesity and the lower incidence of heart failure is complex. This study was published in the American Heart Journal, which is pretty reputable:

An obesity paradox in acute heart failure: Analysis of body mass index and inhospital mortality for 108927 patients in the Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry

Results

Body mass index quartiles in the 108927 hospitalizations were QI (16.0-23.6 kg/m2), QII (23.7-27.7 kg/m2), QIII (27.8-33.3 kg/m2), and QIV (33.4-60.0 kg/m2). Patients in the higher BMI quartiles were younger, had more diabetes, and had a higher left ventricular ejection fraction. Inhospital mortality rates decreased in a near-linear fashion across successively higher BMI quartiles. After adjustments for age, sex, blood urea nitrogen, blood pressure, creatinine, sodium, heart rate, and dyspnea at rest, BMI quartile still predicted mortality risk. For every 5-U increase in BMI, the odds of risk-adjusted mortality was 10% lower (95% CI 0.88-0.93, P < .0001).

Conclusions

In this cohort of hospitalized patients with HF, higher BMI was associated with lower inhospital mortality risk. The relationship between BMI and adverse outcomes in HF appears to be complex and deserving of further study.

link

**JeffWard** · 12-31-10, 09:10

BMI has a very poor correlation to fitness for many.

I run about 29.5 BMI... Borderline OBESE.

I'm 6'4" and 240-243 lbs. With a 34" waist! I run 6-8% body-fat year round, and I'm a fitness professional. I TEACH
the business of personal training for a living n addition to my own clients.

I define "fit" as being able to consistently kick the crap out of my 20-25 year old "aspiring fitness professionals" in standardized fitness testing!

I can out run, out lift, and out sprint 90% of them, half my age. Good enough for me! LOL

JeffWard

Age 40...

**120mm** · 12-31-10, 10:38

Originally Posted by FMJ556

I wouldn't say it is "junk science". Seems like the association between obesity and the lower incidence of heart failure is complex. This study was published in the American Heart Journal, which is pretty reputable:

link

Oops. Pry should've read the link.

But, it's not the first time some media types blew a medical study out of proportion.

**FMJ556** · 12-31-10, 10:52

I agree BMI is pretty useless. Athletes exceed the "normal" limit more often than not. But I think one thing that is important to note is even superfit people can have chronic conditions like heart disease. Jim Fixx is an example. Though in his case his genetics and previous smoking and obesity probably played a major part.