Fitness and Nutrition, Rep VII

[Kriss E]

At my gym, there are a few guys 55+ who are in fantastic shape. After I got to know them a bit, they told me that they all have prescriptions and take a steroid plus some other stuff. I can't deny they look great but I always heard it's really bad for you. What do you experts think?

They are likely on TRT (Testosterone Replacement Therapy). Late 30s+ men can start getting prescription for Testo as their natural production drops.

I've said this multiple times. Steroids are good for you. They are as close as it can get to a ''miracle drug''.
So often when you have issues you need help with, they will come into play.
Steroids can be used to help the treatment of cancer. Doctors will administer some form of roids if you are recovering from a big accident crash. You have a rash? Steroidal cream. You want to get strong? Roids. You want to run faster? Roids. You have hives and big allergies? Steroids.

Steroids are not bad for you. That's BS. They are just a highly effective narcotic so you can't have the general public use this without knowing what they're doing.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

They are likely on TRT (Testosterone Replacement Therapy). Late 30s+ men can start getting prescription for Testo as their natural production drops.

I've said this multiple times. Steroids are good for you. They are as close as it can get to a ''miracle drug''.
So often when you have issues you need help with, they will come into play.
Steroids can be used to help the treatment of cancer. Doctors will administer some form of roids if you are recovering from a big accident crash. You have a rash? Steroidal cream. You want to get strong? Roids. You want to run faster? Roids. You have hives and big allergies? Steroids.

Steroids are not bad for you. That's BS. They are just a highly effective narcotic so you can't have the general public use this without knowing what they're doing.

So you use them then.

 

[Kriss E]

So you use them then.

Not sure how you reached that conclusion, but I'm not, yet.

 

[DAChampion]

Who knew my simple body has the incredible power to change the laws of thermodynamics simply because of my SlOw MeTaBoLiSm!

Every single thing that I wrote is consistent with the first law. Metabolism literally refers to the rate at which you burn energy, or "the work done by the system," as it is called in introductory textbooks. Your metabolism can go up and down and that is fully consistent with the first law.

 

[DAChampion]

Being the lazy person that @BehindTheTimes accused me of being, i did 45 minutes of pre-breakfast cardio this morning.

A loosely relevant statistic is that I burned ~700 calories.

A more interesting statistic is that my peak heart rate reached 175. That is a number that is interesting and worth tracking. I'd like to be able to stay above 180 for a decent bit.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

Not sure how you reached that conclusion, but I'm not, yet.

You referred to them as some sort of miracle cure all. If you really believe that, I assumed you’d be on them.

I for one am not gonna pretend like I know enough about them one way or the other, but I would be hesitant to put things that powerful in my body.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

Every single thing that I wrote is consistent with the first law. Metabolism literally refers to the rate at which you burn energy, or "the work done by the system," as it is called in introductory textbooks. Your metabolism can go up and down and that is fully consistent with the first law.

I’d look online to find safe levels for your age and weight. 180s is quite high for the average person if I recall.

 

[Kriss E]

You referred to them as some sort of miracle cure all. If you really believe that, I assumed you’d be on them.

I for one am not gonna pretend like I know enough about them one way or the other, but I would be hesitant to put things that powerful in my body.

I said ''they're as close as it can be to a miracle drug'', which was only one sentence in my post.
I also said they are a very powerful narcotic and you can't give the general public access to that.

As for me using...
1) Do the general public have access to those drugs? No.
2) I know a place in HK that I could get some pharma grade from, but it's HK...so my trust level isn't very high.
3) Because they're very powerful, you'd need to get an endocrinologist follow you up.
4) It's expensive.
5) I'm still perfectly happy with my natural testo levels.

Your assumption is a bit weird and uninformed. Seemed more like a ''Oh you think they're good well you should be on them then'' snarky type of answer.

 

[waffledave]

I’d look online to find safe levels for your age and weight. 180s is quite high for the average person if I recall.

Everyone is different. Mine goes up to 190s and I can keep it there for extended periods. During a half marathon and kept it at ~170 for 2 straight hours. For me I don't get out of breath until 180+. My resting heart rate is around 90. I used to worry about it but went to the doctor, did an ultrasound, wore a heart monitor for 2 days, all that stuff. He told me I'm fine. So I keep going, never had any heart related symptoms or anything like that.

 

[waffledave]

Every single thing that I wrote is consistent with the first law. Metabolism literally refers to the rate at which you burn energy, or "the work done by the system," as it is called in introductory textbooks. Your metabolism can go up and down and that is fully consistent with the first law.

I just don't buy into this metabolism stuff. Your body needs energy and it will burn calories. If my body is burning calories more slowly, then where is that energy coming from? I still need it. And at the end of the day, it's still calories in vs calories out. I burn calories to fuel my body, I eat them to replenish that. It still evens out whether it takes longer or not.

People who have "fast metabolisms" are always slim, muscular people. If you have more muscle, you will burn more calories naturally. That's not metabolism to me.

 

[DAChampion]

I said ''they're as close as it can be to a miracle drug'', which was only one sentence in my post.
I also said they are a very powerful narcotic and you can't give the general public access to that.

As for me using...
1) Do the general public have access to those drugs? No.
2) I know a place in HK that I could get some pharma grade from, but it's HK...so my trust level isn't very high.
3) Because they're very powerful, you'd need to get an endocrinologist follow you up.
4) It's expensive.
5) I'm still perfectly happy with my natural testo levels.

Your assumption is a bit weird and uninformed. Seemed more like a ''Oh you think they're good well you should be on them then'' snarky type of answer.

Honestly, I partly agree with him. You're clearly very interested in steroids. I think that you should try them out. You can start with a modest and thus relatively safe cycle.

 

[DAChampion]

I just don't buy into this metabolism stuff. Your body needs energy and it will burn calories.

You can reject science if you want, but the variations in metabolism have been measured in people and in other animals.

Your body has a lot of flexibility to reduce metabolism, for example it can lower your body temperature, or it can send fewer nutrients to the brain. Both have been measured to take place. The level of fidgeting over a day has also been measured to vary and matter.

you will burn more calories naturally. That's not metabolism to me.

That is exactly what metabolism is. Stop using terms that you don't understand.

 

[MaKi]

I just don't buy into this metabolism stuff. Your body needs energy and it will burn calories. If my body is burning calories more slowly, then where is that energy coming from? I still need it. And at the end of the day, it's still calories in vs calories out. I burn calories to fuel my body, I eat them to replenish that. It still evens out whether it takes longer or not.

People who have "fast metabolisms" are always slim, muscular people. If you have more muscle, you will burn more calories naturally. That's not metabolism to me.

The way I understand it, and I could be wrong, is that your metabolism or basal metabolic rate is how much energy (calories) your body needs to function on a basic level. If you took two people and had them sleep, wake up and sit in a chair all day until they went back to sleep, performing almost no physical activity, their calories burned would be almost completely based on their metabolism. Sort of like a car just idling, how much fuel does that require? Obviously people's driving habits and the driving conditions would affect the total fuel consumed by the car, just like different activity levels and intensities will affect a humans overall energy consumption (calories), but metabolism only refers to how much the person burns just by being operational the way I understand it.

So unless I'm mistaken what you described almost exactly defines metabolism, because like my example with the car a larger engine will use more fuel while idling, so will a human body that needs to fuel more muscle mass.

 

[MaKi]

Double post

 

[DAChampion]

The way I understand it, and I could be wrong, is that your metabolism or basal metabolic rate is how much energy (calories) your body needs to function on a basic level. If you took two people and had them sleep, wake up and sit in a chair all day until they went back to sleep, performing almost no physical activity, their calories burned would be almost completely based on their metabolism. Sort of like a car just idling, how much fuel does that require? Obviously people's driving habits and the driving conditions would affect the total fuel consumed by the car, just like different activity levels and intensities will affect a humans overall energy consumption (calories), but metabolism only refers to how much the person burns just by being operational the way I understand it.

So unless I'm mistaken what you described almost exactly defines metabolism, because like my example with the car a larger engine will use more fuel while idling, so will a human body that needs to fuel more muscle mass.

What you described is the resting metabolic rate. That is certainly affected by factors such as hormones, genetics, and body composition.

Muscle mass does increase resting metabolic rate, but not by the huge amount that internet broscience often suggests. This colloquial articles gives an estimate that every additional pound of muscle increases resting metabolic rate by 5-10 calories a day:
The Myth about Muscle and Metabolism
A more mainstream source:
Controversies in Metabolism

In practice, "calories out" can decrease by other means as well. For example, depression and fatigue was ovserved in the participants of the Keynes Minnesota experiment. Yes, those patients would have had a decreased heart rate and body temperature, but they'd also have had a decrease in general activity due to general lethargy.

All in all, if somebody tries to lose weight by burning 1,000 calories/day via cardio while maintaining a standard dietary consumption of ~2,000 calories a day, they are in my opinion playing with fire. Particularly if they're older or if they keep it up for several months .

 

[waffledave]

I still don't get where you're coming from. You seem to imply that cardio and cutting calories via diet will decrease your metabolism and you won't lose weight anymore. There needs to be a reason for your body to need more/less fuel, it doesn't just change magically. I mean, obviously if you drop a ton of weight via calorie deficit you will need to make adjustments, you body needs less fuel when it's half the size. If you go back to eating the same as before you will of course gain the weight back.

 

[DAChampion]

I still don't get where you're coming from. You seem to imply that cardio and cutting calories via diet will decrease your metabolism and you won't lose weight anymore. There needs to be a reason for your body to need more/less fuel, it doesn't just change magically. I mean, obviously if you drop a ton of weight via calorie deficit you will need to make adjustments, you body needs less fuel when it's half the size. If you go back to eating the same as before you will of course gain the weight back.

If you cut caloric consumption and increase your expenditure via exercise routines, your body has multiple options, it can:
- Catabolize subcutaneous fat;
- Catabolize organ fat;
- Catabolize muscle;
- Catabolize organ and bone tissue;
- Decrease metabolism, by decreasing heart rate, body temperature, brain activity, etc;
- Decrease body activity by making you more tired, etc.
All of these are observed to occur in nature, in both people and in animals, multiple times over. Nature has many different ways of respecting the first law of thermodynamics.

There are in fact many reasons why the body may respond in different ways. The process of converting fat into energy to maintain metabolic activity is one specific pathway that involves a lot of different hormones and enzymes. They might not all be available in the right amounts at any given time. Moreover, fat is not an inert organ, it's surrounded by extra skin, nerve endings, blood vessels, etc which eventually need to be catabolized as well. It's a complex process for your body. It's not equivalent to simply using up a battery. That's why your body always runs through its glucose reserve first, prior too catabolizing adipose fat, as that's a simpler process.

The idea that hormones have no effect on body composition is quite frankly purely ideological in its irrationality. Nobody actually believes it. For example, it is well known by doctors that every patient taking thyroid medication, insulin medication, prednisone, etc. is at risk of arbitrarily adjusting their medication in order to lose weight. It's well known by the patients that their body composition will change effortlessly if they do so -- but the doctors know that there can be a steep physiological cost. Similarly, women who going through menopause also report that their weight gain is independent of their diet and exercise regimen. Hormones influence the body's composition, and factors such as metabolism and appetite respond accordingly.

 

[Mrb1p]

Seven days ago I was 219.... Today I'm 226, AKA, (I think) the heaviest I ever was.

Coming for that 230 real quick.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

Lol you change your position on a whim yet you keep arguing nonetheless.

I haven't changed anything. Now go whine to someone else please.

No one in their right mind thinks you can eat like shit and lose weight, but if you're nutrition is good running can help a great deal. My position has always been you need to burn more calories than you consume. Your precious feelings got hurt now you're looking to argue for no reason.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

If the alternative is ''do no exercise'', then yes, it can assist.
DA's original post was how slow steady state cardio is terrible for weight loss, and I agree with that.
Just to be clear SSSC is borderline walking, very low intensity work.
If you're running 40min at 15speed on the treadmill, that doesn't qualify.

Agreed, but this is not what the guy with the question was asking.

 

[DAChampion]

Your precious feelings got hurt now you're looking to argue for no reason.

With respect to my feelings, for the record, yes, I am in fact disappointed in you. I had previously regarded you as a worthwhile poster, and I regret the error.

I haven't changed anything.

You have. Perhaps you don't realize it as you contradict yourself in the same post:
No one in their right mind thinks you can eat like **** and lose weight --> My position has always been you need to burn more calories than you consume.

Now go whine to someone else please.

Don't dish it if you can't take it.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

You come off like a global warming denier. You're denying things that have actually been measured, that are settled science. You're doing so due to some ideological position.

For example, Kevin Hall ran a study of former contestants of the biggest loser. They lost weight using "diet and exercise". What Hall found was that their metabolisms ended up slowing down to compensate, by 500-1000 calories a day. They subsequently regained the weight.

FYI, the effect that muscle mass has on metabolism is real, but small.

Yes, because you are talking in extremes again here, you are talking about ppl that go from eating upwards of 6000 calories a day and then they reduce it to 2000 and add exercise that they haven't previously done before. Their system is in complete shock. This is not at all equivalent to a typical real life situation that ppl going to the gym are doing. This study is completely useless when talking about your average person looking to lose weight.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

With respect to my feelings, for the record, yes, I am in fact disappointed in you. I had previously regarded you as a worthwhile poster, and I regret the error.


You have. Perhaps you don't realize it as you contradict yourself in the same post:
No one in their right mind thinks you can eat like **** and lose weight --> My position has always been you need to burn more calories than you consume.


Don't dish it if you can't take it.

Champ I don't know how many different ways you want me to apologize. I said I completely regretted what I said to you if that meant you thought I was taking a shot at you. I wasn't meaning you in particular were lazy.

I deeply regret that dude, but you can either accept it or not. I don't know what else to say about it. I'm being sincere when I say I never once thought u were lazy.

There is no contradiction my friend, if you burn more calories than you consume you will lose weight. It is the only thing for certain we have discussed.

 

[BehindTheTimes]

Being the lazy person that @BehindTheTimes accused me of being, i did 45 minutes of pre-breakfast cardio this morning.

A loosely relevant statistic is that I burned ~700 calories.

A more interesting statistic is that my peak heart rate reached 175. That is a number that is interesting and worth tracking. I'd like to be able to stay above 180 for a decent bit.

I never called you lazy champ, I feel bad you feel that way, but nothing I can say or do will change that, you'll either believe me and move on or not. I track my heart rates during my runs as well and I usually keep it above 165 for the duration. I have peaked around 183, I don't know what I could have done differently to get it any higher.

 

[Shabs]

I said ''they're as close as it can be to a miracle drug'', which was only one sentence in my post.
I also said they are a very powerful narcotic and you can't give the general public access to that.

As for me using...
1) Do the general public have access to those drugs? No.
2) I know a place in HK that I could get some pharma grade from, but it's HK...so my trust level isn't very high.
3) Because they're very powerful, you'd need to get an endocrinologist follow you up.
4) It's expensive.
5) I'm still perfectly happy with my natural testo levels.

Your assumption is a bit weird and uninformed. Seemed more like a ''Oh you think they're good well you should be on them then'' snarky type of answer.

Isn't it difficult to get a prescription for this in Canada?

 

[FF de Mars]

Have you guys seen this podcast?

Marc Fitt, un petit gars de chez-nous a millions views influencer. I'm recouping from an operation, so I'm training 3h a days doing physio. I'm not very much into Sparta and discipline, this guy is insane. He even moniters his sleep. His catch phrase is "optimize yourself". He played midget hockey too, from Hochelaga, his dad pressured him a lot, yelled at him when he didn't play his best, and made him practice with lead pucks. BTW the podcast is made by a OD Bali finalist and his best friend, for the giggles.