Guest guest Posted June 5, 2004 Report Share Posted June 5, 2004 I don't recall specific studies on this. But, to consider this issue, one should define the term, " bodybuilder " or otherwise set some parameters. For example, consider the differences or similarities between Jack LaLanne and Schwarzenneger. Overall, though, more muscle means more weight (mass). A relationship that points to generally a reduced potential for long life. Then, there is the possible CR athlete-slim, healthy, well-defined but small muscle mass. Is this a " bodybuilder " ? What if Bruce Lee did CR instead of drugs? Who knows. As one who traded the 19 " biceps in on a healthier regimen some years ago, I commend you on an intriguing question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2004 Report Share Posted June 5, 2004 Thanks for your input, Ron. Could you expand a bit on your present " healthier regimen " ? (|-|ri5 > > > I don't recall specific studies on this. But, to consider this issue, > one should define the term, " bodybuilder " or otherwise set some > parameters. For example, consider the differences or similarities > between Jack LaLanne and Schwarzenneger. Overall, though, more muscle > means more weight (mass). A relationship that points to generally a > reduced potential for long life. Then, there is the possible CR > athlete-slim, healthy, well-defined but small muscle mass. Is this > a " bodybuilder " ? What if Bruce Lee did CR instead of drugs? Who > knows. As one who traded the 19 " biceps in on a healthier regimen > some years ago, I commend you on an intriguing question. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2004 Report Share Posted June 5, 2004 Chris-by healthier regimen, I mean CR diet (which for me is slightly tilted toward moderate), intermittent fasting at least monthly for 1- 3 days. Exercise now consists of walking, hiking, calisthenics,light weightlifting. And I just began pilates. So in a nutshell: CR diet, any kind of non-joint damaging exercise with cardivascular benefit potential, stretching (ideally yoga and/or pilates). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2004 Report Share Posted June 7, 2004 > Have there been any studies to quantify the average and maximum > lifespans of bodybuilders? BBers are the complete nemesis of CRers. > For an example of how many eye-popping calories they consume, visit > http://www.johnberardi.com/updates/july262002/na_masscalculator.htm > > Logan Call me crazy, but if your goal is to live a longer healthier life, then light bodybuilding would be optimal. Just enough to keep your bones and muscles from atrophy. Unless I'm mistaken, it's the " rusting " from the inside that affects aging. That cellular degradation is the result of the so called power plants inside each cell- the mitochondria. The mitochondrial processing of basic sugars and oxygen give us our energy. The resulting waste material, oxidants, are what zip through your cells doing DNA damage and accelerating aging. Therefore, it would make sense that the more you work out (above what you need), the faster your metabolic rate, the more carbs/sugars and oxygen you need, and the greater the mitochondrial waste. If futher info is desired, this information has mainly come from www.lammd.com and a book that's been on the science best sellers list for months now called " A Short History of Nearly Everything " by Bill Bryson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2004 Report Share Posted June 7, 2004 As for Logan's question, I don't know of any longevity studies on body builders. There are a number of theories of aging & these suggest that heavy exercise work contrary to the benefits of calorie restriction. Probably, each person must balance QOL perception with the only scientific research we know that extends life. Dean wrote: >Call me crazy, but if your goal is to live a longer healthier life, then light bodybuilding would be optimal. Just enough to keep your bones and muscles from atrophy. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2004 Report Share Posted June 7, 2004 Would " bodybuilding " be the word you would use in that case, then? I don't know if there is such a thing as " light " bodybuilding. Perhaps " weight training " would be more accurate. This is what I've been doing: I've only been doing CR seriously since May 18, but I've been dropping weight like crazy. Not that weight loss is my goal, but it is a consequence of CR and must be kept track of if not controlled. I've been working out with dumbells 4-5 times per week and doing pushups to try to keep my upper body from deteriorating. So far the results have been good. I've lost a lot more off my waist than off my arms and chest. I know i won't be able to maintain the musculature that I have now, but to being leaner and lighter, I won't have much need for it. Plus, I've actually increased strength since I started, which has to be a good thing in spite of possible lost muscle mass. By anyone's estimate, though, I am only working out very lightly. I work up a little sweat, and for the 15 minutes or so that I am actually exercising, my heart rate and breathing are increased. I can't imagine that I am burning a lot of energy, though, so I'm not too concerned about the CR impact. I might be burning 50 calories per workout, but that's nothing. The point is that I'm not losing strength, and I'm minimizing the loss of muscle tissue and bone. All in all, I think things are going very well. (|-|ri5 > > Call me crazy, but if your goal is to live a longer healthier life, > then light bodybuilding would be optimal. Just enough to keep your > bones and muscles from atrophy. Unless I'm mistaken, it's > the " rusting " from the inside that affects aging. That cellular > degradation is the result of the so called power plants inside each > cell- the mitochondria. The mitochondrial processing of basic sugars > and oxygen give us our energy. The resulting waste material, > oxidants, are what zip through your cells doing DNA damage and > accelerating aging. Therefore, it would make sense that the more you > work out (above what you need), the faster your metabolic rate, the > more carbs/sugars and oxygen you need, and the greater the > mitochondrial waste. > If futher info is desired, this information has mainly come from > www.lammd.com and a book that's been on the science best sellers list > for months now called " A Short History of Nearly Everything " by Bill > Bryson. > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2004 Report Share Posted June 7, 2004 chris: Congratulations on what sounds like a very sane and successful program! Dropping weight " like crazy " is Ok for the first couple of months or so. But after that you should try to slow down to a pound a week or so. Dropping too fast (after the first intial rapid weight loss) is not healthy. on 6/7/2004 11:07 AM, chris at motjuste@... wrote: > > Would " bodybuilding " be the word you would use in that case, then? I don't > know if there is such a thing as " light " bodybuilding. Perhaps " weight > training " would be more accurate. This is what I've been doing: > > I've only been doing CR seriously since May 18, but I've been dropping > weight like crazy. Not that weight loss is my goal, but it is a consequence > of CR and must be kept track of if not controlled. I've been working out > with dumbells 4-5 times per week and doing pushups to try to keep my upper > body from deteriorating. So far the results have been good. I've lost a > lot more off my waist than off my arms and chest. I know i won't be able to > maintain the musculature that I have now, but to being leaner and lighter, I > won't have much need for it. Plus, I've actually increased strength since I > started, which has to be a good thing in spite of possible lost muscle mass. > > By anyone's estimate, though, I am only working out very lightly. I work up > a little sweat, and for the 15 minutes or so that I am actually exercising, > my heart rate and breathing are increased. I can't imagine that I am > burning a lot of energy, though, so I'm not too concerned about the CR > impact. I might be burning 50 calories per workout, but that's nothing. > The point is that I'm not losing strength, and I'm minimizing the loss of > muscle tissue and bone. All in all, I think things are going very well. > > (|-|ri5 > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 8, 2004 Report Share Posted June 8, 2004 Thanks, Francesca. I couldn't be doing this, well, at the very least, I probably wouldn't have started without pioneers such as yourself paving the way. So, I appreciate your comments. Understand what you mean about losing weight too fast, but shouldn't it slow down on its own after the initial rapid weight loss? I would like to stabilize at a weight that isn't too low (somewhere around 170 lbs, I would think), and I was hoping that the lower weight and slower metabolism would require fewer calories. I guess we'll just have to cross that bridge when we get there, though. When you say " slow down " , do you mean eat more? (|-|ri5 > > > chris: Congratulations on what sounds like a very sane and successful > program! Dropping weight " like crazy " is Ok for the first couple > of months > or so. But after that you should try to slow down to a pound a > week or so. > Dropping too fast (after the first intial rapid weight loss) is > not healthy. > > > on 6/7/2004 11:07 AM, chris at motjuste@... wrote: > > > > > Would " bodybuilding " be the word you would use in that case, > then? I don't > > know if there is such a thing as " light " bodybuilding. Perhaps " weight > > training " would be more accurate. This is what I've been doing: > > > > I've only been doing CR seriously since May 18, but I've been dropping > > weight like crazy. Not that weight loss is my goal, but it is > a consequence > > of CR and must be kept track of if not controlled. I've been > working out > > with dumbells 4-5 times per week and doing pushups to try to > keep my upper > > body from deteriorating. So far the results have been good. > I've lost a > > lot more off my waist than off my arms and chest. I know i > won't be able to > > maintain the musculature that I have now, but to being leaner > and lighter, I > > won't have much need for it. Plus, I've actually increased > strength since I > > started, which has to be a good thing in spite of possible lost > muscle mass. > > > > By anyone's estimate, though, I am only working out very > lightly. I work up > > a little sweat, and for the 15 minutes or so that I am actually > exercising, > > my heart rate and breathing are increased. I can't imagine that I am > > burning a lot of energy, though, so I'm not too concerned about the CR > > impact. I might be burning 50 calories per workout, but that's nothing. > > The point is that I'm not losing strength, and I'm minimizing > the loss of > > muscle tissue and bone. All in all, I think things are going very well. > > > > (|-|ri5 > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 8, 2004 Report Share Posted June 8, 2004 Yes sometimes it slows down while you're eating the same amount. But if it doesn't, then you do have to eat more. Losing too quickly after the first 3 months or so is actually detrimental to your health. And especially so if you're not a youngster anymore. Walford goes over this in his sections on how to lose, esp pp 228-230. on 6/8/2004 2:10 AM, chris at motjuste@... wrote: > > Thanks, Francesca. I couldn't be doing this, well, at the very least, I > probably wouldn't have started without pioneers such as yourself paving the > way. So, I appreciate your comments. > > Understand what you mean about losing weight too fast, but shouldn't it slow > down on its own after the initial rapid weight loss? I would like to > stabilize at a weight that isn't too low (somewhere around 170 lbs, I would > think), and I was hoping that the lower weight and slower metabolism would > require fewer calories. I guess we'll just have to cross that bridge when > we get there, though. > > When you say " slow down " , do you mean eat more? > > (|-|ri5 > >> >> >> chris: Congratulations on what sounds like a very sane and successful >> program! Dropping weight " like crazy " is Ok for the first couple >> of months >> or so. But after that you should try to slow down to a pound a >> week or so. >> Dropping too fast (after the first intial rapid weight loss) is >> not healthy. >> >> >> on 6/7/2004 11:07 AM, chris at motjuste@... wrote: >> >>> >>> Would " bodybuilding " be the word you would use in that case, >> then? I don't >>> know if there is such a thing as " light " bodybuilding. Perhaps " weight >>> training " would be more accurate. This is what I've been doing: >>> >>> I've only been doing CR seriously since May 18, but I've been dropping >>> weight like crazy. Not that weight loss is my goal, but it is >> a consequence >>> of CR and must be kept track of if not controlled. I've been >> working out >>> with dumbells 4-5 times per week and doing pushups to try to >> keep my upper >>> body from deteriorating. So far the results have been good. >> I've lost a >>> lot more off my waist than off my arms and chest. I know i >> won't be able to >>> maintain the musculature that I have now, but to being leaner >> and lighter, I >>> won't have much need for it. Plus, I've actually increased >> strength since I >>> started, which has to be a good thing in spite of possible lost >> muscle mass. >>> >>> By anyone's estimate, though, I am only working out very >> lightly. I work up >>> a little sweat, and for the 15 minutes or so that I am actually >> exercising, >>> my heart rate and breathing are increased. I can't imagine that I am >>> burning a lot of energy, though, so I'm not too concerned about the CR >>> impact. I might be burning 50 calories per workout, but that's nothing. >>> The point is that I'm not losing strength, and I'm minimizing >> the loss of >>> muscle tissue and bone. All in all, I think things are going very well. >>> >>> (|-|ri5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.