With his insane cardio, why isnt Cain ripped?

[roman510]

junk food

 

[Godinski]

Being ripped has nothing to do with having a good stamina/cardio capacity. It's even opposite marathon runners are eating 7000 - 8000 calories 80% carbohydrates before the run ti have energy - fuel on stock.

Huge muscle versus small body fat percentage is limiting you with your stamina capacities - since you need more oxygen for the muscle function and your body has much less fuel (fat station).

Cain has optimum body shape for the sport especially for HW - it's not the same to make drills and move 70 kg and 120 kg.

He is not for cover of Man's Health shirtless, so what he is great athlete.

 

[Alexandergreat3]

The genetic variance between humans is really small.

Yep, the genetic variance between humans is really insignificant. We're all created equal.

That's why almost all of the NBA players are black, some caucasians, and less than a handful of asians.

And that's why male pornstars with the biggest ***** are black.

You can keep living in denial or accept the truth: Genetics is what determines physical traits, intelligence, athletic abilities, health, beauty, and so on.

 

[BisexualMMA]

Yep, the genetic variance between humans is really insignificant. We're all created equal.

That's why almost all of the NBA players are black, some caucasians, and less than a handful of asians.

And that's why male pornstars with the biggest ***** are black.

You can keep living in denial or accept the truth: Genetics is what determines physical traits, intelligence, athletic abilities, health, beauty, and so on.

Shrug. You are welcome to act unwisely and let 'genetics' determine your health going forward if you like.

 

[Alexandergreat3]

Well when you went to get a medical check as a kid, they used the BMI scale and gave instructions accordingly to what it showed. Or maybe we just had a messed up physician lol

My doctor still uses the BMI. It's not accurate when used on people who are physically fit and lift weights, because their lean weight could be mistaken for fat weight.

But, I believe the BMI is still used because it's quick and easy to administer and can be reasonably accurate for the average person.

 

[kebab]

My doctor still uses the BMI. It's not accurate when used on people who are physically fit and lift weights, because their lean weight could be mistaken for fat weight.

But, I believe the BMI is still used because it's quick and easy to administer and can be reasonably accurate for the average person.

On a population level it works just fine. In females BMI even has a tendency to be a little more relaxed than BF% when it comes to determining if people are overweight/obese. Not the other way around.

 

[Sherm]

My doctor still uses the BMI. It's not accurate when used on people who are physically fit and lift weights, because their lean weight could be mistaken for fat weight.

But, I believe the BMI is still used because it's quick and easy to administer and can be reasonably accurate for the average person.

You're overestimating the competence of the medical establishment. BMI is a joke, it doesn't work on fit people, it also doesn't work on skinny-fat people either. There are all kinds of normal weight people who have hypertension, diabetes, clogged arteries, etc, because they eat horrible food and never work out.

I honestly believe that a visual inspection of a person with their clothes off would be a more accurate predictor of obesity related disease. And the inspector wouldn't even have to be a doctor, it could just be some joe off the street who knows an out of shape dipshit when he sees one. Of course, the reason researchers don't use this is because it is not objective, so it would have less credibility when trying to get the paper published. The researchers would also have to blind the inspectors to make sure they did not know which "exposure" group each subject belonged to.

 

[Alexandergreat3]

Shrug. You are welcome to act unwisely and let 'genetics' determine your health going forward if you like.

I never said having healthy habits is not important. It is very important. And it's the only thing people can change to improve, say, their health.

Genetics cannot be changed (at least not yet).

But it's inaccurate to say genetics doesn't have a huge role in determining many things, particularly when it comes to health.

 

[Darkeonz]

Shrug. You are welcome to act unwisely and let 'genetics' determine your health going forward if you like.

Nobody is talking about letting genetics determine your health. Are you saying Cain is not healthy? Of course not. Like I said in my previous post which you have not responded to. We are NOT talking about overweight people and we are NOT using genetics as an excuse for people with weight issues. You have gone to the extremes.

Genetics can determine your health though. You have families where most of them die around age 100 because of genetics, and you can have other families where members die at age 50-60. Genetics can make you prone to some diseases

 

[Darkeonz]

I never said having healthy habits is not important. It is very important. And it's the only thing people can change to improve, say, their health.

Genetics cannot be changed (at least not yet).

But it's inaccurate to say genetics doesn't have a huge role in determining many things, particularly when it comes to health.

I agree with you completely. However within the last couple of years they actually have succeded in turning off genes in test animals. So it is just a matter of time before it will happen with humans as well. Whether or not making a gene inactive is the same as changing them. Well that just depends on the definition of the word.

 

[Sherm]

On a population level it works just fine. In females BMI even has a tendency to be a little more relaxed than BF% when it comes to determining if people are overweight/obese. Not the other way around.

It depends on what populations you're referring to. BMI actually overstimates the risk of disease among blacks because blacks tend to have more muscle mass than whites. The opposite is true of asians. Whether this is due to genetics or cultural differences is immaterial.

BMI would likely also overestimate the risk of disease among a population of physical laborers. For example, a culture based around farming and hunting.

It really only works on the population on which the original cutpoints for overweight/obese/morbidly obese were established. Namely, the US in the relatively recent past (and societies similar to it). But that doesn't mean that it will even work on Americans 20 years from now, when we might have entirely different habits of life, and different genetics as well.

 

[Alexandergreat3]

You're overestimating the competence of the medical establishment. BMI is a joke, it doesn't work on fit people, it also doesn't work on skinny-fat people either. There are all kinds of normal weight people who have hypertension, diabetes, clogged arteries, etc, because they eat horrible food and never work out.

I honestly believe that a visual inspection of a person with their clothes off would be a more accurate predictor of obesity related disease. And the inspector wouldn't even have to be a doctor, it could just be some joe off the street who knows an out of shape dipshit when he sees one. Of course, the reason researchers don't use this is because it is not objective, so it would have less credibility when trying to get the paper published. The researchers would also have to blind the inspectors to make sure they did not know which "exposure" group each subject belonged to.

They have this tool to measure bodyfat called hydrostatic weighing. Basically, they dip the person in a tank of water to calculate/estimate the actual fat mass, based on the weight and density.

But 99% of clinics don't use this because of the process takes very long, impractical, and expensive.

 

[Alexandergreat3]

On a population level it works just fine. In females BMI even has a tendency to be a little more relaxed than BF% when it comes to determining if people are overweight/obese. Not the other way around.

I'm guessing this could be due to the fact that females supposedly carry more fat compared to males of similar height and age.

Example: Ronda_Rousey_judo.jpg

 

[YesYesYes88]

Who cares? Look at Fedor? It is not about how you look, but about your heart and desire. Cain is the p4p number 1 fighter on the planet!

 

[Sherm]

They have this tool to measure bodyfat called hydrostatic weighing. Basically, they dip the person in a tank of water to calculate/estimate the actual fat mass, based on the weight and density.

But 99% of clinics don't use this because of the process takes very long, impractical, and expensive.

Yeah I heard about that. But I still think you could just look at a person in their underwear and get just as accurate a guess of their health, since even the hydrostatic weighing has shortcomings due to differences in peoples lungs, amount of bone etc.

 

[Alexandergreat3]

I agree with you completely. However within the last couple of years they actually have succeded in turning off genes in test animals. So it is just a matter of time before it will happen with humans as well.

Wow, that's pretty damn awesome! It's just a matter of time, and I personally cannot wait till that day comes.

Whether or not making a gene inactive is the same as changing them. Well that just depends on the definition of the word.

If I'm not mistaken, the two are different. Making a gene inactive is simply turning it off, where as changing it is altering its actual codes, and this is used in what's called Gene Therapy to treat people with genetic related diseases and cancer.

 

[Alexandergreat3]

Yeah I heard about that. But I still think you could just look at a person in their underwear and get just as accurate a guess of their health, since even the hydrostatic weighing has shortcomings due to differences in peoples lungs, amount of bone etc.

Yep, it's not perfect either.

 

[eRIKtHErED]

BMR isn't even the best argument for you. The biggest difference in people regarding how easy they get fat/ripped isn't BMR which might be +- a couple of hundred calories/day, ie nothing. It's appetite, which is hugely based on genetics. Some people can eat 3k cals and feel like its nothing while others almost can't get it down. And that just means it a little harder for the first guy in my example, but still not even close to impossible to get shredded.

WTF?

Which scientific study supports this?

 

[eRIKtHErED]

I can't be bothered going back and I can't be bothered finding well cited articles that I've read in the past few years. Like I said, you're the one who needs help here getting educated on a simple, yet important subject - I don't.

It's like me having the exam answers and you keep telling me your answer is right lol. It's whatever dude, keep believing that it's genetics that you cant get ripped.

The fact that you decline to cite your claims demonstrates a lack of respect for education.

 

[Elmero]

He's already the champ, why mess with a good thing.