weight loss

In article said:

I think I'm about 5 percent body fat, and I weigh 150.
Does this mean if i want to lose weight I can't lose
more than
7.5 lbs without sacrificing muscle? I want to lose weight
to improve my running

Regardless of body fat, most people who lose weight lose
lean mass, but losing lean mass is not the same as
losing muscle.

However, if you really are down to 5% body fat, you probably
can't lose weight without also losing some muscle mass and
getting a little weaker. Depending on how tall you are,
losing weight may not help all that much.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

I think I'm about 5 percent body fat, and I weigh 150.
Does this mean if i want to lose weight I can't lose
more than
7.5 lbs without sacrificing muscle? I want to lose weight
to improve my running

And did you forget to tell us you're also 6'7" and run a
3:45 mile?

--
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,-
,ø¤º eNo "If you can't go fast, go long." ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°-
`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I think I'm about 5 percent body fat, and I weigh 150.
Does this mean if i want to lose weight I can't lose
more than
7.5 lbs without sacrificing muscle? I want to lose
weight to improve my running

Regardless of body fat, most people who lose weight lose
lean mass, but

losing

Quoted message said:

lean mass is not the same as losing muscle.

However, if you really are down to 5% body fat, you
probably can't lose

weight

Quoted message said:

without also losing some muscle mass and getting a
little weaker.

Depending on

Quoted message said:

how tall you are, losing weight may not help all
that much.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

If you are really at 5%, I would think that losing weight
would actually be a very bad thing for you to do. Below 5%
increases the risk for getting sick or not recovering
properly from training sessions.

McElroy will probably weigh in that he is too fat and should
lose weight before starting a running program 🙂

Wrong. I was consistantly 2 percent body fat my entire life
until the age of 35. I had no ill effects.

Secondly, if he loses muscle mass, so what. I say it's for
the
better. He may lose muscle mass on his chest, arms, back and
even legs
but even in your legs you don't need big muscles for
distance running.
What you want to do is lighten the load as much as you
possibly can.

Have you ever seen some of those Kenyans. Some of them
look like they have come right out of a concentration
camp. Yet they run like the wind because they have
nothing to carry. This is why they will always beat
Americans.

Do you know anything about Frank Shorter. I do because I
have trained with him. Before the Olympics in 1972,
Shorter lived in the locker of the University of Florida.
He was stone broke. For dinner he had a sandwich. For the
rest of the day he had an Orange. He was 5 feet 10 and
133 pounds. He looked completely emaciated but light
weight makes more difference than anyone here in this
entire newsgroup is willing to admit. Because no one here
wants to admit I'm right and have to stop eating. No.
that's more of a sacrifice then they would ever be
willing to commit to. So most of the people in this group
will go on spinning their wheels uselessly for months or
years and never run fast when they could run as much as
10 minutes faster in their 10Ks within 2 weeks if they
ever decided to lose the 30 pounds of alien cancerous fat
they don't need.

"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<z-
[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I think I'm about 5 percent body fat, and I weigh 150.
Does this mean if i want to lose weight I can't lose
more than
7.5 lbs without sacrificing muscle? I want to lose
weight to improve my running

Regardless of body fat, most people who lose weight lose
lean mass, but

losing

Quoted message said:

lean mass is not the same as losing muscle.

However, if you really are down to 5% body fat, you
probably can't lose

weight

Quoted message said:

without also losing some muscle mass and getting a
little weaker.

Depending on

Quoted message said:

how tall you are, losing weight may not help all
that much.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

If you are really at 5%, I would think that losing weight
would actually be a very bad thing for you to do. Below 5%
increases the risk for getting sick or not recovering
properly from training sessions.

McElroy will probably weigh in that he is too fat and
should lose weight before starting a running program 🙂

"macelroy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Wrong. I was consistantly 2 percent body fat my entire
life until the age of 35. I had no ill effects.

I doubt it. I did body comps (skinfolds, hydro and
DEXA) on many top athletes leading up to the Atlanta
Olympic Games. Many said they had X%BF, even one person
(male) that said he had always been measured at 3%. We
did all three. DEXA (because of how it measures fat)
was by far the highest, hydro was somewhere around 7%
and skinfolds were about the same. Digging deeper, I
suspect that the person doing the measurements was not
very good at doing it.

Quoted message said:

Secondly, if he loses muscle mass, so what. I say it's for
the
better. He may lose muscle mass on his chest, arms, back
and even legs
but even in your legs you don't need big muscles for
distance running.
What you want to do is lighten the load as much as you
possibly can.

Maybe, maybe not. Everyone is a bit different. Each
person has his/her own optimal training and racing
weight.

Quoted message said:

Have you ever seen some of those Kenyans. Some of them
look like they have come right out of a concentration
camp. Yet they run like the wind because they have
nothing to carry. This is why they will always beat
Americans.

Do you know anything about Frank Shorter. I do because
I have trained with him. Before the Olympics in 1972,
Shorter lived in the locker of the University of
Florida. He was stone broke. For dinner he had a
sandwich. For the rest of the day he had an Orange. He
was 5 feet 10 and 133 pounds. He looked completely
emaciated but light weight makes more difference than
anyone here in this entire newsgroup is willing to
admit. Because no one here wants to admit I'm right and
have to stop eating. No. that's more of a sacrifice
then they would ever be willing to commit to. So most
of the people in this group will go on spinning their
wheels uselessly for months or years and never run fast
when they could run as much as 10 minutes faster in
their 10Ks within 2 weeks if they ever decided to lose
the 30 pounds of alien cancerous fat they don't need.

Next time I see Frank (about 2-3x per year although
less since he stepped down as the chair of USADA)
I'll ask him about it. I doubt anyone is going to
argue the effect that weight has on performance. I
will bet that Frank even found that when he got too
light his training and performance suffered. I'll
also stake out that people of his athletic caliber
are far different from the other 99% of the people
in the world where reducing lean mass is a bad thing
to do especially as we age. It is also proposed (and
I heard Frank at least accept this as a possibility)
that his low body fat was detrimental in cooler
marathons (like in Montreal where it rained). Also,
if I lose 30 pounds and got down to 130, I doubt I
would run faster than I did when I was at 135. How
do I know this: Years of race data and various
weights. If I went below 135, training suffered and
performance suffered. Another problem with your math
is that is I got down to 130, I would be running a
32 min 10K (at altitude) which is far faster than I
ever ran when I was at 135. I understand hyperbole,
but your obsession is wearing thin (pun fully
intended) Also, in case you have not noticed it, not
everyone hear is interested in running fast, just
running to stay fit.

Quoted message said:

"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>-
...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

> I think I'm about 5 percent body fat, and I weigh
> 150. Does this mean if i want to lose weight I can't
> lose more than
> 7.5 lbs without sacrificing muscle? I want to lose
> weight to improve my running

Regardless of body fat, most people who lose weight
lose lean mass,

but

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

losing

Quoted message said:

lean mass is not the same as losing muscle.

However, if you really are down to 5% body fat, you
probably can't

lose

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

weight

Quoted message said:

without also losing some muscle mass and getting a
little weaker.

Depending on

Quoted message said:

how tall you are, losing weight may not help all that
much.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

If you are really at 5%, I would think that losing
weight would actually

be

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

a very bad thing for you to do. Below 5% increases the
risk for getting sick or not recovering properly from
training sessions.

McElroy will probably weigh in that he is too fat and
should lose weight before starting a running program 🙂

I will never ever except any type of body fat test results
unless they are done in a tub. You get in a tub, exhale all
the air out of your lungs and then get weighed. That is the
one and only true accurate measurement for fat. The skinfold
test is completely inaccurate. I need to have exact precise
measurements and I will accept nothing less. This is how I
was tested for the 2 percent. Regarding that if the person
was not accurate in doing the test. I took no chances and
had her do it twice. I cover all corners I can think of.

I don't even trust my own home scale and surely enough as I
weighed myself on other scales several years ago, I found
out my scale was 10 pounds light. We then had other
atheletes do the same and found out that there were a whole
lot of home scales that were completely inaccurate. Someone
needs to sue these companies that put out inaccurate
scales. And I highly advise all of you to take a weight
check on other scales then just your home scale.

Regarding that extremely low body fat is detrimental in
colder weather, you bet it is, absolutely. You have no
insulation. You can go into hypothermia very fast.
Temperatures below 60 degrees can feel like freezing
temperatures. That's one of the side effects you have to
live with. I remember running in a downpouring rainstorm
once at 5:30 per mile pace which you think would have been
a fast enough pace to keep me warm. It didn't. I got so
cold I froze and couldn't run the pace any more and barely
made it home. I learned a big lessen then that I will
never run in such a storm without some kind of raingear.

"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<G-
[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

"macelroy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Wrong. I was consistantly 2 percent body fat my entire
life until the age of 35. I had no ill effects.

I doubt it. I did body comps (skinfolds, hydro and
DEXA) on many top athletes leading up to the Atlanta
Olympic Games. Many said they had X%BF, even one
person (male) that said he had always been measured at
3%. We did all three. DEXA (because of how it measures
fat) was by far the highest, hydro was somewhere
around 7% and skinfolds were about the same. Digging
deeper, I suspect that the person doing the
measurements was not very good at doing it.

Quoted message said:

Secondly, if he loses muscle mass, so what. I say it's
for the
better. He may lose muscle mass on his chest, arms, back
and even legs
but even in your legs you don't need big muscles for
distance running.
What you want to do is lighten the load as much as you
possibly can.

Maybe, maybe not. Everyone is a bit different. Each
person has his/her own optimal training and racing
weight.

Quoted message said:

Have you ever seen some of those Kenyans. Some of
them look like they have come right out of a
concentration camp. Yet they run like the wind
because they have nothing to carry. This is why they
will always beat Americans.

Do you know anything about Frank Shorter. I do
because I have trained with him. Before the Olympics
in 1972, Shorter lived in the locker of the
University of Florida. He was stone broke. For dinner
he had a sandwich. For the rest of the day he had an
Orange. He was 5 feet 10 and 133 pounds. He looked
completely emaciated but light weight makes more
difference than anyone here in this entire newsgroup
is willing to admit. Because no one here wants to
admit I'm right and have to stop eating. No. that's
more of a sacrifice then they would ever be willing
to commit to. So most of the people in this group
will go on spinning their wheels uselessly for months
or years and never run fast when they could run as
much as 10 minutes faster in their 10Ks within 2
weeks if they ever decided to lose the 30 pounds of
alien cancerous fat they don't need.

Next time I see Frank (about 2-3x per year although
less since he stepped down as the chair of USADA)
I'll ask him about it. I doubt anyone is going to
argue the effect that weight has on performance. I
will bet that Frank even found that when he got too
light his training and performance suffered. I'll
also stake out that people of his athletic caliber
are far different from the other 99% of the people
in the world where reducing lean mass is a bad
thing to do especially as we age. It is also
proposed (and I heard Frank at least accept this as
a possibility) that his low body fat was
detrimental in cooler marathons (like in Montreal
where it rained). Also, if I lose 30 pounds and got
down to 130, I doubt I would run faster than I did
when I was at 135. How do I know this: Years of
race data and various weights. If I went below 135,
training suffered and performance suffered. Another
problem with your math is that is I got down to
130, I would be running a 32 min 10K (at altitude)
which is far faster than I ever ran when I was at
135. I understand hyperbole, but your obsession is
wearing thin (pun fully intended) Also, in case you
have not noticed it, not everyone hear is
interested in running fast, just running to stay
fit.

Quoted message said:

"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden].-
net>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...
> In article
> <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > I think I'm about 5 percent body fat, and I weigh
> > 150. Does this mean if i want to lose weight I
> > can't lose more than
> > 7.5 lbs without sacrificing muscle? I want to lose
> > weight to improve my running
>
> Regardless of body fat, most people who lose weight
> lose lean mass,

but losing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> lean mass is not the same as losing muscle.
>
> However, if you really are down to 5% body fat, you
> probably can't

lose weight

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> without also losing some muscle mass and getting a
> little weaker.

Depending on

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> how tall you are, losing weight may not help all
> that much.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Donovan Rebbechi
> pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

If you are really at 5%, I would think that losing
weight would actually

be

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

a very bad thing for you to do. Below 5% increases the
risk for getting sick or not recovering properly from
training sessions.

McElroy will probably weigh in that he is too fat
and should lose weight before starting a running
program 🙂

"macelroy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I will never ever except any type of body fat test results
unless they are done in a tub. You get in a tub, exhale
all the air out of your lungs and then get weighed. That
is the one and only true accurate measurement for fat. The
skinfold test is completely inaccurate. I need to have
exact precise measurements and I will accept nothing less.
This is how I was tested for the 2 percent. Regarding that
if the person was not accurate in doing the test. I took
no chances and had her do it twice. I cover all corners I
can think of.

Actually even hydro is an estimate based on some
assumptions. You want to really know? The answers are
DEXA or melting down your body to separate out fat,
lean, etc. Since I have had my measurements checked
against hydro about 100 times and was within a
percentage point or two, I am willing to stack my
"pinches" up with hydro.

So you had the same person do it twice? A problem there
is that if she were doing it wrong, she did it wrong
twice. That might show her to be reliable or consistent
but not valid.

Quoted message said:

I don't even trust my own home scale and surely enough as
I weighed myself on other scales several years ago, I
found out my scale was 10 pounds light. We then had other
atheletes do the same and found out that there were a
whole lot of home scales that were completely inaccurate.
Someone needs to sue these companies that put out
inaccurate scales. And I highly advise all of you to take
a weight check on other scales then just your home scale.

Yes scales need to be calibrated. Of course if you
weigh yourself on several scales, how do you really
know which one is correct? That is like the saying
about the man with several clocks in his house is
never really sure what time it is.

Quoted message said:

Regarding that extremely low body fat is detrimental in
colder weather, you bet it is, absolutely. You have no
insulation. You can go into hypothermia very fast.
Temperatures below 60 degrees can feel like freezing
temperatures. That's one of the side effects you have to
live with. I remember running in a downpouring rainstorm
once at 5:30 per mile pace which you think would have
been a fast enough pace to keep me warm. It didn't. I
got so cold I froze and couldn't run the pace any more
and barely made it home. I learned a big lessen then
that I will never run in such a storm without some kind
of raingear.

"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>-
...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"macelroy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Wrong. I was consistantly 2 percent body fat my entire
life until the age of 35. I had no ill effects.

I doubt it. I did body comps (skinfolds, hydro and
DEXA) on many

top

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

athletes leading up to the Atlanta Olympic Games. Many
said they had

X%BF,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

even one person (male) that said he had always been
measured at 3%. We

did

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

all three. DEXA (because of how it measures fat) was by
far the

highest,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

hydro was somewhere around 7% and skinfolds were about
the same.

Digging

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

deeper, I suspect that the person doing the measurements
was not very

good

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

at doing it.

Quoted message said:

Secondly, if he loses muscle mass, so what. I say it's
for the
better. He may lose muscle mass on his chest, arms,
back and even legs
but even in your legs you don't need big muscles for
distance running.
What you want to do is lighten the load as much as you
possibly can.

Maybe, maybe not. Everyone is a bit different. Each
person has

his/her

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

own optimal training and racing weight.

Quoted message said:

Have you ever seen some of those Kenyans. Some of
them look like they have come right out of a
concentration camp. Yet they run like the wind
because they have nothing to carry. This is why
they will always beat Americans.

Do you know anything about Frank Shorter. I do
because I have trained with him. Before the
Olympics in 1972, Shorter lived in the locker of
the University of Florida. He was stone broke. For
dinner he had a sandwich. For the rest of the day
he had an Orange. He was 5 feet 10 and 133 pounds.
He looked completely emaciated but light weight
makes more difference than anyone here in this
entire newsgroup is willing to admit. Because no
one here wants to admit I'm right and have to stop
eating. No. that's more of a sacrifice then they
would ever be willing to commit to. So most of the
people in this group will go on spinning their
wheels uselessly for months or years and never run
fast when they could run as much as 10 minutes
faster in their 10Ks within 2 weeks if they ever
decided to lose the 30 pounds of alien cancerous
fat they don't need.

Next time I see Frank (about 2-3x per year
although less since he stepped down as the chair
of USADA) I'll ask him about it. I doubt anyone
is going to argue the effect that weight has on
performance. I will bet that Frank even found
that when he got too

light

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

his training and performance suffered. I'll also stake
out that people

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

his athletic caliber are far different from the other
99% of the people

in

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the world where reducing lean mass is a bad thing to do
especially as we age. It is also proposed (and I heard
Frank at least accept this as a possibility) that his
low body fat was detrimental in cooler marathons

(like

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

in Montreal where it rained). Also, if I lose 30 pounds
and got down to 130, I doubt I would run faster than I
did when I was at 135. How do I know this: Years of race
data and various weights. If I went below 135, training
suffered and performance suffered. Another problem with
your math is that is I got

down

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to 130, I would be running a 32 min 10K (at altitude)
which is far

faster

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

than I ever ran when I was at 135. I understand
hyperbole, but your obsession is wearing thin (pun fully
intended) Also, in case you have not noticed it, not
everyone hear is interested in running fast, just
running to stay fit.

Quoted message said:

"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]-
.net>...

Quoted message said:

> "Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> "]news:[email hidden]...
> > In article <785eb762972904c4779b86f41e8eb3f7@news-
> > .scbiz.com>,

Quoted message said:

> > > I think I'm about 5 percent body fat, and I
> > > weigh 150. Does this mean if i want to lose
> > > weight I can't lose more than
> > > 7.5 lbs without sacrificing muscle? I want to
> > > lose weight to improve my running
> >
> > Regardless of body fat, most people who lose
> > weight lose lean

mass,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

but losing

Quoted message said:

> > lean mass is not the same as losing muscle.
> >
> > However, if you really are down to 5% body fat,
> > you probably can't

lose weight

Quoted message said:

> > without also losing some muscle mass and getting a
> > little weaker.

Depending on

Quoted message said:

> > how tall you are, losing weight may not help all
> > that much.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > --
> > Donovan Rebbechi
> > pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗
>
> If you are really at 5%, I would think that losing
> weight would

actually

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be

Quoted message said:

> a very bad thing for you to do. Below 5% increases
> the risk for

getting

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> sick or not recovering properly from training
> sessions.
>
> McElroy will probably weigh in that he is too fat
> and should lose

weight

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> before starting a running program 🙂

Sam said:

Yes scales need to be calibrated. Of course if you
weigh yourself on several scales, how do you really
know which one is correct? That is like the saying
about the man with several clocks in his house is
never really sure what time it is.

Sam, have been to my house? My wife has every damn clock at
a different time for different "good" reason. I use my cell
phone or computer to tell the real time.

We only have one scale and would guarantee it's off by a
bunch. It's ok for gain and loss but the numbers are very
approximate. I always wonder how often the professional
scales such as in doctors offices are calibrated.

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email hidden]

The lab I once worked in (and still have "adjunct" status
in) calibrates its scales once a year by the company that
made the scales. I doubt docs ever calibrate their scales.
For the most part what does it matter if it is a few
pounds off?

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Sam said:

Yes scales need to be calibrated. Of course if you
weigh yourself

on

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

several scales, how do you really know which one is
correct? That is

like

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the saying about the man with several clocks in his
house is never

really

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

sure what time it is.

Sam, have been to my house? My wife has every damn clock
at a different time for different "good" reason. I use my
cell phone or computer to tell the real time.

We only have one scale and would guarantee it's off by a
bunch. It's ok for gain and loss but the numbers are very
approximate. I always wonder how often the professional
scales such as in doctors offices are calibrated.

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email hidden]

[email hidden] (macelroy) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I will never ever except any type of body fat test results
unless they are done in a tub. You get in a tub, exhale
all the air out of your lungs and then get weighed. That
is the one and only true accurate measurement for fat. The
skinfold test is completely inaccurate. I need to have
exact precise measurements and I will accept nothing less.
This is how I was tested for the 2 percent. Regarding that
if the person was not accurate in doing the test. I took
no chances and had her do it twice. I cover all corners I
can think of.

Repeating an inaccurate test only gives you two wrong
answers. And with the tub test, are you really sure you can
"empty" your lungs consistently from day to day? Do you
calibrate for the barometric pressure?

Quoted message said:

I don't even trust my own home scale and surely enough as
I weighed myself on other scales several years ago, I
found out my scale was 10 pounds light. We then had other
atheletes do the same and found out that there were a
whole lot of home scales that were completely inaccurate.
Someone needs to sue these companies that put out
inaccurate scales. And I highly advise all of you to take
a weight check on other scales then just your home scale.

Was that an electronic or analog scale? I'd bet it wasn't a
balance scale, but those can have systematic error too. But
10pounds, what are you complaining about? For weights
between 100-200 pounds (likely the majority of those in this
group fit that range), 10pounds is only a 10-5% error. For a
spring scale, that's pretty good. If you really wanted
better, you'd spent some money to get a better quality one.
But there are a lot of factors to consider: linearity,
historesis, accurracy, and repeatability. If you really
wanted to do something besides complain, then go out and buy
a better scale.

Quoted message said:

Regarding that extremely low body fat is detrimental in
colder weather, you bet it is, absolutely. You have no
insulation. You can go into hypothermia very fast.
Temperatures below 60 degrees can feel like freezing
temperatures. That's one of the side effects you have to
live with. I remember running in a downpouring rainstorm
once at 5:30 per mile pace which you think would have
been a fast enough pace to keep me warm. It didn't. I
got so cold I froze and couldn't run the pace any more
and barely made it home. I learned a big lessen then
that I will never run in such a storm without some kind
of raingear.

An anecdote to "prove" low body fat means you go "into
hypothermia very fast." however, no reference to the
temperature when this happened to you, no evidence that you
suffered hypothermia (only that you slowed down), no
reference to clothing (other than the minor hint that it
wasn't "some kind of raingear"😉, and totally neglecting heat
transfer is a function of surface area.

Regarding the last point, I would not be surprised to find
that between two people, one with body fat and the other
being a body builder, both with similar measurements (weight
and size), would have similar rates of heat loss.

It is good that you learned something from the experience.
I'm hoping that you are not a close-minded troll. 8^)

Quoted message said:

"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:-
<[email hidden]>...

[]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Also, in case you have not noticed it, not
everyone hear is interested in running fast, just
running to stay fit.

And I hope you learn something for others replying to you.
Sam made several great points, including the above.

So have a good day and a great run everybody. Ed