G
G
gty
Guest
No female should weigh 150 lbs. Period. Fat girls don't get dates
because nature does not want fat or big boned chicks reproducing. News
Flash: it is not ok for a girl to be
big!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I could care less how fit she is!
because nature does not want fat or big boned chicks reproducing. News
Flash: it is not ok for a girl to be
big!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I could care less how fit she is!
G
gty
Guest
you will end up with a fat wife if you don't ring the alarm when she
gains weight. you tell her that you are no longer attracted to her and
she will start exercising.
gains weight. you tell her that you are no longer attracted to her and
she will start exercising.
H
h squared
Guest
macelroy wrote:
> Maybe we agree then.
that's not *exactly* what i meant, but i'll let it go. maybe it's just
me, but i would never advise someone to lose enough weight that they
stop having their period. i pasted in a case study at the end of this
post, with an emphasis on the bit-
"Even though this particular athlete’s body fat percentage increased
with the intervention, there are plenty of females with low body fat who
retain their monthly cycle. There is no “set” level of body fat that is
applicable to all athletes for normal menstrual function."
so i think broadcasting over the internet that all women should try to
be between 5-8% bodyfat to achieve peak performance is a little
irresponsible. maybe they'll be ok, but maybe not.
h
http://www.usaswimming.org/USASWeb/...=395&Alias=Rainbow&Lang=en&mid=614&ItemId=531
A 19-year-old runner underwent a 15-week diet and training intervention.
She began menstruating at the age of 12, but had lost close to 20 lbs
over 3 months during her freshman year at college and had been
amenorrheic for 14 consecutive months leading up to the intervention.
Six months before the treatment, she began to complain of chronic
fatigue, poor performance, and a high frequency of illness and injury.
The dietary component of the intervention consisted of adding one 11-oz
serving of nutritionally balanced sports nutrition shake to her daily
diet. The training component of the intervention consisted of
eliminating one day of training from her schedule, bringing the
athlete’s program from 7 days/week to 6.
Results
* Prior to the intervention, this runner was deficient in her
caloric intake by about 155 kcal/day, or 1,085 kcal/week.
* At the end of 15 weeks, she gained 6 lbs and her percent body fat
was restored from 8.2% to 14.4%.
* Her LH levels increased to match those of her normally
menstruating teammates’.
* Her serum cortisol, which was 70% above the expected limit at the
onset of the intervention, fell significantly to only 21% above the
normal range. (Note: Cortisol is a substance the body produces in
response to both physical and emotional stress.)
* This runner’s performance improved during the season. She went on
to set more personal records than during any prior season, breaking two
school records and qualifying for Nationals in several events.
* She resumed normal menstruation three months later and has
displayed normal function for two consecutive months.
Implications
* Even seemingly small amounts of weight loss can impact
performance and health. The caloric deficit this runner was experiencing
would have led her to continue losing weight at a rate of approximately
1 pound every three weeks. This amount does not seem very high, yet the
effects on performance and health at this level competition were
significant.
* Intervention can be easy. One easily-accessible energy drink per
day and one rest day per week to restore the performance and
reproductive health of a competitive athlete…a simple opportunity with a
big pay-off.
* Energy availability is the key. Even though this particular
athlete’s body fat percentage increased with the intervention, there are
plenty of females with low body fat who retain their monthly cycle.
There is no “set” level of body fat that is applicable to all athletes
for normal menstrual function.
* It may take as long as three months for an amenorrheic athlete to
experience restoration of normal menstrual function. Time may vary
depending on the athlete and the severity of the situation. Patience and
persistence are highly recommended.
> Maybe we agree then.
that's not *exactly* what i meant, but i'll let it go. maybe it's just
me, but i would never advise someone to lose enough weight that they
stop having their period. i pasted in a case study at the end of this
post, with an emphasis on the bit-
"Even though this particular athlete’s body fat percentage increased
with the intervention, there are plenty of females with low body fat who
retain their monthly cycle. There is no “set” level of body fat that is
applicable to all athletes for normal menstrual function."
so i think broadcasting over the internet that all women should try to
be between 5-8% bodyfat to achieve peak performance is a little
irresponsible. maybe they'll be ok, but maybe not.
h
http://www.usaswimming.org/USASWeb/...=395&Alias=Rainbow&Lang=en&mid=614&ItemId=531
A 19-year-old runner underwent a 15-week diet and training intervention.
She began menstruating at the age of 12, but had lost close to 20 lbs
over 3 months during her freshman year at college and had been
amenorrheic for 14 consecutive months leading up to the intervention.
Six months before the treatment, she began to complain of chronic
fatigue, poor performance, and a high frequency of illness and injury.
The dietary component of the intervention consisted of adding one 11-oz
serving of nutritionally balanced sports nutrition shake to her daily
diet. The training component of the intervention consisted of
eliminating one day of training from her schedule, bringing the
athlete’s program from 7 days/week to 6.
Results
* Prior to the intervention, this runner was deficient in her
caloric intake by about 155 kcal/day, or 1,085 kcal/week.
* At the end of 15 weeks, she gained 6 lbs and her percent body fat
was restored from 8.2% to 14.4%.
* Her LH levels increased to match those of her normally
menstruating teammates’.
* Her serum cortisol, which was 70% above the expected limit at the
onset of the intervention, fell significantly to only 21% above the
normal range. (Note: Cortisol is a substance the body produces in
response to both physical and emotional stress.)
* This runner’s performance improved during the season. She went on
to set more personal records than during any prior season, breaking two
school records and qualifying for Nationals in several events.
* She resumed normal menstruation three months later and has
displayed normal function for two consecutive months.
Implications
* Even seemingly small amounts of weight loss can impact
performance and health. The caloric deficit this runner was experiencing
would have led her to continue losing weight at a rate of approximately
1 pound every three weeks. This amount does not seem very high, yet the
effects on performance and health at this level competition were
significant.
* Intervention can be easy. One easily-accessible energy drink per
day and one rest day per week to restore the performance and
reproductive health of a competitive athlete…a simple opportunity with a
big pay-off.
* Energy availability is the key. Even though this particular
athlete’s body fat percentage increased with the intervention, there are
plenty of females with low body fat who retain their monthly cycle.
There is no “set” level of body fat that is applicable to all athletes
for normal menstrual function.
* It may take as long as three months for an amenorrheic athlete to
experience restoration of normal menstrual function. Time may vary
depending on the athlete and the severity of the situation. Patience and
persistence are highly recommended.
D
Doug Freese
Guest
"h squared" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> macelroy wrote:
>> Maybe we agree then.
>
> that's not *exactly* what i meant, but i'll let it go. maybe it's just
> me, but i would never advise someone to lose enough weight that they
> stop having their period. i pasted in a case study at the end of this
> post, with an emphasis on the bit-
H**2,
McElroy stops in once in while and attempts to pass off his minimalist
weight as "ideal." He stirs the pond, ignores all the science that
shows he is out to lunch and then goes back to hibernation. He thinks
the Kenyans are obese.
-DF
news:[email protected]...
> macelroy wrote:
>> Maybe we agree then.
>
> that's not *exactly* what i meant, but i'll let it go. maybe it's just
> me, but i would never advise someone to lose enough weight that they
> stop having their period. i pasted in a case study at the end of this
> post, with an emphasis on the bit-
H**2,
McElroy stops in once in while and attempts to pass off his minimalist
weight as "ideal." He stirs the pond, ignores all the science that
shows he is out to lunch and then goes back to hibernation. He thinks
the Kenyans are obese.
-DF
H
h squared
Guest
Doug Freese wrote:
> H**2,
> McElroy stops in once in while and attempts to pass off his minimalist
> weight as "ideal." He stirs the pond, ignores all the science that
> shows he is out to lunch and then goes back to hibernation. He thinks
> the Kenyans are obese.
>
> -DF
but i waaaant to play...okok, since you asked nicely i will get some
self respect and stop it
hh
> H**2,
> McElroy stops in once in while and attempts to pass off his minimalist
> weight as "ideal." He stirs the pond, ignores all the science that
> shows he is out to lunch and then goes back to hibernation. He thinks
> the Kenyans are obese.
>
> -DF
but i waaaant to play...okok, since you asked nicely i will get some
self respect and stop it
hh
M
macelroy
Guest
Some Kenyans are obese. Not the ones winning races though. Any Kenyan
that is 5' 1" and 150 pounds is overweight and out of shape. This is
not good running shape or even a good healthy weight. Only fat
Americans would think otherwise.
You call that stirring the pot? I call it honesty.
that is 5' 1" and 150 pounds is overweight and out of shape. This is
not good running shape or even a good healthy weight. Only fat
Americans would think otherwise.
You call that stirring the pot? I call it honesty.
W
Wayan
Guest
"gty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> No female should weigh 150 lbs.
Wrong. The more the cushion, the better the pushin'!!
Period. Fat girls don't get dates
> because nature does not want fat or big boned chicks reproducing. News
> Flash: it is not ok for a girl to be
>
big!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> I could care less how fit she is!
>
news:[email protected]...
> No female should weigh 150 lbs.
Wrong. The more the cushion, the better the pushin'!!
Period. Fat girls don't get dates
> because nature does not want fat or big boned chicks reproducing. News
> Flash: it is not ok for a girl to be
>
big!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> I could care less how fit she is!
>
T
The Dirty Vicar
Guest
"gty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> No female should weigh 150 lbs. Period. Fat girls don't get dates
> because nature does not want fat or big boned chicks reproducing. News
> Flash: it is not ok for a girl to be
> big!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> I could care less how fit she is!
mmm you're a real man. i hope you would back hand me if i got out of line.
i'd have it coming baby, i'm sorry i made you do it.
>
news:[email protected]...
> No female should weigh 150 lbs. Period. Fat girls don't get dates
> because nature does not want fat or big boned chicks reproducing. News
> Flash: it is not ok for a girl to be
> big!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> I could care less how fit she is!
mmm you're a real man. i hope you would back hand me if i got out of line.
i'd have it coming baby, i'm sorry i made you do it.
>
G
gty
Guest
D
Doug Freese
Guest
"macelroy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You call that stirring the pot? I call it honesty.
All anyone has to do is search through r.r for your past missives to see
you lack any credibility and were in fact intentionally ludicrous on a
variety of topics if not every one . What you "honestly" believe and
what the world believes implies you're from a different planet.
-df
news:[email protected]...
> You call that stirring the pot? I call it honesty.
All anyone has to do is search through r.r for your past missives to see
you lack any credibility and were in fact intentionally ludicrous on a
variety of topics if not every one . What you "honestly" believe and
what the world believes implies you're from a different planet.
-df
M
macelroy
Guest
> What you "honestly" believe and what the world believes implies
you're from a different planet.
So then you're saying it's OK to be 35 pounds overweight on the planet
earth? Even on my planet that is overweight.
you're from a different planet.
So then you're saying it's OK to be 35 pounds overweight on the planet
earth? Even on my planet that is overweight.
M
macelroy
Guest
> What you "honestly" believe and what the world believes implies
you're from a different planet.
So then you're saying it's OK to be 35 pounds overweight on the planet
earth? Even on my planet that is overweight.
you're from a different planet.
So then you're saying it's OK to be 35 pounds overweight on the planet
earth? Even on my planet that is overweight.
T
The Dirty Vicar
Guest
"macelroy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Jane Lumley wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> macelroy <[email protected]> writes
>> >Maybe we agree then. However, there are some on this board (Jane for
>> >one) that seem to think that 35 pounds of excess fat is healthy.
>>
>> That's not what I said at all. What I said was that higher
> bodyweight
>> might not be UNhealthy.
>>
>> There are health risks associated with being underweight, too,
>> especially for women (cessation of ovulatory and menstrual cycles,
> for
>> instance - and yes, this did happen to me). I wonder aloud whether
> your
>> own enthusiasm for thinness is entirely health-driven or whether you
> are
>> influenced by fashion and aesthetics.
>
> My point of view is from that of a coach. This has nothing to do with
> aesthetics. I am simply coaching my athletes to get from point A to
> point B in the shortest amouont of time. One way to do that is to
> reduce the weight that the muscles are required to move. Additionally,
> a weight reduction will also reduce the chance of injury. Very few
> athletes are capable of reducing their weight to the point of being
> unhealthy. All my runners are given a physical at least twice a year.
> If their low bodyweight were an issue, then their doctor would make me
> aware of the problem.
but as a coach; dont you like the girls to have a little meat on their
bones?
>
news:[email protected]...
> Jane Lumley wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> macelroy <[email protected]> writes
>> >Maybe we agree then. However, there are some on this board (Jane for
>> >one) that seem to think that 35 pounds of excess fat is healthy.
>>
>> That's not what I said at all. What I said was that higher
> bodyweight
>> might not be UNhealthy.
>>
>> There are health risks associated with being underweight, too,
>> especially for women (cessation of ovulatory and menstrual cycles,
> for
>> instance - and yes, this did happen to me). I wonder aloud whether
> your
>> own enthusiasm for thinness is entirely health-driven or whether you
> are
>> influenced by fashion and aesthetics.
>
> My point of view is from that of a coach. This has nothing to do with
> aesthetics. I am simply coaching my athletes to get from point A to
> point B in the shortest amouont of time. One way to do that is to
> reduce the weight that the muscles are required to move. Additionally,
> a weight reduction will also reduce the chance of injury. Very few
> athletes are capable of reducing their weight to the point of being
> unhealthy. All my runners are given a physical at least twice a year.
> If their low bodyweight were an issue, then their doctor would make me
> aware of the problem.
but as a coach; dont you like the girls to have a little meat on their
bones?
>
F
frank-in-toronto
Guest
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 07:40:45 +0100, Jane Lumley
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>macelroy <[email protected]> writes
>>Maybe we agree then. However, there are some on this board (Jane for
>>one) that seem to think that 35 pounds of excess fat is healthy.
>
>That's not what I said at all. What I said was that higher bodyweight
>might not be UNhealthy.
>
>There are health risks associated with being underweight, too,
>especially for women (cessation of ovulatory and menstrual cycles, for
>instance - and yes, this did happen to me). I wonder aloud whether your
>own enthusiasm for thinness is entirely health-driven or whether you are
>influenced by fashion and aesthetics.
>
>This is my last word, so no more umbrageousness, please
you know you are responding to jokers. don't you?
....thehick
<[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>macelroy <[email protected]> writes
>>Maybe we agree then. However, there are some on this board (Jane for
>>one) that seem to think that 35 pounds of excess fat is healthy.
>
>That's not what I said at all. What I said was that higher bodyweight
>might not be UNhealthy.
>
>There are health risks associated with being underweight, too,
>especially for women (cessation of ovulatory and menstrual cycles, for
>instance - and yes, this did happen to me). I wonder aloud whether your
>own enthusiasm for thinness is entirely health-driven or whether you are
>influenced by fashion and aesthetics.
>
>This is my last word, so no more umbrageousness, please
you know you are responding to jokers. don't you?
....thehick
M
macelroy
Guest
frank-in-toronto wrote:
> you know you are responding to jokers. don't you?
Yeah. I had a feeling I was wasting my time. Thanks for the tip.
> you know you are responding to jokers. don't you?
Yeah. I had a feeling I was wasting my time. Thanks for the tip.
T
True Grit
Guest
> there are some on this board (Jane for
one) that seem to think that 35 pounds of excess fat is healthy.>
Jane is also a fat pig.
one) that seem to think that 35 pounds of excess fat is healthy.>
Jane is also a fat pig.
T
True Grit
Guest
>Maybe we agree then. However, there are some on this board (Jane for
one) that seem to think that 35 pounds of excess fat is healthy.>
It is, as long as it's on someone else.
one) that seem to think that 35 pounds of excess fat is healthy.>
It is, as long as it's on someone else.
S
steve common
Guest
"macelroy" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm just saying for pure running performance sake, 5 to 8%
>bodyfat is ideal.
And unattainable for an average female, unless she accepts serious health
implications ; and even then...
>I have yet to hear from someone disputing my statement that carying 35
>pounds of extra bodyfat is healthy.
What has that got to do with the nonsense about 5% being ideal?
> I'm just saying for pure running performance sake, 5 to 8%
>bodyfat is ideal.
And unattainable for an average female, unless she accepts serious health
implications ; and even then...
>I have yet to hear from someone disputing my statement that carying 35
>pounds of extra bodyfat is healthy.
What has that got to do with the nonsense about 5% being ideal?
S
steve common
Guest
"macelroy" <[email protected]> wrote:
>My point of view is from that of a coach.
A particular kind of coach then. One who doesn't mind encouraging his female
athletes to put themselves in danger of long health problems by excessive
loss of weight. Takes all kinds I suppose.
>My point of view is from that of a coach.
A particular kind of coach then. One who doesn't mind encouraging his female
athletes to put themselves in danger of long health problems by excessive
loss of weight. Takes all kinds I suppose.