Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Amaya wrote:Gonna take a wild guess and say you haven't done any olympic lifts, squats, or deadlifts ever.

20 rep squats wreck my lungs much more than running 6 miles ever did.

Oh well it must be more healthy then.

ifStatement wrote:

Amaya wrote:Gonna take a wild guess and say you haven't done any olympic lifts, squats, or deadlifts ever.

20 rep squats wreck my lungs much more than running 6 miles ever did.

Oh well it must be more healthy then.

Yeah, you obviously know nothing about weightlifting.

Amaya wrote:

ifStatement wrote:

Amaya wrote:Gonna take a wild guess and say you haven't done any olympic lifts, squats, or deadlifts ever.

20 rep squats wreck my lungs much more than running 6 miles ever did.

Oh well it must be more healthy then.

Yeah, you obviously know nothing about weightlifting.

I lose sleep over that fact every night.

If you're going to try to argue that somehow cardio is superior to weightlifting than it would help if you knew something about both sides.

ifStatement wrote:
What about the idea that anaerobic exercise is not as healthy as aerobic exercise is not simple?

Explain to me what it means to be healthy such that anaerobic exercise is less healthy than aerobic exercise.

Further, not all lifting is anaerobic, there are tons of training regimes that feature aerobic lifting systems.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:
Okay, where did I put up Scott Mendelson as being the picture of health? His strength is unreal, but like most super heavy lifters he has excessive fat and is in general, not healthy.

I never said that you did, I'm simply pointing out that being really, really muscular doesn't make you healthy. Indeed, one can have negatively excessive muscle mass.

I'm also not sure he has excessive body fat, obviously you need body fat to maintain that kind of muscle mass for any realistic period of time, but I see clear abdominal definition there and that's hard to maintain with any amount of body fat that I would consider excessive.

Amaya wrote:
You have to achieve a balance between build and strength to optimize your health.

I agree with this, for the most part.

dogma wrote:

ifStatement wrote:
What about the idea that anaerobic exercise is not as healthy as aerobic exercise is not simple?

Explain to me what it means to be healthy such that anaerobic exercise is less healthy than aerobic exercise.

Further, not all lifting is anaerobic, there are tons of training regimes that feature aerobic lifting systems.

You know I feel like I'm speaking in plain english but somehow giving one example of lifting weights as an anaerobic exercise amounts to me saying that all weight lifting is anaerobic in your head. Turns out putting Dr in front of your name doesn't amount to much these days.

I'd venture that he is between 15% and 17% body fat and that he has massive abdominal muscles which probably help to make them more visible. My top 4 abdominals are visible around 16%ish BF, but I have to drop down to at least 12% for a visible six pack. It varies somewhat from person to person. For a 6' male anything over 240-250lbs is probably unhealthy in the long run, even if most of it is muscle.


I don't think ifStatement even knows the difference between anaerobic or aerobic or what HIIT is...




Edit: And he's possibly a troll.

ifStatement wrote:
You know I feel like I'm speaking in plain english but somehow giving one example of lifting weights as an anaerobic exercise amounts to me saying that all weight lifting is anaerobic in your head. Turns out putting Dr in front of your name doesn't amount to much these days.

You said that lifting until your arms ache and downing a protein shake is less healthy than playing a game of football. This implies that lifting is anaerobic, because soccer most definitely is. I can lift until my arms ache and down a protein shake, while exercising aerobically, just as I can play football till my legs ache and exercise aerobically. Hell, my legs ache far more after a rugby match than any leg workout.

Either way, the problem is that you think "plain English" means anything separate from "what I'm trying to express". It doesn't, if you can't clearly define your terms in a written context with people you don't know personally, then your terms are probably crap, and the problem with being misunderstood is probably on your end.

Amaya wrote:I'd venture that he is between 15% and 17% body fat and that he has massive abdominal muscles which probably help to make them more visible. My top 4 abdominals are visible around 16%ish BF, but I have to drop down to at least 12% for a visible six pack.

I agree with that, but I don't think 15-17% is excessive for your average person.

I envy the visible 6-pack at 12%, I had to go down to 9% for that, though they became visible at 10-11% after I started a more creative ab workout.

Amaya wrote:
It varies somewhat from person to person. For a 6' male anything over 240-250lbs is probably unhealthy in the long run, even if most of it is muscle.

Yeah, there's always body type issues, and genetics. But I generally agree with that, and can claim anecdotal evidence regarding sickness and joint pain regarding my own weight gains and losses.

Amaya wrote:
I don't think ifStatement even knows the difference between anaerobic or aerobic or what HIIT is...

Funny thing, I took up running because I hated it less than HIIT.

dogma wrote:

ifStatement wrote:
You know I feel like I'm speaking in plain english but somehow giving one example of lifting weights as an anaerobic exercise amounts to me saying that all weight lifting is anaerobic in your head. Turns out putting Dr in front of your name doesn't amount to much these days.

You said that lifting until your arms ache and downing a protein shake is less healthy than playing a game of football. This implies that lifting is anaerobic, because soccer most definitely is. I can lift until my arms ache and down a protein shake, while exercising aerobically, just as I can play football till my legs ache and exercise aerobically. Hell, my legs ache far more after a rugby match than any leg workout.

Either way, the problem is that you think "plain English" means anything separate from "what I'm trying to express". It doesn't, if you can't clearly define your terms in a written context with people you don't know personally, then you're terms are probably crap, and the problem with being misunderstood is probably on your end.

You must become a real ball ache when it comes to arguing between raw and rai. In other words it's clear what type of weight lifting exercise I was getting at in that example. You're just being deliberately particular to back up your idea that I don't believe any type of weight lifting could possibly be involved in aerobic exercise. I'm alltogether too familiar with the difficulties of being understood when the person your talking to is an arrogant narcissist who would quible with the slightest spelling mistake just to increase their one upmanship brownie points.

Do you know what HIIT is?

Edit: @Dogma I actually prefer HIIT to running simply because it's more efficient for fat loss. Running for 30-45 minutes gets boring for me pretty fast.

ifStatement wrote:
You must become a real ball ache when it comes to arguing between raw and rai. In other words it's clear what type of weight lifting exercise I was getting at in that example.

No, it really wasn't. And it wasn't just me, clearly Amaya didn't think so either, and he's been critical of my claims in this thread.

ifStatement wrote:
You're just being deliberately particular to back up your idea that I don't believe any type of weight lifting could possibly be involved in aerobic exercise. I'm alltogether too familiar with the difficulties of being understood when the person your talking to is an arrogant narcissist who would quible with the slightest spelling mistake just to increase their one upmanship brownie points.

I'm actually more concerned with the broad claim you made regarding health, but whatever.

And sure, I'm arrogant, news at 11. I've admitted this before, and most people here are well aware. Narcissistic, maybe in my worst moments regarding nondescript others, though I generally only think of myself as important to me.

But in this case, I legitimately have no idea what your take on aerobic versus anaerobic is, other than the manner in which it relates to ridiculously vague term "healthy".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:@Dogma I actually prefer HIIT to running simply because it's more efficient for fat loss. Running for 30-45 minutes gets boring for me pretty fast.

Sometimes I do. Running at night down the Mag Mile (or any major street) is pretty awesome, and gets me motivated even when I'm tired.

But I think the bigger issue is that I've settled into a routine of a hybrid between hypertrophy and powerlifting, and that standard cardio feels good because its simply different.

dogma wrote:

ifStatement wrote:
You're just being deliberately particular to back up your idea that I don't believe any type of weight lifting could possibly be involved in aerobic exercise. I'm alltogether too familiar with the difficulties of being understood when the person your talking to is an arrogant narcissist who would quible with the slightest spelling mistake just to increase their one upmanship brownie points.

I'm actually more concerned with the broad claim you made regarding health, but whatever.

And sure, I'm arrogant, news at 11. I've admitted this before, and most people here are well aware. Narcissistic, maybe in my worst moments regarding nondescript others, though I generally only think of myself as important to me.

I didn't call you arrogant because I thought it might come as a surprise to you, nor a narcissist because I needed your approval. The fact that you are not insulted is not bothering me as it wasn't my intention. That you interpreted it as an insult is telling enough.

ifStatement wrote:
I didn't call you arrogant because I thought it might come as a surprise to you, nor a narcissist because I needed your approval. The fact that you are not insulted is not bothering me as it wasn't my intention. That you interpreted it as an insult is telling enough.

I interpreted it as an insult?

dogma wrote:

ifStatement wrote:
I didn't call you arrogant because I thought it might come as a surprise to you, nor a narcissist because I needed your approval. The fact that you are not insulted is not bothering me as it wasn't my intention. That you interpreted it as an insult is telling enough.

I interpreted it as an insult?

Of course not you just felt the need to qualify something I said outside of it's context for gaks and giggles.

ifStatement wrote:
Of course not you just felt the need to qualify something I said outside of it's context for gaks and giggles.

Pretty much.

And possibly also because I thought it would annoy you.

I'll say again: welcome back, whatwhat.

I doubt that was your true aim but keep trying if you must. Confusing me with in-jokes is probably not going to work either btw.

ifStatement wrote:I doubt that was your true aim but keep trying if you must. Confusing me with in-jokes is probably not going to work either btw.

I don't really care what you believe, because you're not likely to believe anything that I say. Similarly, the in-joke wasn't for you.

Internet forums are, essentially, wonderful text-based RPGs with NPCs that, generally, are more interesting than coded versions.

dogma wrote:

ifStatement wrote:I doubt that was your true aim but keep trying if you must. Confusing me with in-jokes is probably not going to work either btw.

I don't really care what you believe, because you're not likely to believe anything that I say. Similarly, the in-joke wasn't for you.

Internet forums are, essentially, wonderful text-based RPGs with NPCs that, generally, are more interesting than coded versions.

Whatever gets you off.