UdoR wrote:

Yeah, you are correct... what does practical experience in physical performance of athletes in over a quarter of a century mean?

Seeing the direct result in physiology of humans for a long time, based on accumulated and applied knowledge is just another "hearsay".

Geez... *shakes head*

BTW, did you ever notice how the body composition of those "experts" are? I did... and when an overweight physician or scientist tells me what's healthy food... he/she is just not very believable.

Pay attention next time you see an expert talking about health and nutrition and see if he/she is seemingly following his/her own advise and studies!

I'm always paying attention. and paying attention is exactly my point. Shaking my head. Quater of a century? Diets and healtrh go back further than that. Quater of a century of diets and what is good have also been listed as bad, then they turn around and say that it's good. Scientist both physically looking healthy and not are too indecisive and many base what they know by hear say. Don't matter if it is a quater of a century. Those same things that we've been hearing about, suddenly is wrong, according to what the 'experts' say. Shakes my head again.


Slim people can and are just as unhealthy as someone that is heavy. Heavy people can be just as healthy as someone that is slim who takes care of their bodies. Diet is one thing, but other factors that you haven't addressed plays a factor in health too. And I'm not talking about food.

UdoR wrote:

I am sorry Jakki;

I looked at your portfolio and I don't see "fat", "obese" or "overweight" at all!

You have a certain body type that looks fantastic on you and you are very proportionate.

Oh wow...well thanks!

Jayne Jones wrote:

I really don't know what you're inferring here.  So I guess I am indeed ignorant in that regard.

I am referring to the part in your textbook that you have obese vegetarians.

I am pointing out that obese vegetarians are a very American phenomenon, because they seem to exist only in American and not in Europe (specifically Germany and Denmark).

So, this is a "politically correct" textbook.

Same crap as the "incomplete protein in vegetarian diet" myth in American medical books which was written by a nutritional expert who is an expert that is part of the meat packing industry...

Don't get me started about that b.s.... I am trying to go to be for the past 45 minutes.

UdoR wrote:

Yes and No!

It is the individual metabolism of a person that determines the weight gain or loss.

It's not that this formula is a constant, but a variable, reflecting the individuals metabolic rate and energy intake vs. expenditure.

The formula is applicable to anybody, really!

If you eat more than your own body burns... etc.

The amounts are different from person to person.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Do I have to look up my German/American Dictionary to make a proper translation of that principle?

Where am I expecting too much to be understood? I think that is so simple.

Damn... maybe I should just write in German and you guys try to translate it yourself.

Udor what you post ins't hard to understand. Let me break it down so that you can understand where I'm coming from. Mayhaps I should post in Deusch for you to understand.

I'll go back to my point. It depends on the individual. Yeap energy in energy out. BUT a higher metabolism, let's say the slim Jim who can eat a ton will not gain that outrageous weight that a heavy slow metabolism person will gain. Energy in or not.

I'm giving my example to you because energy aka lack of excersise is more than just the reason to weight gain. That slower metabolism human is going to have to work extra harder to keep that weight off once he or she looses it. Just ask Oprah that, she can tell you this. Someone that is nautrally slim isn't going to work as hard to keep those calories off because his or her metab. burns calories without alot of effort.

DNA is one of the major factors here my man. It aint always about diet aka what we eat.

Jakki Browne wrote:

Oh wow...well thanks!

no Jakki isn't fat. But there was a time in this country that she would be because of the slim obsession. And then there was a time, 1950's and 60's that her body type was the perfect body type in this country. I agree that it's about how you feel about yourself.

The example of what I find attractive physically, Jakki is an example of that body type. But to each his or her own.

Legacys 7 wrote:

no Jakki isn't fat. But there was a time in this country that she would be because of the slim obsession. And then there was a time, 1950's and 60's that her body type was the perfect body type in this country. I agree that it's about how you feel about yourself.

The example of what I find attractive physically, Jakki is an example of that body type. But to each his or her own.

Jakki is glad she decided to post in this thread. She will be smiling all weekend long. Or until someone rains on her parade....

Jayne Jones wrote:
Because I eat once a day as opposed to three meals minimum or even five small meals ideally. . .

BTW... this is exactly another point that confirms what I am saying all along.

See, by you eating only once a day, your body is in a constant state of famine. As a survival mechanism, your body slows down its metabolism to be able to preserve whatever energy (food) is being taken in to prepare for the next starvation period.

If you eat the same amount of food you eat once a day, divided up over 6 small portions a day (recommended is a meal, the size of your own fist every 2.5 to 3 hours), your metabolism speeds up drastically, since there is always food in the stomach to digest and the body doesn't get the message of famine.

Hence, we are ending up again with my initial formula of energy in versus energy out.

You enhance your metabolic rate by "always eating" and eventually burning additional calories by enhanced physical activity... energy in versus energy out... but I am repeating myself.

Legacys 7 wrote:
no Jakki isn't fat. But there was a time in this country that she would be because of the slim obsession. And then there was a time, 1950's and 60's that her body type was the perfect body type in this country. I agree that it's about how you feel about yourself.

The example of what I find attractive physically, Jakki is an example of that body type. But to each his or her own.

I totally agree that it is how you see yourself.  I LOVE me. . .every fat inch of myself. . .but the "industry" doesn't so much.  I can either conform, or become a hobbyist.  I've yet to decide.  However, the fact that the "industry" doesn't find me sexy. . .doesn't mean that I'm not.  Every person, man or woman, should feel the same about themselves!  ;-)

UdoR wrote:

Interesting enough...

Obse vegetarians is soo AMERICAN... it's unbelievable.

People here are so clueless about food and the food they are able to get in the supermarkets are so engineered, it's a huge (pun intended!) problem.

I have never seen a long time vegetarian who is obese until I came to America! I swear by God!

In Germany and other parts of Europe... a fat vegetarian (unless someone who JUST started it as advised by his/her physician) is unheard of.

Vegetarianism and obesity just doesn't go hand in hand in Europe (e.g. Germany and Denmark, which has an extremely high percentage of ovo lacto vegetarians).

We end up again with the issue of ignorance, and if this is part of your nutrition class... then it shows how deeply rooted this ignorance and misinformation is in this society and educational system... no surprise here!

I think it's partially all these "vegetarian/vegan friendly!" products. They are so over processed they hold little nutritional value, not to mention a lot are loaded with unnecessary fillers. All so that tofu can resemble hot dogs/bacon/lunchmeat (wtf!).

I knew a vegan that lived on veggie dogs and potato chips. literally.

Yup... just thought I'd jump in here and say that.

Regarding your original post - I would agree that almost all women have curves.

UdoR wrote:
This comes up ALL the time...

Slender girls being bashed by "curvy" girls... as if the slender and athletic types are something unreal, and made out to be "stick figures".

This maybe too much of a personal view, but I consider a girl "curvy" when she is slender, has perky round b-cup breasts (curve #1), athletic latissimus that goes into a narrow waist (curve #2) and outwards to a round hip (curve #3) with a round and firm buttock (curve #4), then athletic thighs with toned legs tapering down to narrow ankles.

But... that's MY definition of curvy.

Other peoples definition maybe flabby arms, rolls under the arms, belly rolls, muffin tops and big thighs with a big shapeless buttock.

I am sure some people will flame me for this, or think that I am attacking big girls..., but no, I don't mean that... I attack the terminology, because, frankly, it just gets on my friggin nerves when models I am working with or girls I am friends with, or girls I am dating who are slender and curvy are simply being insulted by the "curvy girls brigade"...

If you are one of those, why don't you make the simple distinction of calling yourself "curvier" girls, because you have some more rolls.

There is nothing wrong with it, according to a recent statistic I have seen on the news in reference to the Madrid Idiocy, the average American girl is 5'4" and 143 lbs... wondering if KFC, McD and the King have anything to do with it...

Just stop denying that slender girls can have fantastic curves in the right places...

End of rant

. . .what you "meant" was energy in vs energy out?  Ohhhhh.  My bad.  I guess "KFC, McD and the King" is German for energy in, energy out.

Your original rant was based on womanly curves, you threw in a stab at the average american girl being short and having a poor diet, and we're supposed to gather from that. . .energy in vs energy out.  Ok.  Glad we cleared that up.

Sarah Deathriage wrote:
Udo,

looking at your pics you don't look exactly thin.. You look kinda curvy yourself. Tell me it's all muscle.

Why are you so hung up on other peoples weight? You just want us to be healthy or thin? Because I am healthy.

I am an athlete and weight lifter.

I warm up with 300lbs (310lbs to be exact) during bench press, to get ready for a static hold of 615lbs and hold over 2,000 lbs of weight in leg press for 20 seconds. I do abdominal crunches with close to 500 lbs for 30 seconds etc.

I also do almost a full split without warming up and am very flexible, so, yeah, there is a lot of muscle on my body!

Amanda Jeanne wrote:

I think it's partially all these "vegetarian/vegan friendly!" products. They are so over processed they hold little nutritional value, not to mention a lot are loaded with unnecessary fillers. All so that tofu can resemble hot dogs/bacon/lunchmeat (wtf!).

I knew a vegan that lived on veggie dogs and potato chips. literally.

Yup... just thought I'd jump in here and say that.

Regarding your original post - I would agree that almost all women have curves.

Dude I was a vegetarian for awhile and then a vegan, and the funniest thing in the world is the "accidentally vegan" portion of the peta website.  Oreos are vegan!

Jayne Jones wrote:
I missed the part where your OP talked about energy in vs energy out.  So I read it again. . .and again. . .still missed it.  Just so we're clear when you ...

I think that you have missed much more than that Jayne!

My original post had nothing to do with the energy expenditure, but it evolved into this issue since nutrition came up!

Jakki Browne wrote:
Dude I was a vegetarian for awhile and then a vegan, and the funniest thing in the world is the "accidentally vegan" portion of the peta website.  Oreos are vegan!

After I have delivered today a CD to a fashion editor for a California based trade publication from Fashionweek (Project Runway), I stumbled into the San Genaro festival in Little Italy... and saw a food stand that offered "deep fried oreos"... I tried to see what those little critters looked like... but I was kinda disgusted by the mere thought of that crap in deepfried form.

UdoR wrote:

I am an athlete and weight lifter.

I warm up with 300lbs (310lbs to be exact) during bench press, to get ready for a static hold of 615lbs and hold over 2,000 lbs of weight in leg press for 20 seconds. I do abdominal crunches with close to 500 lbs for 30 seconds etc.

I also do almost a full split without warming up and am very flexible, so, yeah, there is a lot of muscle on my body!

300 lbs! ok that's crazy. But you do seem to have that body type of a body builder. I go the gym and see those guys with the belts and gloves..

I will stick to my yoga. eliptical machines and diet. I am slowly losing weight.

Jakki Browne wrote:

Dude I was a vegetarian for awhile and then a vegan, and the funniest thing in the world is the "accidentally vegan" portion of the peta website.  Oreos are vegan!

If someone is being a vegan for health reasons, I sure hope they aren't eating oreos!

Jayne Jones wrote:

I agree with everything you've said. . .I just thought that the point of his post was that people were picking on the slender models and calling them curvaceously challenged.  So for him to say what he said about fat people was just as insulting.  That's the point I was trying to make.

The CDC says that America is vastly overweight due to "inactivity and sedentary lifestyles" not diet.  NOT that diet doesn't play a role in the whole scheme of things, because it does. . .but there are just as many skinny people in lines at these fast food giants as there are fat people. . .and THAT fact shouldn't be overlooked.  Us big folk don't own any more stock in fast food than slim folk.

Don't take this the wrong way, jayne. I like you. I respect your points of view.

I must say this: 1. You try to rationalize any point of view that happens to support your argument AD NAUSEUM.

                      2. Any statement eeven SLIGHTLY contrary to your own sends you into this ultra-defensive mode where you start belittling and attacking people.

I can't speak for anyone else, so I'll speak for myself. I'm starting to TUNE YOU OUT. 

Your pontificating is becoming BACKGROUND NOISE.

Kevlar Gal couldn't take it. I can. But...

Every statement that disagrees with you is not a personal attack.

Please, try to R-E-L-A-X.

Try to r-e-l-a-x.

Image K wrote:
Don't take this the wrong way, jayne. I like you. I respect your points of view.

I must say this: 1. You try to rationalize any point of view that happens to support your argument AD NAUSEUM.

                      2. Any statement eeven SLIGHTLY contrary to your own sends you into this ultra-defensive mode where you start belittling and attacking people.

I can't speak for anyone else, so I'll speak for myself. I'm starting to TUNE YOU OUT. 

Your pontificating is becoming BACKGROUND NOISE.

Kevlar Gal couldn't take it. I can. But...

Every statement that disagrees with you is not a personal attack.

Please, try to R-E-L-A-X.

Try to r-e-l-a-x.

Sorry you feel that way.  I honestly don't know why it's evidently okay for people to generalize and bash away at others. . .but if I say something about it. . .then I"m defensive and personally attacking someone.  I have yet to do that.  I've bantered with Udo in his thread based on what he said.  I even quoted him.

Belittled?  I have yet to belittle anyone in this thread or any other.  I merely express my point of view. . .as does everyone else that posts in a forum here.

I'm not understanding what you mean about my need to relax.  Again, I looked at what Udo posted and disagreed with that part of his thread, and explained why I felt that way.  I didn't see it as my taking anything personally.  If you did. . .that's your opinion and you're welcome to it. . .we do live in a free country.

I have yet to state where I've been personally attacked.  Again, if that's how you viewed my responses to the OP. . .and his posts. . .your opinion.  I'm sure you're not alone in them.

Jayne Jones wrote:

Sorry you feel that way.  I honestly don't know why it's evidently okay for people to generalize and bash away at others. . .but if I say something about it. . .then I"m defensive and personally attacking someone.  I have yet to do that.  I've bantered with Udo in his thread based on what he said.  I even quoted him.

Belittled?  I have yet to belittle anyone in this thread or any other.  I merely express my point of view. . .as does everyone else that posts in a forum here.

I'm not understanding what you mean about my need to relax.  Again, I looked at what Udo posted and disagreed with that part of his thread, and explained why I felt that way.  I didn't see it as my taking anything personally.  If you did. . .that's your opinion and you're welcome to it. . .we do live in a free country.

I have yet to state where I've been personally attacked.  Again, if that's how you viewed my responses to the OP. . .and his posts. . .your opinion.  I'm sure you're not alone in them.

I'm sorry, did you...say something?

Image K wrote:
I'm sorry, did you...say something?

In a nutshell. . .I asked if Udo could have his thread back yet. 

Jayne Jones wrote:

In a nutshell. . .I asked if Udo could have his thread back yet. 

Is there any way to make you happy aside from telling you EXACTLY what you want to hear?

Wynd Mulysa wrote:
What category do girls like Kaitlin and myself, who don't have the "booby curves" but have the hip curves, fall into?

..Just wondering.

Personality and original thoughts category. Kindred spirits. It makes the best kinds of pictures ... shine from the inside out.

Wynd Mulysa wrote:
What category do girls like Kaitlin and myself, who don't have the "booby curves" but have the hip curves, fall into?

..Just wondering.

Personality and original thoughts category. Kindred spirits. It makes the best kinds of pictures ... shine from the inside out.

Jayne Jones wrote:
Your original rant was based on womanly curves, you threw in a stab at the average american girl being short and having a poor diet, and we're supposed to gather from that. . .energy in vs energy out.  Ok.  Glad we cleared that up.

Umm, the ''average'' girl is average -- it would be impossible for an average girl to be below average height and therefore considered ''short''.  Sheesh.  ''Poor diet'' can be more than just the type of food -- it can also be the intake of too much food.  5'4'' and 143 lbs is fat.  Not thick.  Not curvy.  Fat.  Get a clue -- he's making it very simple.  It seems that Americans are the fattest people in the world -- this is not by accident.  We stuff ourselves with too much food (healthy and otherwise) and sit on our asses too much.

Legacys 7 wrote:
DNA is one of the major factors here my man. It aint always about diet aka what we eat.

DNA is not a major factor.  It's energy in, energy out.  If you have a slow metabolism then you can't eat as much as someone with a fast metabolism.  Simple. It's not ''fair'' but real life isn't fair.  If you're ''overweight'' then you eat too much.  It's that darn simple.  If you're ''too skinny'' then you don't eat enough.  As an adult, you choose to be fat or thin and you can't blame anyone but yourself.  No one else is putting food in your mouth (or taking it out).  Why is this so hard to understand?

Click Hamilton wrote:

Personality and original thoughts category. Kindred spirits. It makes the best kinds of pictures ... shine from the inside out.

Whoa! Kum-ba-yah!

Let me hold this feeling!

Oh Lord!

Kum-ba-yah!

UdoR wrote:
If you are one of those, why don't you make the simple distinction of calling yourself "curvier" girls, because you have some more rolls.

Maybe they should be called ripply or ridged..like Ruffles.

UdoR wrote:
I hope you know that I am fighting against the hostility against slender girls and not against "big" girls... .

Sarah Deathriage wrote:
Udo,

looking at your pics you don't look exactly thin.. You look kinda curvy yourself. Tell me it's all muscle.

Why are you so hung up on other peoples weight? You just want us to be healthy or thin? Because I am healthy and a vegetarian. LOL

jayedwards wrote:
5'4'' and 143 lbs is fat.  Not thick.  Not curvy.  Fat.  Get a clue -- he's making it very simple.  It seems that Americans are the fattest people in the world -- this is not by accident.  We stuff ourselves with too much food (healthy and otherwise) and sit on our asses too much.

UdoR wrote:
I warm up with 300lbs (310lbs to be exact) during bench press, to get ready for a static hold of 615lbs and hold over 2,000 lbs of weight in leg press for 20 seconds. I do abdominal crunches with close to 500 lbs for 30 seconds etc.

I also do almost a full split without warming up and am very flexible, so, yeah, there is a lot of muscle on my body!

Hope Parr wrote:
stop trying to sound important, I was ranked in the top 5 in the nation when I was 16 as a powerlifter, I have set 3 state records with my lifts and then at 24 yrs old I switched to bodybuilding and took 1st place. Powerlifting is not real healthy, neither is bodybuilding.  It does not matter how much you can lift, you still have layers of fat over the muscle. How does your heart get exercise? For someone who thinks they know everything, you left out your cardio.

I have trained with professionals, so your amateur attempt at being important is just plain weak.

Do you feel better now?

Skinny girls vs. curvy girls. That's like Christianity vs. Islam. Or Coke vs. Pepsi.

There is no resolution to this.

give it a rest.

Hope Parr wrote:
stop trying to sound important, I was ranked in the top 5 in the nation when I was 16 as a powerlifter, I have set 3 state records with my lifts and then at 24 yrs old I switched to bodybuilding and took 1st place. Powerlifting is not real healthy, neither is bodybuilding.  It does not matter how much you can lift, you still have layers of fat over the muscle. How does your heart get exercise? For someone who thinks they know everything, you left out your cardio.

I have trained with professionals, so your amateur attempt at being important is just plain weak.

Hope Parr wrote:
stop trying to sound important, I was ranked in the top 5 in the nation when I was 16 as a powerlifter, I have set 3 state records with my lifts and then at 24 yrs old I switched to bodybuilding and took 1st place. Powerlifting is not real healthy, neither is bodybuilding.  It does not matter how much you can lift, you still have layers of fat over the muscle. How does your heart get exercise? For someone who thinks they know everything, you left out your cardio.

I have trained with professionals, so your amateur attempt at being important is just plain weak.

I am not getting into a pissing contest with you and list my championships that I won beginning from age 7 on and the level I competed in for 20 years in full contact martial arts. Due to citizenship situation, I couldn't enter the Olympic Games as some of my team mates did despite qualification. Furthermore, in my 30 plus years as an athlete, I have been also a personal trainer and coach putting nutritional programs and workout regimens together!

If you think that what I wrote is to show "importance" than you may have to read the entire thread from the beginning, carefully, since it appears that you didn't understand the points I've made... and the lifting numbers are simply mentioned to explain my "curvyness".

What I wrote about myself is simply to explain personal experience and that I didn't come up with this info by having read an article in a tabloid magazine.

Oh, and I "left cardio out" because I didn't put any exercise program together in this thread, but you would have known that if you actually read what I wrote.

The fact that lean muscle tissue weighs about 5 times more than fatty tissue, hence alters the bodyweight/height ratio, but we are talking here about "curvy" models with high percentage of bodyfat in this thread and not competing female bodybuilders.

I don't have 7% bf, I am twice that and at 5'10", I weigh 213lbs. Since I am not competing in any sports anymore and work out for myself... I am quite happy with what I've got.

Toodles

safiraangel wrote:
Here's a list of some of the factors affecting metabolism in order of greatest impact to least:

# 1.Muscle tissue.

Thanks for posting that summary!

Sarah Deathriage wrote:
300 lbs! ok that's crazy. But you do seem to have that body type of a body builder. I go the gym and see those guys with the belts and gloves..

I will stick to my yoga. eliptical machines and diet. I am slowly losing weight.

It should also be noted that if you are able to gain about 10lbs of NEW lean muscle mass, and you don't change your diet (to higher calories), those 10lbs of muscle burn 62.5lbs of bodyfat over a year... just to maintain itself, which is a pretty awsome and often overlooked fact.