Thu, Apr-23-20, 11:41
|
|
Senior Member
Posts: 6,378
|
|
Plan: Atkins72/Paleo/NoGrain/IF
Stats: 285/220/200
BF:
Progress: 76%
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WereBear
Because right now, it's not. I know I was far healthier at 165 than I was at 220 and discovered low carbing. But then, even without gaining weight, I got an autoimmune flare which indicated I had messed up my immune system anyway. Turned out food sensitivities played a huge part in that, for both health and weight.
But... if we look at obesity as a large-scale marker of metabolic health in a population, it is a signal, just like blood pressure, blood sugar, and CRP indicators build a picture of metabolic dysfunction. And from the beginning, these are the kind of "co-morbid conditions" which signaled trouble with this virus.
|
This is where I get confused and annoyed. By all measures, I am healthier at 220 than I was at 180 which was my lowest weight on low carb. My running times are better at this weight, overall health, immunity, resistance to fatigue, better sleep, etc. I'm stronger. Heck, at an even higher weight I had my best race ever and I find it harder to do squats at a lower weight than 20 pounds ago.
I totally agree that as a large-scale marker, it's very good. And I am decidedly way more unhealthy at 270 than I am at 200 pounds. I just think it's very complicated and individual and our paradigms related to weight don't like complicated and individual.
|