How much do you weigh?

(Bluto) from url='http://groups.google.com/'http://groups.google.com//url said:

The fact is that different bodies are different, and no single formula is an accurate indicator of
health and fitness.

Pulse. If you have one, that's good. If you don't, that's bad.

--
home.sport.rr.comcuthuluOpen ↗ human rights = peace BARRY ... That was the most HEART-WARMING
rendition of "I DID IT MY WAY" I've ever heard!!
8:55:47 PM 11 February 2003

in article [email hidden], Terry Morse at [email hidden] wrote on
2/11/03 5:47 PM:

Quoted message said:

Ah yes, the "I'm fat, but I'm fit" delusion. You can be obese and strong, but you can't be obese
and healthy:

niddk.nih.govunders.htmOpen ↗

However, I recall reading of a study done in the last few years which followed four groups of men:

Fit, not overweight Fit, overweight Unfit, not overweight Unfit, overweight

Not surprisingly, the unfit, overweight group had the most significant health problems, and the fit,
not overweight group fared the best.

But the fit, overweight group fared much better than the unfit, not overweight group.

In other words, fitness was more important than weight.

Of course, I have not idea when or where the study was done, or what kinds of follow up studies were
down or are planned. Typical newsgroup posting material. :-)

--
Alan Jeddeloh "ajeddelo at easystreet dot com" The person who said "The only things certain in life
are death and taxes" didn't do the laundry in a family with children!

Terry Morse said:

Ah yes, the "I'm fat, but I'm fit" delusion. You can be obese and strong, but you can't be obese
and healthy:

niddk.nih.govunders.htmOpen ↗

Just not true. I don't purport to be especially fit now, at 6'8" and about 350 lbs., though I'm not
particularly unfit or unhealthy either.

But I have been fit, fast, and healthy by anybody's standards at 280 lbs., and the BMI rating system
says that's obese!

You can continue to take your health wisdom from Mademoiselle magazine etc., and I will go on (like
many other fat people) to live a healthy life despite what you think.

Chalo Colina

P.S. Sumo competitors work out for 5 hours every day before breakfast. Anyone who could reasonably
be called "unhealthy" would not withstand the regimen:
see.ed.ac.uksumo.pdfOpen ↗

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

Quoted message said:

BMI is worthless, fundamentally mathematically flawed. The system uses height as a simple divisor
in deriving an index of comparison-- but weight increases as the cube of height! Someone 5'0" and
100 lbs can have exactly the same proportions and body composition as someone 6'0" and 173 lbs, or
someone 7'0" and 274 lbs. But according to BMI nincompoops, the five-footer is at the low end of
the normal range, the six-footer is at the high end of the normal range, and the seven-footer is
overweight. Mind you, these imaginary people are identical except for scale.

I hear what you say about "scale", but, at least in my case, the BMI formula seems to scale OK. I'm
6'10", 230 lb, which yields a BMI of just under 25. My "ideal" weight (by formula) would be more
like 210, with a BMI of 22 or so. I think (except for height), I'm a pretty average build, that is
to say reasonably proportional (frame, musculature), and I don't find the BMI to be inaccurate even
at my size. Although most who meet me seem to find me extraordinarily large (I've never actually met
someone taller than myself), I'm only 17% or so taller than the American male average. I have no
doubt that I could gain (er, benefit) from losing the 20 lb of body fat that my "ideal" BMI would
indicate. More heavily muscled types, of any height, will probably need to adjust their BMI ranges,
but I don't think a +/- 15-20% in variation in height necessarily invalidates the model.

In article said:

BMI is worthless, fundamentally mathematically flawed. The system uses height as a simple divisor
in deriving an index of comparison-- but weight increases as the cube of height!

They actually divide by height squared, FYI.

Quoted message said:

The fact is that different bodies are different, and no single formula is an accurate indicator of
health and fitness.

Agreed, but it's useful to have general, approximate guidelines, and weight is a big risk factor.
Imagine doctors having to work everyone up with a full set of fitness tests. The time, the cost, the
fact that a lot of people don't want to be strapped into a treadmill and run til they want to puke.
If BMI/body fat/ other guideline helps classify 80% of people, that's useful; the other 20% can
argue their cases on their merits. (Blind adherence to BMI numbers in the way I've been told some
medical people do, on the other hand, is really stupid.)

-- Dan

--
Dan Cosley ([email hidden] * cs.umn.edu~cosleyOpen ↗) GroupLens Research
Lab, Univ of MN (movielens.umn.edumovielens.umn.eduOpen ↗ * 612.624.8372) *** Just a foot soldier in the Army
of Truth ***

Bluto said:

Terry Morse said:

Ah yes, the "I'm fat, but I'm fit" delusion. You can be obese and strong, but you can't be obese
and healthy:

niddk.nih.govunders.htmOpen ↗

Just not true.

Please post any references for that claim.

Quoted message said:

I don't purport to be especially fit now, at 6'8" and about 350 lbs., though I'm not particularly
unfit or unhealthy either.

What are you triglyceride levels? Have you had a glucose test? Heart disease, stroke, and type II
diabetes are the threee most common fat related diseases.

Quoted message said:

But I have been fit, fast, and healthy by anybody's standards at 280 lbs., and the BMI rating
system says that's obese!

Maybe so, as BMI is a rough gauge of body fat.

Quoted message said:

You can continue to take your health wisdom from Mademoiselle magazine etc., and I will go on
(like many other fat people) to live a healthy life despite what you think.

Mademoiselle? No thanks, I'll take my health cues from the NIH. So should you.

Quoted message said:

P.S. Sumo competitors work out for 5 hours every day before breakfast. Anyone who could reasonably
be called "unhealthy" would not withstand the regimen:
see.ed.ac.uksumo.pdfOpen ↗

They are also young with high testosterone, which protects them somewhat from the health destroying
ravages of high body fat. What are their triglycerides, and what are the health consequences as they
age? Is there a masters category for sumo wrestlers?
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA terrymorse.combikeOpen ↗

Alan Jeddeloh said:

Not surprisingly, the unfit, overweight group had the most significant health problems, and the
fit, not overweight group fared the best.

But the fit, overweight group fared much better than the unfit, not overweight group.

In other words, fitness was more important than weight.

There have been a few recent studies that indicate fitness may be more important than body fat in
health, and these have stirred up controvery in the media and the medical world. The government
still insists that obesity is unhealty. Which is worse, obesity or a sedentary lifestyle? That's
like asking would you rather have a bullet to the brain or the chest.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA terrymorse.combikeOpen ↗

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

Quoted message said:

Bluto wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

P.S. Sumo competitors work out for 5 hours every day

before breakfast.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Anyone who could reasonably be called "unhealthy" would

not withstand

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the regimen:

see.ed.ac.uksumo.pdfOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

They are also young with high testosterone, which protects

them somewhat

Quoted message said:

from the health destroying ravages of high body fat. What

are their

Quoted message said:

triglycerides, and what are the health consequences as

they age? Is

Quoted message said:

there a masters category for sumo wrestlers?

I have read that they are often in very poor health later in life, especially for Japan where people
are generally very healthy and long-lived. The same is true of American football players -- most
eventually suffer from weight and obesity related health problems, and in recent years the problems
from steroid abuse have become more prevalent too.

However, I do believe that being fit in a cardiovascular sense is ultimately most important. I have
friends my age
(39) who look great -- model/actor/actress/rockstar looks -- but they can't walk up a flight of
stairs without stress. I'd put my money on the person who's 40# overweight, but doesn't smoke
at all or drink much, and rides a bike 50 miles a week.

Matt O.

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

Quoted message said:

Alan Jeddeloh said:

Not surprisingly, the unfit, overweight group had the

most significant

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

health problems, and the fit, not overweight group fared

the best.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But the fit, overweight group fared much better than the

unfit, not

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

overweight group.

In other words, fitness was more important than weight.

There have been a few recent studies that indicate fitness

may be more

Quoted message said:

important than body fat in health, and these have stirred

up controvery

Quoted message said:

in the media and the medical world. The government still

insists that

Quoted message said:

obesity is unhealty. Which is worse, obesity or a

sedentary lifestyle?

Quoted message said:

That's like asking would you rather have a bullet to the

brain or the

Quoted message said:

chest.

Well, sure, but obesity is usually the result of a sedentary lifestyle. I can't say I know anyone
who's obese that I would consider non-sedentary. Well, maybe two people -- neither of whom has a
food intake anywhere near normal, and one of whom is a professional chef. But for most people,
activity level is what makes the difference, in more ways than one. When you're busy doing stuff
you're less likely to be stuffing your face.

Even if people gain only a pound or two a year, it's easy to see how it can become a serious problem
after 30 years. The difference in people's fitness at age 20 is amazing enough, but at age 50 or 60
it's staggering -- which is when most people appear to start "falling apart." However, most of them
were probably well on their way to poor health while still in their 20s.

Matt O.

Fabrizio Mazzoleni said:

Show up for the first time at one of my group rides with something lame like 32 spoked Mavic Open
Pros and I will be thinking 'ok, we're going to drop this newcomer real quick'.

That's what the guy on the Klein thought. He was sorely [censored] when I went past him - with my dynamo
running :-)

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. chapmancentral.comchapmancentral.comOpen ↗ (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

Bob said:

As I said the "average male" stops growing at around 21yrs old.

Nothing average about me :-)

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. chapmancentral.comchapmancentral.comOpen ↗ (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

Fabrizio Mazzoleni said:

if you're still going around with hair on your legs at this time of the year, then it looks as
though your 2003 season may be a write off.

You don't know the half of it:

<http://www.chapmancentral.com/Web/public.nsf/Documents/Bike_Optima_Stinger>

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. chapmancentral.comchapmancentral.comOpen ↗ (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

Per Elmsäter said:

I'm satisfied enough by the results. They were just a bit confusing. I've already lost 22 pounds
by cutting out fats like you suggest. In the last six months I've been rock steady on the scale
but my belllyline keeps on shrinking. That means my BMI is still the same but my %bodyfat is
steadily diminishing. This of course is due to working out and riding my bike now, more than I've
ever done before.

Yep - a classic weakness of BMI, muscle being denser than fat.

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. chapmancentral.comchapmancentral.comOpen ↗ (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

Alan Jeddeloh said:

However, I recall reading of a study done in the last few years which followed four groups of men:

Fit, not overweight Fit, overweight Unfit, not overweight Unfit, overweight

Not surprisingly, the unfit, overweight group had the most significant health problems, and the
fit, not overweight group fared the best.

But the fit, overweight group fared much better than the unfit, not overweight group.

In other words, fitness was more important than weight.

Of course, I have not idea when or where the study was done, or what kinds of follow up studies
were down or are planned. Typical newsgroup posting material. :-)

IIRC, that study came out of the UNC-CH medical school. Sorry I don't remember which journal it was
published in, but the popular press picked it up and disseminated it.

Pat
--
Apologies to those easily confused. Address is spam-resistant. Correct email address like pdlamb
'round-about comcast point net.

In article said:

It may be the case that someone could extend his or her life by crash dieting and wanking about on
a treadmill in front of the TV, but I'm guessing that's not the case.

I think the problem with that kind of program is less the program itself and more the fact that it's
so damn boring nobody can actually keep it up in the long run and so they don't meet their goals.

--Paul

Terry Morse said:

Bluto said:

I don't purport to be especially fit now, at 6'8" and about 350 lbs., though I'm not
particularly unfit or unhealthy either.

What are you triglyceride levels? Have you had a glucose test? Heart disease, stroke, and type II
diabetes are the three most common fat related diseases.

But are they related or just associated? To me they appear to be illnesses of flesh-eaters. I'm not
one of those.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You can continue to take your health wisdom from Mademoiselle magazine etc., and I will go on
(like many other fat people) to live a healthy life despite what you think.

Mademoiselle? No thanks, I'll take my health cues from the NIH. So should you.

The NIH is in the business of drawing general conclusions based on broad statistics. They
characterize obesity as an illness because, statistically speaking, fat people die younger and
suffer more often from various degenerative conditions, compared to thin people.

Statistics show that grey-haired people are stricken by arthritis far more often than
black-haired people. So, naturally, hair dye should be your first resort against this
debilitating affliction. Right?

Most fat people lead sedentary lives, eat an indiscriminate and/or imbalanced diet, watch a lot of
TV, and drive cars everywhere too. That is what made them fat. Is it not reasonable to speculate
that these lifestyle characteristics are also what made them unhealthy? Or that a fat person who did
not live that way might not suffer the same health problems? I've not seen any statistical analysis
to determine the answer to that question.

It may be the case that someone could extend his or her life by crash dieting and wanking about on a
treadmill in front of the TV, but I'm guessing that's not the case. It's a proven way to remedy
obesity though, if that's your aim.

Easier to tell folks they are sick because they are fat, than to tell them they're sick because they
observe the USian way of life.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

P.S. Sumo competitors work out for 5 hours every day before breakfast. Anyone who could
reasonably be called "unhealthy" would not withstand the regimen:
see.ed.ac.uksumo.pdfOpen ↗

They are also young with high testosterone, which protects them somewhat from the health
destroying ravages of high body fat. What are their triglycerides, and what are the health
consequences as they age? Is there a masters category for sumo wrestlers?

Big people's bodies wear out faster than small people's. That goes for tall vs. short just as it
goes for fat vs. thin. The vitality-- strength, power, stamina, structural integrity, resistance to
infection, and ability to heal from injury-- displayed by a large, heavy, healthy person is a better
measure of his or her overall health than is a tally of wear-and-tear issues. By these criteria it's
fair to say that sumo wrestlers, olympic heavyweight weightlifters, Highland games competitors,
football linebackers, and other fatter athletes are as healthy as their thinner counterparts, even
if their bodies deteriorate faster with age.

Small dogs and horses outlast their large counterparts, but it would be incorrect to call them
categorically healthier just because they live longer.

Chalo Colina

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

Quoted message said:

Terry Morse said:

Bluto said:

I don't purport to be especially fit now, at 6'8" and about 350 lbs., though I'm not
particularly unfit or unhealthy either.

What are you triglyceride levels? Have you had a glucose test? Heart disease, stroke, and type
II diabetes are the three most common fat related diseases.

But are they related or just associated? To me they appear to be illnesses of flesh-eaters. I'm
not one of those.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You can continue to take your health wisdom from Mademoiselle magazine etc., and I will go on
(like many other fat people) to live a healthy life despite what you think.

Mademoiselle? No thanks, I'll take my health cues from the NIH. So should you.

The NIH is in the business of drawing general conclusions based on broad statistics. They
characterize obesity as an illness because, statistically speaking, fat people die younger and
suffer more often from various degenerative conditions, compared to thin people.

All true, there's a lot of blurring between cause and symptom in people's minds. Obesity may be
symptomatic of an unhealthy lifestyle, but where is isn't, it doesn't necessarily cause major health
problems. Thin people don't necessarily have healthy hearts, colons, etc., nor do fat people
necessarily have unhealthy ones. In prior times, and currently in other cultures, fat is considered
a sign of health, aesthetics come and go, physiology and true health is much more complicated, and
the book has by no means been entirely written yet. Personally, I like my body better when it's
leaner, just like I prefer a lighter bike, but realistically I know that a light body, like a light
bike, doesn't tell the whole story.

Hello all,

I have Bontrager Race Lite wheelset, but I really do not like the spokes. I am looking for VERY wide
(6mm or more) chrome or polished steel bladed spokes. I have a couple of questions:
1. It appears that my hubs are slotted enough for a wide blade. Does anyone know the max width
these hubs will allow?
2. Where can I get a very high quality spoke like I describe?

Thanks for the help

Michael

Michael James Anderson said:

Where can I get a very high quality spoke like I describe?

coloradocyclist.comproductdisplay2 v2.cfmOpen ↗
5544,18243,18245,18249,13082,13097,24589,13643

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net home.earthlink.net~jeverett3Open ↗

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

Quoted message said:

Yesterday on NPR I heard a story about Americans being overweight and getting worse:

discover.npr.orgfeature.jhtmlOpen ↗

This got me thinking… I haven't ever done any BMI calculations on myself, but according to
some of the web calculators, my 5' 11" frame is considered obese at 220 pounds. I know that that
can't really be the case, since my leg muscles are at least twice the size of most non-cyclists
and I lift weights, but I know I'm carrying more fat than most cyclists I see around here. Some
background: I stopped riding after college, ate, drank and smoked for about 12 years (I'm 34), and
2 years ago I started riding and getting in shape again. I did about 2000 miles in 2001 and 2800
last year. I went from about 270 to 215, and seem to have hit a plateau. Since the weather got
cold, I'm back up to 220 and holding (same as last year). I'm OK with that, but I would like to be
a little lighter overall. I don't have the discipline to count every calorie I take in. I did it
for a while, and it becomes very boring and tough to continue. I'm well aware of the weight loss
methods that work (IE: input less than you output), and I still pay attention to what I'm eating,
not just to the point I did when I was really loosing weight. I just want to get rid of the rest
of the spare tire.

That being said, I know that many of the bikers around here are college students, and many are
fast enough to compete professionally. I'm not really at that level, never will be. Most of the
commuters are the same, and I suspect that many of them are also vegetarians as well. But still,
that is the only body shape reference I have. So, I'm asking the group for feedback. Should I
weigh less or not? Most web site calculators are telling me I should weigh about 180, but I can't
really believe that is realistic, unless I give up muscle mass (or chop off an arm). Thanks in
advance.

i'm 50 years old, 6'4", 235# with a 38" waist (beer muscles). i'll go down to 225# and 36" when
summer gets here and i ride more in the heat. most people would describe me as a fairly muscular
build (20 years of weight training). no, i don't look like the soloflex guy and i don't make models
in bikinis swoon. that's ok, i've been happily married for 20 years and have lots of good friends.
i'm not what most would call a great rider, but i have a LOT of fun. can't fly up the hills like
lance, but i'm cleaning many that i was walking a year ago. i don't follow any special diet, just
eat pretty much what i want while avoiding gluttony. don't worry about your weight, those charts are
based on some lab nerds concept of "ideal". ride your bike, enjoy life, and be happy with your
youth! smokey, recreational rider with a lemond poprad