It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => 2nd Amendment/Firearms => Topic started by: Pandora on February 17, 2012, 12:21:05 PM
-
Ann Barnardt discusses her physical fitness program, "Fran", as ONE element of a "readiness" issue, and includes a practical demonstration:
(http://barnhardt.biz/blogimages/Readiness.jpg)
http://barnhardt.biz/ (http://barnhardt.biz/)
-
Rule #1: Cardio . The Fatties are the first to go. Poor Fat Bastard.
Zombieland - Cardio (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ci9dCZEF6Mw#ws)
-
I'm of two minds about physical preparation. Body fat strongly contributes to poor cardiovascular health and stamina, but it also exists for a reason. The ready availability of high calorie food is one of the marvels of the modern world. In nature our bodies are equipped for infrequent meals that come only as a result of hard work. Surplus calories are stored as fat because the next meal might be more than a week away.
Could there actually be some benefit to having a bit of padding while it is still easy to do so? I can honestly see both sides of this argument. I can see how being very lean and muscular would exact such a high metabolic cost that a transition into a scenario where food is no longer easy to come by could be problematic. The body will quickly find those calories somewhere, and it is able to breakdown muscle tissue to get them. Naturally, it also breaks down fat for that purpose. The main difference is that fat tissue is there for exactly that purpose, whereas breaking down muscle tissue is more of a last resort strategy.
-
... a transition into a scenario where food is no longer easy to come by could be problematic. The body will quickly find those calories somewhere, and it is able to breakdown muscle tissue to get them .... a last resort strategy.
I think that's called cannibalism ! ::puke:: ;D
-
I think that's called cannibalism ! ::puke:: ;D
The other, other, other white meat!
-
Could there actually be some benefit to having a bit of padding while it is still easy to do so? I can honestly see both sides of this argument. I can see how being very lean and muscular would exact such a high metabolic cost that a transition into a scenario where food is no longer easy to come by could be problematic.
It probably depends on your defintion of "fit" - If you are looking to compete with trained Marines 22 years of age, then yeah, you probably need to be lean.
I amnot sure "fit" needs to be that. As long as you are fit enough to do the work you need to do, I am sure the slower metabolism helps. After the work I did last summer, I am pretty sure my body wants to maintain pudge even as I get stronger. The reason that its so dang hard for humans to maintain that perfect body is because Nature doesn't want us to. Mother Nature wants to store some fat - or at least she sure does on me. Fat doesn't mean you are not fit. You need your cardio-vascular system to be up to speed, and your muscles need to be strong enough to do what is required. Being fit doesn't mean looking like a Greek God - that is an artifact of human vanity ( of whose measure I apparently got too little) and a desire to keep your metabolic rate the same as it was when you were 18. Its far more important to be healthy, and being so probably does not mean pushing your body to extremes metabolic rates it doesn't do naturally in order to get rid of fat it wants to keep at age 40.
If you don't know what you are doing, moderation seems to always be the wisest choice.
-
Functionally fit, I can do what I need to do, but I'm not the lean critter I was 20 years ago, so, being smarter helps overcome other shortcimings. While I may not be able to outrun zombies, I can drop 'em with lead and be smart enough not to put myself in precarious positions.
;)
-
I'm almost ready as I can be for now. But there's always room for improvement.
-
... a transition into a scenario where food is no longer easy to come by could be problematic. The body will quickly find those calories somewhere, and it is able to breakdown muscle tissue to get them .... a last resort strategy.
I think that's called cannibalism ! ::puke:: ;D
Actually I've heard this muscle self-consumption as the explanation for why distance runners are usually so scrawny. Apparently when the body is put in situations where its free-circulating energy stores (glycogen) are used up, which occurs after about 20-30 minutes of high intensity exercise, it will start breaking down muscle tissue as an emergency source of energy because it can do so more easily and more quickly than it can with fat.
-
... a transition into a scenario where food is no longer easy to come by could be problematic. The body will quickly find those calories somewhere, and it is able to breakdown muscle tissue to get them .... a last resort strategy.
I think that's called cannibalism ! ::puke:: ;D
Actually I've heard this muscle self-consumption as the explanation for why distance runners are usually so scrawny. Apparently when the body is put in situations where its free-circulating energy stores (glycogen) are used up, which occurs after about 20-30 minutes of high intensity exercise, it will start breaking down muscle tissue as an emergency source of energy because it can do so more easily and more quickly than it can with fat.
And I suppose the euphoria as a result of losing muscle mass is what relaxes them to the point where they crap their shorts and keep running...