BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > General diet questions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 01-11-2016, 11:35 PM
Neutrogena Neutrogena is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 41
Default Is it "healthy" to live below set point?

Obviously it's better to not be obese. But say someone's set point was around 25% bf and they dieted down to ~12-14% and stayed there through dietary vigilance and eating habit reform. From a (health? longevity?) perspective, would it be "healthier" for this person to stick around their set point so as to avoid downregulation of hormones, etc?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 01-12-2016, 01:42 AM
squat squat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 649
Default

12-14% > 25% for your health.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 01-12-2016, 07:13 AM
BigPecsPeter BigPecsPeter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,098
Default

It's actually an incredibly good question. By continuously fighting against the body fat level that the body is driving you towards, is your endocrine system affected? I guess it's possible, but I can't imagine it's tremendously well studied. I have anecdotally come across situations where men have complained of post diet erectile difficulties that went on for years, long after the diet was completed and at sustainable body fat levels. As for whether there's any connection, who knows...
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 01-12-2016, 08:26 AM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 851
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigPecsPeter View Post
It's actually an incredibly good question. By continuously fighting against the body fat level that the body is driving you towards, is your endocrine system affected? I guess it's possible, but I can't imagine it's tremendously well studied. I have anecdotally come across situations where men have complained of post diet erectile difficulties that went on for years, long after the diet was completed and at sustainable body fat levels. As for whether there's any connection, who knows...
At best there is the data on caloric restriction

I think any fears are greatly unfounded. Maybe if you're trying to stay sub 10% and your body eats your brain like it did to Martin
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 01-12-2016, 09:26 AM
stoomc stoomc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 314
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcdonald View Post
At best there is the data on caloric restriction

I think any fears are greatly unfounded. Maybe if you're trying to stay sub 10% and your body eats your brain like it did to Martin
Lol!

I was thinking the same.
Surely it's better/ healthier in more ways than one to maintain a weight ~ 15-20% bodyfat than it is 25% +.
I hope thinking like this doesnt become mainstream as it would just = "ah well, it's better to stay fat/ it's inevitable"

I understand that the problems that people have (due to dieting down) are people with very low bodyfat... not just someone seeking to maintain a healthy weight/ size.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 01-12-2016, 10:07 AM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 851
Default

Here's what people need to stamp on their head

Almost all aspects of biology show a U shaped dose response curve.

Too high and bad things happen (i.e. too fat, too much exercise)
Too low and bad things happen (too lean, too little exercise
In the middle is where good things happen.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 01-12-2016, 12:22 PM
Neutrogena Neutrogena is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 41
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcdonald View Post
Here's what people need to stamp on their head

Almost all aspects of biology show a U shaped dose response curve.

Too high and bad things happen (i.e. too fat, too much exercise)
Too low and bad things happen (too lean, too little exercise
In the middle is where good things happen.
But does setpoint dictate where exactly that "U" is? If someone's setpoint is 40% bodyfat, would maintaining 15% for them be "too lean," just as a naturally 15% individual maintaining 5% is "too lean"?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 01-12-2016, 01:15 PM
stoomc stoomc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 314
Default

I certainly hope not anyway. I am a dieted down to "normal" weight from very overweight and would hope that it's not an inevitable road back to fatty!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Unread 01-12-2016, 01:25 PM
Neutrogena Neutrogena is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 41
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stoomc View Post
I certainly hope not anyway. I am a dieted down to "normal" weight from very overweight and would hope that it's not an inevitable road back to fatty!
I'm reasonably confident any potential hazards that might be present as a result of dieting down pale in comparison to those that occur as a consequence of obesity. Setpoint doesn't make it impossible to stay lean, it just means you can't get away with as much.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 01-12-2016, 03:15 PM
crazyhorse crazyhorse is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 31
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neutrogena View Post
But does setpoint dictate where exactly that "U" is? If someone's setpoint is 40% bodyfat, would maintaining 15% for them be "too lean," just as a naturally 15% individual maintaining 5% is "too lean"?
I wouldn't think anyone (male) would have a set point of 40%. Even 25% the OP used seems too high.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.