You can reach people you otherwise might not have by inviting your neighbours around for coffee and cake one weekend morning? Even if you have nothing in common it starts building a community of people who live in proximity to one another.
This annoys me: at least say you're not going to make it. I don't expect you always to be free or even want to attend, but how hard is it to say 'Thanks but I can't come.'?
I would imagine we'll see a greater emphasis on muscularity. Already 'skinny fat' has long been a pejorative for slim people that hadn't 'earned' it (whatever 'it' is). Like just about everything, supply and demand will determine desirability. In a world where no-one is overweight being slim is no longer a desirable differentiator.
If the dataset includes household size you could limit the analysis to that subset. Alternatively you could focus on households with lower average basket sizes and hypothesise that those households have fewer adults. Obviously those measure aren't going to be anywhere near perfect but might be informative.
That position does not appear to be supported by clinical evidence. [This study](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dar.12433) references several studies that show that taking low (in the context of gym users) doses of steriods and not exercising is more effective at building muscle mass than strength training and not taking steroids.
Steroids significantly increase glycogen/water retention in-muscle while on them and for a period of time while coming off of them. This would increase muscle size by the measures noted in Bhasin's study (the big one people reference here), but not increase the amount of actual contractile tissue. There's also a cap there - going up in dosage, going for longer, etc., is not going to continually increase overall muscle size at that rate because you've saturated the stores in the muscle for the glycogen and water.
You will gain some additional contractile tissue doing nothing on gear. The average person, if faced with the two options, will gain more actual contractile tissue opting to lift weights without gear.
You can find huge quantities of people in gyms that are on gear and look like they barely lift.
Sounds like you've never taken steroids either brother LOL. You believe what you want, taking steroids and not exercising is not going to get you the results you're looking for...
Bro science bullshit doesn't belong here. I'd rather take roids and not lift than do SS+GOMAD and listen to /fit/ memes. Rich Piana and Zyzz are dead for a reason.
It sounds like you're making great changes to your health. Although BMI is a population metric and has its flaws it is accurate for the vast majority of people. The reason the weight component _seems_ low is that being overweight is so normalised. Most UFC fighters are in the normal weight range and are clearly more muscular than the average person. Society isn't suffering an over-abundance of buffness, it's just people are generally carrying lots of extra weight.
Outside of science it would be an interesting pedagogic tool for many people. There is a tendency to imagine that people in the past saw the world much the same as we do. The expression "the past is a foreign country" resonates because we can empathise at some level that things were different, but we can't visit that country. "Talking" to a denizen of London in 1910 regarding world affairs, gender equality, economic opportunities, etc would be very interesting. Even if it can never be entirely accurate I think it would be enlightening.
Yeah, honestly, if anything, congratulations are in order: if you die in your 90s, you did quite well in the longevity contest. Most people die before their 90th birthday, many long before. Not too many people make it to their 100th birthday.
Being a parent gets harder the older you are, not just becoming a parent which is where the focus tends to be. Yes you have fewer financial resources and less life experience, but if you want kids the best time is as soon as you can. Kids don't care about how rich you are (so long as needs are met - those concerns come later and enough will never be enough for a teenager) and they don't know that we're all making it up as you go along. Have kids at 25 means that by your early 40s you are pretty much free again but parented in times of good health.
Doing the school run now and seeing parents pushing 50 with primary school aged children makes me sad for them and their kids when I see how physically shattered they look through the fatigue and stress.
I had kids 'early' for my peer group (early 30s when most are pushing 40) and there is a noticeable difference in the amount of energy I have. It's not playing games with kids (the stereotypical keeping up with the kids at the park) it's that early years of childhood mean that you have 5+ years of bad / shorter sleep and get sick more than you probably have since you were a child.
reply