Fit does not = thin

mr_eddy

Ok so I have always been a bit heavier than various magazines and charts say I should be however I feel that I am fitter now at 32 than I was at 22 despite being a solid 20lbs heavier.

This got me thinking do we really need to be thin to be fit and likewise does being a bit 'overweight' automatically mean bad news for our health ?

A couple of recent studies one from The Cancer Institute and another from the American Heart Journal (will post links if I find them again) suggest that actually having a fit body is more about internal conditioning than visual appearance.

I must admit that I do not like the extra inch or so of flab I have around my belly and I wish I could get away with 32" Jeans rather than 34/36" but I think I have reached the age where physical fitness and well-being is far more important that what I look like in the mirror.

Yet despite this my blood pressure is lower than ever, my last work medical showed no issues and I can still smoke 20yr old students up the big hill on the way to work on my fixie without even getting out of breath I am gonna stop beating myself up about being 5kg overweight and stop searching for a perfectly flat belly and just except that fact that I am who I am - I eat nice food because I like it and having a having a perfect torso is in no way a sign of being fit & healthy.

slowmart

http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/loseweight/P ... rpear.aspx :shock:


It's all relative. My wife's logic dictates I should cut back on the cake and then I won't need to cycle so much to keep the weight off.


The trouble is I love cake and cycling….

ai_1

There's plenty thin people with unhealthy levels of visceral fat but they assume they're okay fat wise because they're thin. I think your perspective is absolutely reasonable. Lighter will be a performance advantage but a 5 or 10kg extra is not the end of the world health wise provided you're fit. I'm probably 10kg above my "ideal" weight but based on recent medical my LDL cholesterol is spectacularly low, my heart and lungs are in great shape and I've nothing much to worry about on the health front for the foreseeable future. I hope to lose weight for performance reasons nit health ones.

pblakeney

If you are exercising and still 5 kg overweight at age 32, get back to us at age 42.

Your opinion will have varied, although that does not mean that you are incorrect.

Middle age spread is coming your way. I am speaking from experience.

byke68

"I wish I could get away with 32" Jeans rather than 34/36" "

I wish I could get away with 34/36 jeans!

I'm not as fit as I was 10 years ago but I'm a lot fitter than everyone I know of the same age so I'm happy. And so is the missus..........................

homers_double

byke68 wrote:

"I wish I could get away with 32" Jeans rather than 34/36" "

I wish I could get away with 34/36 jeans!

I'm not as fit as I was 10 years ago but I'm a lot fitter than everyone I know of the same age so I'm happy. And so is the missus..........................

Pretty much this, although I've let it go the mast few weeks.

macleod113

Slowmart wrote:

The trouble is I love cake and cycling….

the other half simply doesn't understand me using the same logic as this :-)

DeVlaeminck

I wear 32" jeans, well modern 32" jeans. I found an old pair of 32" levis and I couldn't even do the button up let alone wear them comfortably. It's easy to kid ourselves but I tend to agree with the poster that said if you are a stone overweight at 32 wait until you are well into your 40s and beyond.

Having said that it is possible to carry extra weight and still be healthy - not sure about fit but healthy is certainly possible.

ai_1

DeVlaeminck wrote:

....Having said that it is possible to carry extra weight and still be healthy - not sure about fit but healthy is certainly possible.

Define "fit"?
You can certainly have some extra weight and yet have good cardiovascular fitness.

Sirius631

Slowmart wrote:

It's all relative. My wife's logic dictates I should cut back on the cake and then I won't need to cycle so much to keep the weight off.

The trouble is I love cake and cycling….

But do you love your wife? Cake won't tell you to stop cycling.

thegreatdivide

Fit might not equal thin 'out there' - but this is a cycling forum where thin = WIN.

bompington

I have always been a bit overweight - my best fighting weight is probably about 12 stone, my whole adult life I have varied between 14 stone down to 12 stone 3 - but relatively fit.

I have no doubt whatsoever that if I wasn't overweight then I would, in every practical respect, be fitter.

DeVlaeminck

Ai_1 wrote:

DeVlaeminck wrote:

....Having said that it is possible to carry extra weight and still be healthy - not sure about fit but healthy is certainly possible.

Define "fit"?
You can certainly have some extra weight and yet have good cardiovascular fitness.

Depends how much extra weight. Of course yes it depends on your definition of "fit" but for most people one element of being "fit" is not being fat.

morstar

Currently reading Phil Maffetone at the moment. He goes to great lengths to separate the idea of fitness from health. Quite an interesting read.
Makes the case that many very fit people are not healthy, injuries, illness etc. You could argue that applies here.

pblakeney

morstar wrote:

Currently reading Phil Maffetone at the moment. He goes to great lengths to separate the idea of fitness from health. Quite an interesting read.
Makes the case that many very fit people are not healthy, injuries, illness etc. You could argue that applies here.

By that definition, Guy Martin is not very healthy.
He is however, very fit.

norvernrob

I started cycling in Feb this year and have gone from 75kg to 67kg. I need a belt with 32" waist jeans. Cycling has been win-win-win for me, I'm lighter than I was at 20 (I'm 38) fitter than I've ever been and it doesn't really feel like work as I love doing it (apart from turbo sessions, I really hate them!).

ai_1

Basically the word fit is far too vague for many discussions.

Fit for what?

You can have well trained heart and lungs but carry unnecessary weight. The reverse is also common.
You can be slim and have great heart and lungs but poor posture or disproportionate muscle distribution and toning.
You could be a 100kg rugby player with very low body fat and superb general strength and explosive power and well trained heart and lungs but poor slow steady endurance ability.

"Fit" is not an easily defined term with a single meaning.
Even specific to cycling you will have different parameters weighted differently depending on the discipline and specific event in question.

rick_chasey

Don't confuse fit with healthy.