Does reduced fat really prolong our lives?
-
or does it just make us think we are a little healthier when we eat something with no flavor?
Contrary to what Yogi Berra said -- fat tastes good. As has been said: moderation. And while we're on the subject of healthy(er) eating -- sugar may be bad, but the substitutes are worse.
Slacker007 wrote:
when we eat something with no flavor
Yeah, I don't do that.
-
or does it just make us think we are a little healthier when we eat something with no flavor?
Slacker007 wrote:
Does reduced fat really prolong our lives?
No, the opposite[^] might be true. ..but the idea does feed a lot of mouths, since it produces income for the food-industry, the sport-schools, doctors, lawyers, pharma, dentists.. Your cells might prefer saturated fat as a primary building block. Sugar isn't evil either; but in large enough (read, "supersized") quantities, even water becomes poisonous.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: if you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
-
loctrice wrote:
I actually prefer a treadmill
Either the 'scenery' at your gym is truly exceptional, or the countryside where you live completely sucks. To my mind, the worst run outdoors is better than the best workout on the treadmill.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
It depends. You can't be truly healthy unless you're also fit - and you won't be that unless your diet is balanced (which means appropriate levels of fat, sugar, carbs, protein etc.), and you exercise appropriately. 10 years or so back, I weighed about the same as I do now - but I'm now far fitter (I took up road/off-road running) and it shows whenever I'm doing anything that involves exertion. Back then, I'd struggle to run around the block - now I'm quite happy to run 4-5 miles every day. Statistically, that should mean I have a better chance of living longer, but of course you can never tell what will happen re lifespan on a person by person basis. Alone I'm not statistically significant, but across an entire population it certainly holds.
Anna :rose: Tech Blog | Visual Lint "Why would anyone prefer to wield a weapon that takes both hands at once, when they could use a lighter (and obviously superior) weapon that allows you to wield multiple ones at a time, and thus supports multi-paradigm carnage?"
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote:
Back then, I'd struggle to run around the block
I never have to run around any blocks, so, given that building muscle groups into optimal shapes for doing things that you will never do is bad for you, I think I'll skip the running, ta very much.
I mean, do I look French?
-
Anna-Jayne Metcalfe wrote:
Back then, I'd struggle to run around the block
I never have to run around any blocks, so, given that building muscle groups into optimal shapes for doing things that you will never do is bad for you, I think I'll skip the running, ta very much.
I mean, do I look French?
I don't run around the block, but the park - 5 days a week, on average. It's a personal choice. Personally, I'd rather be fit than the alternative (which I've also experienced, and put me in a place I really don't want to go back to).
Anna :rose: Tech Blog | Visual Lint "Why would anyone prefer to wield a weapon that takes both hands at once, when they could use a lighter (and obviously superior) weapon that allows you to wield multiple ones at a time, and thus supports multi-paradigm carnage?"