STAY/GET BACK IN SHAPE VOL 3.0 -- A New Niketalk = A New Thread

Yeah that's not an unreasonable amount of mass for a 5'6 body.

The conditioning for 45 though is another thing :nerd:
considering it became his career, I wouldn't be surprised. the question though is how long. kinda shocked me when I first saw his pics like "unreal". had to confirm it with my bestfriend because he is his adopted brother and confirmed that's how he is now. from what I knew, he went 1st place in the 80kg division about 2 years ago according to my bestfriend. anyway, gotta up my game. dont want to be slacking off considering I'm around 97.5 kg. :emoji_rolling_eyes:
 
considering it became his career, I wouldn't be surprised. the question though is how long. kinda shocked me when I first saw his pics like "unreal". had to confirm it with my bestfriend because he is his adopted brother and confirmed that's how he is now. from what I knew, he went 1st place in the 80kg division about 2 years ago according to my bestfriend. anyway, gotta up my game. dont want to be slacking off considering I'm around 97.5 kg. :emoji_rolling_eyes:

Aight I overlooked the competing bodybuilder part :lol:

BARE min he is on TRT/HRT.
 
My gym just got a hip thrust and a reverse hyper machine. Bout to try them out later
Any tips for either? curious how the reverse hyper is
 
On reverse hyper do less weight than you think you need. Actually contract because it’s easy to go on there and just swing that thing around with hella weight.
 
IMG_3792.png


🥱 normal reaction to a 5 plate squat
 
Tested my BMI (26.1). Apparently I'm overweight. Crazy how most people who see me think I'm skinny.

I guess I'll go work on withering away into a skeleton or something.
 
Outside of clinical context, BMI is useless.

Within clinical context, it’s even worse than useless.

BMI is definitely incomplete/insufficient in terms of specificity, but not entirely useless...as a general classification tool applied to normal distribution of people it is generally applicable as a guide for most.
 
BMI is definitely incomplete/insufficient in terms of specificity, but not entirely useless...as a general classification tool applied to normal distribution of people it is generally applicable as a guide for most.

I think we're on the same page. This is what it was originally intended for, analyzing large populations.

But it really doesn't have any validity in medicine, where care should be at the individual level, and there are better oversimplified metrics available to use.

There’s a reason why it’s being phased out of primary care by doctors.
 
i think it can be useful as a metric, not alone/by itself…but outside of outliers on the ‘extreme’ of both ends, most people would want to be in that ‘normal’ range.

beyond bmi, are there other simple general systems that help understand whether one is in a ‘healthy/normal’ range?
 
Bmi has to be taken in the context of the eye test.

If youre fat looking and have the clinical picture of metabolic syndrome then BMI is useful in tracking your weight and overall health.

Cant be applying that to active people who lift weights....for the most part.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom