Laoch comments on Outside the Laboratory - Less Wrong

63 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 21 January 2007 03:46AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (336)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Lumifer 16 December 2013 03:30:56PM 3 points [-]

Occasionally even health-conscious people eat stuff like pizza

What's wrong with healthy people (in particular, gluten-tolerant) eating pizza?

Comment author: Laoch 16 December 2013 04:24:50PM 1 point [-]

It's high carb? It gives me heartburn (probably gluten intolerance?). If you are trying to go on a cut i.e. want a six pack it's a bad idea.

Comment author: Lumifer 16 December 2013 04:29:30PM 2 points [-]

It's high carb?

And why is that a problem? You seem to be implying that a low-carb diet is The Only True Way which looks doubtful.

If you are trying to go on a cut i.e. want a six pack

The claim was about "health-conscious" people, not body-image-conscious.

Comment author: Laoch 16 December 2013 04:38:02PM *  2 points [-]

And why is that a problem? You seem to be implying that a low-carb diet is The Only True Way which looks doubtful.

Because of the negative effects it has on your insulin response, leading to pancreas fatigue and type 2 diabetes.

The claim was about "health-conscious" people, not body-image-conscious.

I was under the impression that a low body fat percentage was healthier. Perhaps I'm wrong. I must admit my beliefs are influenced by aesthetics. I'd bet on low abdominal fat been the optimal via a low-ish carb diet.

Comment author: Lumifer 16 December 2013 05:06:48PM 1 point [-]

We know that low-carb is effective at losing weight. The jury is still out on whether low-carb is healthy in the long term.

Similarly, while it is clear that being obese is unhealthy, I don't think that there is any evidence to show that being very thin (having low body fat %) is healthier than being normal.

Comment author: [deleted] 16 December 2013 06:34:07PM 0 points [-]

See here, though it uses BMI rather than body fat %.

Comment author: Lumifer 16 December 2013 06:46:18PM 0 points [-]

Yes, and it does show the expected U-shaped curve.

BMI is pretty useless as an individual metric, though.

Comment author: [deleted] 16 December 2013 06:56:20PM 0 points [-]

Yes, and it does show the expected U-shaped curve.

That was the point. (I also incorrectly remembered that the minimum was shifted a bit to the right of what's usually called “normal weight”, i.e. 18.5 to 25, but in the case of healthy people who've never smoked it looks like that range is about right.)

Comment author: Laoch 17 December 2013 08:32:50AM 0 points [-]

Depends on what you mean by normal?

Comment author: Lumifer 17 December 2013 04:52:06PM 0 points [-]

The usual: 10-20% BF for men (you can have less if you're actually an athlete), 20-30% for women.

Comment author: Laoch 17 December 2013 07:37:06PM 0 points [-]

Oh you mean healthy not normal? Few men are at 10-20%.

Comment author: Lumifer 17 December 2013 07:46:28PM *  1 point [-]

I mean "normal" in the sense of "not broken", NOT in the sense of "average".

Having said that, about 20% of US men under 40 have less than 20% body fat. Source

Comment author: [deleted] 16 December 2013 06:39:55PM 2 points [-]

I was under the impression that a low body fat percentage was healthier.

In which case you should take “healthy people” to mean those who are not trying to go on a cut because they already have a six-pack.