Older guys who were/are skinny: at what age did you have to start watching your weight?

Coconut Oil wrote:

Tyrone ReXXXing wrote:

an excess can lead to some health issues and that naturally occurring unsaturated fats are healthier.

So why is Coconut oil then considered a health supplement and wonder food by the same scientists?

1 tbsp of coconut oil has 60% of the daily recommended limit for sat fats?

So basically if I eat 2 tbsps of coconut oil per day I am one step closer to a heart attack?

A)Those DV's are a bit outdated

B) as stated, sat fats in coconut oil are considered a bit more benign than some other sat fat sources (and coconuts do have some other healthy qualities)

C) obviously these are general recommendations. It depends on the rest of your diet, exercise amount, weight, genetics, and lifestyle on what impact a supposedly negative part of your diet could have on your health

Coconut Oil wrote:

Tyrone ReXXXing wrote:

an excess can lead to some health issues and that naturally occurring unsaturated fats are healthier.

So why is Coconut oil then considered a health supplement and wonder food by the same scientists?

1 tbsp of coconut oil has 60% of the daily recommended limit for sat fats?

So basically if I eat 2 tbsps of coconut oil per day I am one step closer to a heart attack?

Saturated fat has a profound impact on LDL cholesterol, IE it raises it (through up regulation of cholesterol production by the liver), as well as the subsequent risk for CAD, PVD, CVD etc. I'd stay FAR away from it.

I understand that this is a running forum, but you people must be living on another planet than the one where I reside. The "magic age" for most of the population is more like 20, not 30! Like, did none of you ever have any non-running friends at any point in college or your early working life? The majority of people start gaining weight the moment they hit their final, mature musculo-skeletal system. So 21-22 for men, 18-19 for women, generally. And a big part of why this happens is exactly that everybody thinks that they won't gain weight until they are "old", so it catches them by surprise.

I mean seriously, have none of you ever known a college frat-boy who was already growing a gut by his senior year from all the beer and pizza?

Yes, for naturally skinny endurance athletes the calculus is rather different, and all the years that you spend training an efficient fuel-burning system have a lasting effect. I'm 5'11", 145, and this hasn't changed by more than 5 pounds from ages 20 - 33. Kind of annoying actually, since running more than 30 MPW seems to make it impossible for me to bulk up in the weight room.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

Saturated fat has a profound impact on LDL cholesterol, IE it raises it (through up regulation of cholesterol production by the liver), as well as the subsequent risk for CAD, PVD, CVD etc. I'd stay FAR away from it.

First of all, saturated fat MOSTLY raises HDL (and therefore total cholesterol). And that is a good thing. You want your HDL (good cholesterol) to be high.

Risks of high LDL are overstated/mostly a myth.

Triglycerides are where it's at, you want to keep them low (by reducing your sugar intake)

Older runner dudes need to focus on the upper body. A skinny older runner looks frail, not healthy. Hitting that weight room regularly is something you need to emphasize more as you get older.....more than running even.

If you are a typical old geezer runner size, you are never going to bulk up too much.

XFIT BRO THE REAL ONE 1 wrote:

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

Saturated fat has a profound impact on LDL cholesterol, IE it raises it (through up regulation of cholesterol production by the liver), as well as the subsequent risk for CAD, PVD, CVD etc. I'd stay FAR away from it.

First of all, saturated fat MOSTLY raises HDL (and therefore total cholesterol). And that is a good thing. You want your HDL (good cholesterol) to be high.

Risks of high LDL are overstated/mostly a myth.

Triglycerides are where it's at, you want to keep them low (by reducing your sugar intake)

You have obviously not done the research. Take a look at The Framingham Heart Study data, do your homework, then come back and we can debate the topic.

You're 100% correct, and this has been my experience:

I ran for a solid D1 program and was pretty good. I was/am thin and fit but I was never skeletal. I have always had a more "Mediterranean" physique. I would describe it as a thin Mesomorph body type. One time a tailor described me as "Mediterranean" because I have a thin waist but wear a 38 jacket in the chest. Anyway...

I have a lot of good friends who were major frat boys. Big time drinkers and general messes during their college days. So many of them looked like total sh-t during college and the years after. Somehow, they all managed to marry attractive women. Anyway, I kept running after college and remained fit. Always felt superior to them.

So once we hit, say, 30 or so, I probably put on about 10 pounds over the course of about 3 years. Nothing more than kids, work and day-to-day responsibilities injecting their presence into my life. I was still running and eating healthy, but I could feel the extra ten pounds.

At the same time, my fat buddies discovered things like X Fit and marathons. Suddenly they are melting fat off of their bodies and looking better than ever. While I was still fitter and thinner, it was hard to feel good about my fitness when I had gained weight and they had lost noticeable amounts.

I am 37 now and it has been hard. I am still running decent times and look pretty fit, but I am also a father of three and have a demanding job, so I manage about 70 mpw and maybe hit the weights 1-2 a week (plus nightly pushups and pullups). I cannot devote my free time to working out like some can, but that was a choice I made and I can live with that... It has just been a weird dynamic to see these friends bounce back with so much success.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

XFIT BRO THE REAL ONE 1 wrote:

First of all, saturated fat MOSTLY raises HDL (and therefore total cholesterol). And that is a good thing. You want your HDL (good cholesterol) to be high.

Risks of high LDL are overstated/mostly a myth.

Triglycerides are where it's at, you want to keep them low (by reducing your sugar intake)

You have obviously not done the research. Take a look at The Framingham Heart Study data, do your homework, then come back and we can debate the topic.

It will be pointless. There is literally nothing you could say or reference that would change his mind even one iota. Nothing.

If you look at the data of the Framingham study actually showed that dietary fat had no relation to lipid fat.

The director of the study had this to say in a 1992 paper

"In Framingham, Mass., the more saturated fat one ate, the more cholesterol one ate, the more calories one ate, the lower the person's serum cholesterol. The opposite of what… Keys et al would predict…We found that the people who ate the most cholesterol, ate the most saturated fat, ate the most calories, weighed the least and were the most physically active."

Ancel Keys, who first proposed the hypothesis that high lipid cholesterol leads to heart disease has this to say:

"There's no connection whatsoever between cholesterol in food and cholesterol in blood. And we've known that all along. Cholesterol in the diet doesn't matter at all unless you happen to be a chicken or a rabbit." Ancel Keys, Ph.D., professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota 1997.

I won't even go into all the newer studies trying to debunk Keys in the first place as those are just too young to rely on.

Tyrone ReXXXing wrote:

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

First of all, saturated fat MOSTLY raises HDL (and therefore total cholesterol). And that is a good thing. You want your HDL (good cholesterol) to be high.

Risks of high LDL are overstated/mostly a myth.

Triglycerides are where it's at, you want to keep them low (by reducing your sugar intake)

You have obviously not done the research. Take a look at The Framingham Heart Study data, do your homework, then come back and we can debate the topic.

It will be pointless. There is literally nothing you could say or reference that would change his mind even one iota. Nothing.[/quote

That's a shame 🤓

I'm 6'0", or slightly shorter. 13 years ago in 2003, when I started training again seriously at age 45 after 19 years of indifferent jogging, I weighed 175. Over the next four or five years, I slimmed down to 160. My times gradually got faster during that period. I ran my fastest times in 2008-2009 at age 50-51, and I was 163-164.

I've had a tough time remaining healthy and uninjured since then. I got back in good shape in the spring of 2014 and raced a fast 5K (for me) at 165 or so.

Then something happened and I put on 5-7 pounds. It's been very hard to shed them, although if I combine salads with a strict no-booze policy and steady training, I'll slim down.

Something happens around 53.

Send me a link to that statement the Director of the study in the 80s (William Castelli) was a colleague of mine. Contrary to everything the study showed. I have reams of data that show exactly the opposite.

i ate cake wrote:

basically like the title says. I'm 27 now and eat whatever I want. I pig out basically every day and I don't gain weight. All my friends have either gained a bunch of weight or have to watch their diets to stay fit. Lately I've been wondering how long I can get away with this lifestyle for. I'm not ready to give up mcdonalds or taco bell binges

I was like that 'til I hit 44, whether I ran or not. I can still get away with garbage food three days a week and I'm 55. And the ticker is in great shape, regular physicals, etc. Sure, I'll drop dead of something. We all will.

Was always taunted for being skinny and the only way to put on weight was to workout at the gym but that was only good for a few kilograms. Lets say 70-75 max. If I didnt train I actually lost weight and eating vast amounts made no difference. If my diet was less than adequate as when I roamed around Europe for a year I bottomed out at 66kg. Until I hit 37 and then it all changed, and within a few years they were calling me big man. By 39 I hit 96kg.Since then it has been a constant fight to lose weight and maintain it. Last year with huge effort I got down to 70kg but after a few injuries shot back up to 85kg. Once I get below 80kg I will get back into running. To think once I was embarrassed to to be skinny.

Great point! I hear that often. But I cannot eat whatever I want! Krispy Kremes are Delicious! I can eat 6 easy...but that's simply way to many "calories" in a sitting.

I was 158 I in my prime and now I'm at 172, age 58. It's a struggle. And I simply cannot run lots of miles. More than 12/ week and systems fell vs highs of 60 in my prime.

I am 42 and still skinny and fit but as others noted yes, I have to watch what I eat in a way that I didn't as an undergraduate. I also run, including sprints and hurdles, play soccer and bball in pickup games weekly and skateboard. At 168lbs at 6'2" I have the basic build of an NBA point guard but not of a model for some emo clothing line. And I'm good with that because if I was lighter I could injure myself in bball and at this age you just don't heal as fast.

Haven't started yet.. 56 now, 6'2" and 170lbs, 5lbs more than when running in college.

"The fact is that unless you are serious about limiting caloric intake and running/training on a consistent basis, you will get slower and fatter. It's simply a matter of time. "

Exactly right. However I'd add that limiting calories does not have to be a deprivation.. I still eat whatever I want, but what I want tends to include a lot of minimally or unprocessed food, fruit, vegetables, grilled proteins, etc. This is trainable just as running is trainable. Spend 3 months eating a clean diet without junk, and the junk will taste absolutely disgusting when you try it again. This makes it easy to not want the junk. There's fast food in my diet still, but not often.

In college days on 40-70mpw I'd be 160 in season, 165 out of season. Now on 10-20mpw it's more like 165 in season, 170 out of season. It is true I do a lot more swimming and weights now, hope that some of that 5lbs may be muscle, but I'm probably deluding myself.

At one point medication added 20lbs which was very discouraging. Trying to cut calories didn't work, I got weak without losing weight. After coming off the meds the weight went away too.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2253845

I remember my mom called me "pudgy" when I was about 13, so I never had the genetics to be super skinny with no effort.

My freshman year of college, at 6'3 I was a very "skinny fat" 175, and then started running seriously at 19 and stayed around 155 throughout college. Since I was doing serious mileage (60-100+), for the first time in my life I could basically eat whatever I wanted without worrying about the consequences, which was awesome.

Right after college, I intentionally went on an eating/weight-lifting binge, put on about 30 pounds within 3-4 months and have mostly been in the 180-200 pound range ever since. I know my metabolism must be decent, due to the fact that even in times of heavy eating/drinking I haven't gone much beyond 195-200, but I don't look or feel great at that weight, and I can see the pudginess showing up in photos. I'm currently in the second week of a month-long plan to get from 190 to 180 while doing significant strength training (including whey and creatine supplements), and doing this sort of thing before has made a huge difference in the way I look and feel, but I feel like I've been going through this cycles of "pretty fit/ripped/in shape" to "just a little heavy/sluggish/slow" on an annual basis for the past decade. And the difference between the two comes mostly down to avoiding or indulging in that extra slice of pizza/beer/whatever street food is available, and working out 5-6 versus 2-3 times per week.

KudzuRunner wrote:

I'm 6'0", or slightly shorter. 13 years ago in 2003, when I started training again seriously at age 45 after 19 years of indifferent jogging, I weighed 175. Over the next four or five years, I slimmed down to 160. My times gradually got faster during that period. I ran my fastest times in 2008-2009 at age 50-51, and I was 163-164.

I've had a tough time remaining healthy and uninjured since then. I got back in good shape in the spring of 2014 and raced a fast 5K (for me) at 165 or so.

Then something happened and I put on 5-7 pounds. It's been very hard to shed them, although if I combine salads with a strict no-booze policy and steady training, I'll slim down.

Something happens around 53.

Can understand being injured, but how do you have a tough time remaining healthy. Health & injuries are generally completely different things.