The Y-Y PARADOX

[Teluguredu]

3 minutes ago, gothamprince said:

Dude you are not a doctor and don't comment on what you don't know leave it for us the doctors to decide

This is one of the best medical journal just google about lancet

What doctor are you?

[gothamprince]

Just now, Teluguredu said:

Whr is most efficient to measure health of a person but not the best physical way for fat percentage 

Skinfold Calipers are usually used in fitness .you can't measure fat in other areas using whr.but problem with calipers is they can't measure visceral fat,but it's okay in fitness as most people don't carry much visceral fat.

We know about skin fold calipers which is tested at the triceps which is not routinely practiced in hospital settings

[Teluguredu]

3 minutes ago, gothamprince said:

Lol you know nothing about human body , into bodybuilding doesn't equate to a degree in medicine , don't expose your stupidity herey

You are stupid idiot who doesn't know about 9% bodyfat looks like.

People not involved in fitness profession don't get into 9% bodyfat.

 

[gothamprince]

1 minute ago, Teluguredu said:

What doctor are you?

I am a junior resident in internal medicine 

[gothamprince]

Just now, Teluguredu said:

You are stupid idiot who doesn't know about 9% bodyfat looks like.

People not involved in fitness profession don't get into 9% bodyfat.

 

Again stupid it is medical journal lancet and it is peer reviewed idiot, no body publishes false data in the reputed journals so again you are idiot in medical knowledge, just stick to your profession 

[Teluguredu]

1 minute ago, gothamprince said:

Again stupid it is medical journal lancet and it is peer reviewed idiot, no body publishes false data in the reputed journals so again you are idiot in medical knowledge, just stick to your profession 

It's stupid either way 9% bodyfat for a guy with greater than 40 years is unhealthy even if he has 9% bodyfat.

 

Anyone with basic knowledge can tell you noone gets below 10% bodyfat without being into professional fitness.

[gothamprince]

Just now, Teluguredu said:

It's stupid either way 9% bodyfat for a guy with greater than 40 years is unhealthy even if he has 9% bodyfat.

 

Anyone with basic knowledge can tell you noone gets below 10% bodyfat without being into professional fitness.

I already stated he is a marathon runner read my post lol , anyone can't  just simply comment about medicine lol , there are lot of factors other than just simple body fat percentage , you can't simply say less than 10% is unhealthy, just leave the health aspect to us , you need to just follow the doctor not teach him because you know nothing 

[Teluguredu]

13 minutes ago, gothamprince said:

I already stated he is a marathon runner read my post lol , anyone can't  just simply comment about medicine lol , there are lot of factors other than just simple body fat percentage , you can't simply say less than 10% is unhealthy, just leave the health aspect to us , you need to just follow the doctor not teach him because you know nothing 

What factors are there ,tell me.for dangerously low body fat.

[Teluguredu]

18 minutes ago, gothamprince said:

I already stated he is a marathon runner read my post lol , anyone can't  just simply comment about medicine lol , there are lot of factors other than just simple body fat percentage , you can't simply say less than 10% is unhealthy, just leave the health aspect to us , you need to just follow the doctor not teach him because you know nothing 

Casual marathon runners don't get to 9% percent body fat.

 

This is how 9% bodyfat looks like.you can see striations .

[gothamprince]

Just now, Teluguredu said:

What factors are there ,tell me .

There is central fat distribution and peripheral fat distribution and risk for heart disease is more in central fat distribution than peripheral fat distribution and type of fat and cholesterol levels that is HDL and LDL and their ratio and apolipoprotein levels and the condition of plaque in the coronary arteries which  can classified into stable and unstable plaque , and there is lot more which can't simply be covered in this thread 

[gothamprince]

Just now, Teluguredu said:

Casual marathon runners don't get to 9% percent body fat.

 

This is how 9% bodyfat looks like.

Again it is measured in the hospital and verified and then published in the journal, one don't publish false data in the reputed journal like lancet 

[gothamprince]

2 minutes ago, Teluguredu said:

Casual marathon runners don't get to 9% percent body fat.

 

This is how 9% bodyfat looks like.

Again saying don't teach medicine to a doctor, your lifetime is not sufficient to teach us medicine 

[Teluguredu]

7 minutes ago, gothamprince said:

There is central fat distribution and peripheral fat distribution and risk for heart disease is more in central fat distribution than peripheral fat distribution and type of fat and cholesterol levels that is HDL and LDL and their ratio and apolipoprotein levels and the condition of plaque in the coronary arteries which  can classified into stable and unstable plaque , and there is lot more which can't simply be covered in this thread 

What are you smoking lol , I asked about dangerously low fat percent ,you are giving the answer for risks of higher body fat percent.

[gothamprince]

Just now, Teluguredu said:

What are you smoking lol , I asked about dangerously low fat percent ,you are giving the answer for risks of higher body fat percent.

You are smoking lol there are no obvious risks for low fat percentage compared to high fat percentage, too low fat percentage can affect heart by causing bradycardia that is slow heart and can reduce cardiac output but the value mentioned above is perfectly fine , literally perfectly healthy for that fat percentage, and too low percentage can affect immunity but it is more of muscle wasting which affects immunity than fat percentage 

[Teluguredu]

6 minutes ago, gothamprince said:

Again saying don't teach medicine to a doctor, your lifetime is not sufficient to teach us medicine 

You are pilla doctor who haven't even done some speciality ,you barely know anything about this stuff ,you are just writing some random b.s instead of answering what I have asked.

The doctor was dead in 1995 which means the measurements were probably taken in 1970's or 1980 when dxa scans weren't even used for body fat measurements .you could have simply said that there might have been some errors cause of that ,but the hypothesis still stands instead of writing bullshit.