|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Neil CowardNeil Coward Date: Oct 15, 2006 13:31
I couldn't think where to post this question, but here seemed as good a
place as any so here goes.
In this article http://www.mikementzer.com/bodyfat.html
an MD makes the point that fat has ensured our survival of centuries.
He says
"Not since the end of the Great Depression and World War II has starvation
not been a real possibility. We have about 150,000 generations where
efficient fat storage was essential for survival, and 3-4 generations where
efficient fat storage can lead to obesity"
Seeing as for 150,00 generations fat was so important, why don't women find
fat blokes attractive? Why do they prefer lean, toned males. Surely if fat
has been so essential for our survival for so long, we would have evolved to
find it attractive. From a Darwinian point of view it would be fat male =
plenty of fat storage = survival = a good mate.
Any ideas?
|
| |
|
| | 23 Comments |
|
|
Author: tgtg Date: Oct 15, 2006 16:55
Neil Coward wrote:
> I couldn't think where to post this question, but here seemed as good a
> place as any so here goes.
> In this article http://www.mikementzer.com/bodyfat.html
>
> an MD makes the point that fat has ensured our survival of centuries.
> He says
> "Not since the end of the Great Depression and World War II has starvation
> not been a real possibility. We have about 150,000 generations where
> efficient fat storage was essential for survival, and 3-4 generations where
> efficient fat storage can lead to obesity"
>
> Seeing as for 150,00 generations fat was so important, why don't women find
> fat blokes attractive? Why do they prefer lean, toned males. Surely if fat
> has been so essential for our survival for so long, we would have evolved to
> find it attractive. From a...
|
| Show full article (1.23Kb) |
|
| | 8 Comments |
|
|
Author: Brian FletcherBrian Fletcher Date: Oct 15, 2006 17:37
>I couldn't think where to post this question, but here seemed as good a
>place as any so here goes.
> In this article http://www.mikementzer.com/bodyfat.html
>
> an MD makes the point that fat has ensured our survival of centuries.
> He says
> "Not since the end of the Great Depression and World War II has starvation
> not been a real possibility. We have about 150,000 generations where
> efficient fat storage was essential for survival, and 3-4 generations
> where efficient fat storage can lead to obesity"
>
> Seeing as for 150,00 generations fat was so important, why don't women
> find fat blokes attractive? Why do they prefer lean, toned males. Surely
> if fat has been so essential for our survival for so long, we would have
> evolved to find it attractive. From a Darwinian point of view it would be
> fat male = plenty of fat storage = survival = a good mate.
>
> Any ideas? ...
|
| Show full article (1.81Kb) |
| 2 Comments |
|
|
Author: Brian FletcherBrian Fletcher Date: Oct 15, 2006 17:38
> Neil Coward wrote:
>> I couldn't think where to post this question, but here seemed as good a
>> place as any so here goes.
>> In this article http://www.mikementzer.com/bodyfat.html
>>
>> an MD makes the point that fat has ensured our survival of centuries.
>> He says
>> "Not since the end of the Great Depression and World War II has
>> starvation
>> not been a real possibility. We have about 150,000 generations where
>> efficient fat storage was essential for survival, and 3-4 generations
>> where
>> efficient fat storage can lead to obesity"
>>
>> Seeing as for 150,00 generations fat was so important, why don't women
>> find
>> fat blokes attractive? Why do they prefer lean, toned males. Surely if
>> fat ...
|
| Show full article (1.46Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: AlanSAlanS Date: Oct 15, 2006 20:30
>Any ideas?
You are confusing fat with fat. Fat is good, fat is not.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: SammybabySammybaby Date: Oct 15, 2006 22:31
Neil Coward wrote:
> Seeing as for 150,00 generations fat was so important, why don't women find
> fat blokes attractive? Why do they prefer lean, toned males. Surely if fat
> has been so essential for our survival for so long, we would have evolved to
> find it attractive.
Seems like rich fat old guys are doing just fine out there. If you get
your fat through fast food and cheap beer and form a hard pot belly,
the ladies are quiet. But if its gourmet italian food and fine wines
and etc. forming soft fat all over your body, that's ok.
Does your fat have gold bars backing it up or cheap starch?
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: BORGBORG Date: Oct 15, 2006 22:46
>I couldn't think where to post this question, but here seemed as good a
>place as any so here goes.
> In this article http://www.mikementzer.com/bodyfat.html
>
> an MD makes the point that fat has ensured our survival of centuries.
> He says
> "Not since the end of the Great Depression and World War II has starvation
> not been a real possibility. We have about 150,000 generations where
> efficient fat storage was essential for survival, and 3-4 generations
> where efficient fat storage can lead to obesity"
>
> Seeing as for 150,00 generations fat was so important, why don't women
> find fat blokes attractive? Why do they prefer lean, toned males. Surely
> if fat has been so essential for our survival for so long, we would have
> evolved to find it attractive. From a Darwinian point of view it would be
> fat male = plenty of fat storage = survival = a good mate.
>
> Any ideas? ...
|
| Show full article (1.06Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Neil CowardNeil Coward Date: Oct 16, 2006 02:04
Mike Mentzer had a phenomenal physique but my personal favourite was Frank
Zane.
I presume MMs premature death was related to body building drugs?
"Brian Fletcher" bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:CvAYg.47883$rP1.21594@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
|
| Show full article (2.15Kb) |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Neil CowardNeil Coward Date: Oct 16, 2006 02:05
No, YOUR reasoning is way off.
You say yourself, the more efficiently a male stores fat the less he needs
to hunt.
Isn't this a big genetic plus then?
But no! A woman prefers a guy who can't store fat efficiently and has to be
out there risking his life hunting wild beasts most of the time.
Fat could also be genetically interpreted as this guy is great at hunting
and getting food - just look at the fat he is storing. Mr Lean over there is
obviously crap at hunting, he just manages to get enough to stay alive with
no surplus to build up fat for the lean winter ahead.
"tg" earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1160956558.258321.227960@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...> Neil Coward wrote:
>> I couldn't think where to post this question, but here seemed as good...
|
| Show full article (1.98Kb) |
| 6 Comments |
|
|
|
|
