I'm sure that loading up on protein and working out to the extent that you
would be considered a "muscle man/woman" is not a good idea if your goal is
maximum life span. All that extra "work" is sure to cause additional wear
and tear. Not to mention all the extra oxygenation that you will subject
your body to (oxygen is a killer).
But a diet low in fat, high in nutrients and a consistent program of
moderate exercise is sure to do a body good. Being stronger makes life that
Learn how your computer can earn you money while you sleep!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Atkins" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2000 8:48 PM
Subject: Re: i do not understand: exercise
> There are definite advantages to high heartrate aerobic exercise, say 5
> times a week for 45 minutes or so. Keep ya from having one of those
> heart attacks :-) As for going for the muscle-bound superman look I am not
> so sure of any benefits from that unless you are a leader of some
> and have to look good in public. I fear that all the extra calories burned
> to keep that muscle mass happy may actually reduce your lifespan slightly.
> Andy Toth wrote:
> > if there is an optimum amount of muscle use, food-energy conversion,
> > neural activity for an individual (based on the individual's current
> > genetic structure and averaged environment). and that this activity is
> > regulated and "matched" via homeostasis (and other support mechanism)
> > via the average environment, what is the purpose of exercise? is it
> > an overextension? a bank/buffer? a counteraction? what would be the
> > advantage of producing an individual with excessive muscle (or quality
> > 1001), where, the individual does not require muscle in the normal
> > environment. is energy being wasted through investment and
> > maintenance? (perhaps i am modeling this after cerebral ectomorphs).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:21 MDT