Comparison of two people. Health Related Diet comparison, mature people only please.

[xbadkarmax]

First of all, I do not want immature people replying to this, if your balls havent dropped yet like kallubadshaah then please don't reply.

Here is a comparison of two peoples lifestyles, which would be healthier.. and why. they BOTH have a calorie limit of 2000

Person 1:

Is underweight.. and eats under 2000 calories a day, so he does not gain weight. BUT those calories come from half decent food and sweets and fatty foods.

Person 2:

Is just as overweight as person 1 is underweight.. eats above 2000 calories a day, so he gains weight. BUT those calories come from very healthy food and follows the food pyramid but with bigger proportions. SO his fat is just an excess of good calories.


WHICH person is better off? you would suspect person 1 is because he is not fat, but person 2 follows a better lifestyle and seems healthier in those regards.. please explain what you think.

[DJDaNGeR]

First of all, I do not want immature people replying to this, if your balls havent dropped yet like kallubadshaah then please don't reply.

Here is a comparison of two peoples lifestyles, which would be healthier.. and why. they BOTH have a calorie limit of 2000

Person 1:

Is underweight.. and eats under 2000 calories a day, so he does not gain weight. BUT those calories come from half decent food and sweets and fatty foods.

Person 2:

Is just as overweight as person 1 is underweight.. eats above 2000 calories a day, so he gains weight. BUT those calories come from very healthy food and follows the food pyramid but with bigger proportions. SO his fat is just an excess of good calories.


WHICH person is better off? you would suspect person 1 is because he is not fat, but person 2 follows a better lifestyle and seems healthier in those regards.. please explain what you think.

the underweight person burns of all the calories so no gain in weight. the overweight one although following a healthy diet, eats excess calories. (if u are gaining weight it means that u are eating more than u are losing). excess weight is unhealthy. it causes more problems than udnerweight unless of course the person is excessively underweight and malnourished (with 2000 calories ths doesnt seem to be the case)

[xbadkarmax]

but wouldnt the underweight person still have a very clogged up system because of his poor eating habits?

the overweight person still seems to have a clean internal system right?

[Ranii123]

hmm i would think person 1... do u have like an acutal answer that gives facts as to why?

[xbadkarmax]

i dont have a real answer buuut.. ive read/heard person 1 is unhealthier because he does not have the nutrients in his body to be healthy and his arteries are still more clogged cause of bad food resulting in stuff in the long run.. i just wonder what conclusions people will come up with

[Ranii123]

oh ok.. i was thinkin the overweight person was really fat

[xbadkarmax]

overweight in the sense ooof being far from normal as far as the underweight person would be far from normal.. like if the skinny guy was 10 pounds under then the fatty would be 10 pnds over lol

[ladoo ram]

i think person 1 who eats under 2000 n is underweight is better off than over weight coz 1 can allways gain but its hard to reduce n get all sorts of problems like blockage n stuff

[xbadkarmax]

but person 2 wouldnt have blockages if the fat is from good sources right? see thats my conufusion

[Ranii123]

overweight in the sense ooof being far from normal as far as the underweight person would be far from normal.. like if the skinny guy was 10 pounds under then the fatty would be 10 pnds over lol


haha oh ok so if the fat guys reallyyy fat the skinny guys probably like invisable

[methodman535]

half decent food and sweets and fatty foods <--- First of all this doesnt really tell much. "half decent" could mean anything. Sweets...well it could be fruits or fruit juice. And fats...well a person can DIE if they dont get fat. And wtf is underweight? What matters is the bodyfat ratio not the amount of flesh on your bones. Person #1 sounds like he would be healthier.


And also they have done experiments on animals that prove, if animals are undefed persiodically instead of allowed to eat whenever they live 30% longer.

So person #1 should be healthier.

[xbadkarmax]

haha oh ok so if the fat guys reallyyy fat the skinny guys probably like invisable

then I must be invisibile :nervious: <testing if smiley works here

[xbadkarmax]

half decent food and sweets and fatty foods <--- First of all this doesnt really tell much. "half decent" could mean anything. Sweets...well it could be fruits or fruit juice. And fats...well a person can DIE if they dont get fat. And wtf is underweight? What matters is the bodyfat ratio not the amount of flesh on your bones. Person #1 sounds like he would be healthier.


And also they have done experiments on animals that prove, if animals are undefed persiodically instead of allowed to eat whenever they live 30% longer.

So person #1 should be healthier.


sorry , i did not get too detailed as most posters wouldn't care for it BUT your right from your interpretations.. but animal testing.. doesn't always correlate to humans but I'm sure in this case it probably does?

[miss_qupid]

First of all, I do not want immature people replying to this, if your balls havent dropped yet like kallubadshaah then please don't reply.

Here is a comparison of two peoples lifestyles, which would be healthier.. and why. they BOTH have a calorie limit of 2000

Person 1:

Is underweight.. and eats under 2000 calories a day, so he does not gain weight. BUT those calories come from half decent food and sweets and fatty foods.

Person 2:

Is just as overweight as person 1 is underweight.. eats above 2000 calories a day, so he gains weight. BUT those calories come from very healthy food and follows the food pyramid but with bigger proportions. SO his fat is just an excess of good calories.


WHICH person is better off? you would suspect person 1 is because he is not fat, but person 2 follows a better lifestyle and seems healthier in those regards.. please explain what you think.
Fistly being overweight doesnt always mean being unhealthy. To me it seems the first has an unhealthy diet, its not about the consumption of calorie that determines health and weight there are many other variables, such as the amount of sugar intake, about of saturated and unsaturated fats, fibre , proteins...etc.

[Ac89]

let's see person 1...most likely his body already has a set weight set and so it's a lot harder for him to gain weight...and so his body will store some of the calories he eats from those sweets and non healthy foods, while the rest will be flushed out of his system.

Person # 2 is most likely to store a lot of those calories than person # 1...because unlike the underweight person, this person's got to have a lot more stored up...and you didn't mention excercise...so we'll assume that neither exercises....so, with person # 2, you're more likely to see most of these foods kept in his body...but for good reason. Because he eats well his body will take in more of the stuff you need...like fats, calories, carb's, proteins...etc...where person # 1 will have none of this.

If it came down to looking into the future...person # 1 is going to have to eat a lot more to gain weight...because his body will have to adjust really badly ... especially if he wants to put on weight...and not loose it.
Person # 2...obviously...will lose the weight...so with sufficient exercise and a good healthy regime...he will lose it and most likely have a 6 pac.

I'd agree with the fact that Person # 2 is more healthier. However, it seems that you're only looking at one day's meals...you'd have to examine both eating habits for a period of time to really know who's better off health wise.

[methodman535]

sorry , i did not get too detailed as most posters wouldn't care for it BUT your right from your interpretations.. but animal testing.. doesn't always correlate to humans but I'm sure in this case it probably does?



It does. Theres even one guy who wrote a book about it, he fucked himself up by drinking and pigging out and smoking all his life. He almost was dead at the age of 40 according to his physicians he wasnt gunna live very much longer, then one of the docs suggested undereating to him. It worked and the guy lived to the age of 97. Whenever he stopped undereating and started pigging out he would get weaker and sicker. Eventually he wrote a book also, translated into dozens of languages and yeah..theres other people that corraborate that too.

Also look at fasting, everyone knows fasting cleanses the system and makes you healthier...logically overeating and binging do the opposite.

[xbadkarmax]

hm i see, but in this case i just meant if the guy over ate.. but only in terms of healthy food by following the food pyramid BUT in slightly bigger serving sizes.. that way he would go over his caloric intake and put on fat but , they would be from good sources .. what would happen then?

[xbadkarmax]

let's see person 1...most likely his body already has a set weight set and so it's a lot harder for him to gain weight...and so his body will store some of the calories he eats from those sweets and non healthy foods, while the rest will be flushed out of his system.

Person # 2 is most likely to store a lot of those calories than person # 1...because unlike the underweight person, this person's got to have a lot more stored up...and you didn't mention excercise...so we'll assume that neither exercises....so, with person # 2, you're more likely to see most of these foods kept in his body...but for good reason. Because he eats well his body will take in more of the stuff you need...like fats, calories, carb's, proteins...etc...where person # 1 will have none of this.

If it came down to looking into the future...person # 1 is going to have to eat a lot more to gain weight...because his body will have to adjust really badly ... especially if he wants to put on weight...and not loose it.
Person # 2...obviously...will lose the weight...so with sufficient exercise and a good healthy regime...he will lose it and most likely have a 6 pac.

I'd agree with the fact that Person # 2 is more healthier. However, it seems that you're only looking at one day's meals...you'd have to examine both eating habits for a period of time to really know who's better off health wise.

consider that both of them have their eating habits similar to the one i wrote out during that day, and the exercise level would be equal.. whether it be none at all, or moderate .. based on the food and quality of food and the amount from person one to two, which would you suspect lives longer

[Ac89]

consider that both of them have their eating habits similar to the one i wrote out during that day, and the exercise level would be equal.. whether it be none at all, or moderate .. based on the food and quality of food and the amount from person one to two, which would you suspect lives longer


i'd say # 1 lives longer...because there's no way he's going to gain any more weight...the body thinks it doesn' need it ...so it all goes to waste...person #2's body doesn't know anymore...so it'll jsut store more of it...

because # 2 is overweight, despite the food that he eats, he/she is more in danger of being affected by something like obesity, cholestrol level...stress..pressure is more likely to have more negative effects on this body than the first one...there's so many problems with being overweight.
but as i mentioned before, it would depend on how long they continue to eat like this..and whether one chooses to change his/her lifestyle.

what do u think??? what's your answer in all thsi?

[methodman535]

hm i see, but in this case i just meant if the guy over ate.. but only in terms of healthy food by following the food pyramid BUT in slightly bigger serving sizes.. that way he would go over his caloric intake and put on fat but , they would be from good sources .. what would happen then?

It would still fuck him up more than the undereater. Reason being that the food pyramid is built on grains, not veggies. A lot depends on WHAT the 2nd guy eats, the US food pyramid is just bullshit, its responsible for doubling the rate of type II diabetes and obesity between 1990 and 2002. I can guarantee you that the #2 guy is eating abour 40% more junk than he needs, and its taxing his system slowly. The #1 guy is gettin all the nutrition he needs from his food and his body is recycling stuff better, in the long run he will be healthier.

And calories dont mean jack really....calories from denatured, overcooked meat protein are very very unhealthy compared to calories from steamed veggies or boiled whole durum wheat spagetti for example.

[xbadkarmax]

i'd say # 1 lives longer...because there's no way he's going to gain any more weight...the body thinks it doesn' need it ...so it all goes to waste...person #2's body doesn't know anymore...so it'll jsut store more of it...

because # 2 is overweight, despite the food that he eats, he/she is more in danger of being affected by something like obesity, cholestrol level...stress..pressure is more likely to have more negative effects on this body than the first one...there's so many problems with being overweight.
but as i mentioned before, it would depend on how long they continue to eat like this..and whether one chooses to change his/her lifestyle.

what do u think??? what's your answer in all thsi?

I would agree that person 2 would have problems with pressure and cholestorol from the excess weight.. regardless where it came from... BUT wouldnt the thin person also obtain a bad chol. level as well ? I've heard a doctor saying this as well.. that his internal system would be corrupted in that sense due to the foods eaten.. but I think your still right, person 2 would die faster.. but consider that if person one was 10 pounds underweight, then person 2 would be 10 pounds overweight and that the amount would not varry as the food taken in doesnt either, but i guess this contradicts if the food amount stays the same, then the weight fluctuates if person 2 eats a certain amount over the limit, then the weight will go up by that amount steadily..

.. lol .. shAt

[xbadkarmax]

It would still fuck him up more than the undereater. Reason being that the food pyramid is built on grains, not veggies. A lot depends on WHAT the 2nd guy eats, the US food pyramid is just bullshit, its responsible for doubling the rate of type II diabetes and obesity between 1990 and 2002. I can guarantee you that the #2 guy is eating abour 40% more junk than he needs, and its taxing his system slowly. The #1 guy is gettin all the nutrition he needs from his food and his body is recycling stuff better, in the long run he will be healthier.

And calories dont mean jack really....calories from denatured, overcooked meat protein are very very unhealthy compared to calories from steamed veggies or boiled whole durum wheat spagetti for example.

point proven. type 2 diabetes and obesity goes hand in hand. also about the part that the second person gets more junk then he needs because he is storing that fat. BUT can you be sure that person 1 gets all the nutrition he needs from his food?

but all in all your right, especially about the latter paragraph.

[Aurovon]

Good post Pratik.

[xbadkarmax]

Good post Pratik.

thanks auro, hows your training going? .. also im curious to what you think about this topic.. cause frankly, I actually am very interested to know what would actually promote a longer life.

[Aurovon]

thanks auro, hows your training going? .. also im curious to what you think about this topic.. cause frankly, I actually am very interested to know what would actually promote a longer life.

It's ok. Could always be better. Honestly I don't know for sure which person is better off..but seems like the underweight person would be. remember the village people...

[xbadkarmax]

It's ok. Could always be better. Honestly I don't know for sure which person is better off..but seems like the underweight person would be. remember the village people...

oh ya, but i always thought they died younger?

[Aurovon]

oh ya, but i always thought they died younger?

hmm im not sure. jeez this is hard.

[methodman535]

oh ya, but i always thought they died younger?

I dunno where you got the idea or the stats to say that underweight people die younger. Ok look at this. On TV whenever I see centenarians, which means old people who are confirmed 100 years or older, I see their body as being underweight. Not normal, not obese, but wasted looking...thin....underweight. Not one 100+ year old have I see who is not underweight. Each and every one, man or woman, has been underweight.

[xbadkarmax]

your right in that sense.. it was just my mistake to think they died younger, I wasn't sure at all :). I just assumed they died from other problems disregarding this topic

[caramelcutie15]

i've heard that 1 is unhealthier too..well i don't know..cause this comparison is the two extremes.. i had with a anorexic skinny girl..and a average looking girl...and doctors prefer to say that the average looking girl is well off healthwise.. dont know if it helps but yea

[anjie*]

ummmm both .... neither of them r helpin themselves... they seem to be at opposite ends of da spectrum

[sensousglitter]

I would have to say the second person would be better off...

1. If a thin person's diet compromises of fatty/sweet foods, his insides are probably worse-off than the healthy-eating fat person.
2. Some people tend to gain weight quicker than others, but gaining weight eating healthy stuff is not exactly bad, it could be alot of muscle weight.
3. Genetics plays a huge part in being pre-disposed to gaining weight quicker, so the fat person could be really healthy, as in fit and eating well.

But then again, eating too much of any of the food groups is just as harmful, as eating less of them. Mal-nourished people have just as much problems and diseases as over-weight people, such as rickets, or being aneamic. The thin person isn't probably getting all the nutrients they need which is just as harmful.

[methodman535]

ummmm both .... neither of them r helpin themselves... they seem to be at opposite ends of da spectrum
Yeah they are both screwed up diet wise. If a third person existed, who ate balanced meals AND who underate rather than stuffing himself and was thin and underweight lookin, then that person would clearly be the healthiest. These two are kinda dubious yep.

[methodman535]

ummmm both .... neither of them r helpin themselves... they seem to be at opposite ends of da spectrum


But the underfed one is at the better end of the spectrum. They have done so many animal experiments. Rats, Drosphilia, cats, dogs and overwhelmingly they found that calorie restriction always resulted in healthier bodies and longer life. If you notice, animals in the wild NEVER eat unless they are hungry, NEVER! Even if you look at cows chewing in fields they are not really chomping on new grass but are chewing cud.

The recently did an experiment on flies, removed genes from them to make them less able to process carbs into glucose...they found the ones that could do that the least lived twice as long as the ones perfectly able to digest carbs! Fruit flies are genetically the closest to humans from what I have heard..or really a lot closer than they should be maybe someone can elaborate.