How to be fat?

The max ive been is 10.5 stone 66kg

I think it would be good, if you could get the weight back there. I don't really know you or what your situation is, but 54kg is too low regardless.

I would recommend you start doing little bit of some exercising, not too much, but little bit of something like bodyweight exercises and up the calories significantly. No need to change everything in one day, but start upping those calories gradually and move a little bit :)
 
Yep, move away from the keyboard and start eating bacon sandwiches for breakfast.

For comparison, I think I'm skinny; 178cm and about 75kg. Shorter and a lot heavier.
 
For comparison, I think I'm skinny; 178cm and about 75kg. Shorter and a lot heavier.


I was so thin when I weighted ~76Kg about 5 years ago. To get to that weight I'd definitely need to lose a lot of the muscle I have now.
My ideal weight is probably on the 80-something Kg. Definitely not my current 90Kg, but I'm sure it'd be above 78Kg or so.
And I'm even shorter than you.
 
I quite like my weight, I wouldn't want to be heavier unless I was a bit more toned.

I personally find slim attractive. My partner is exactly my height and she weighs a fair amount less than I do. Yay me.

(I'm 36)
 
I quite like my weight, I wouldn't want to be heavier unless I was a bit more toned.

I personally find slim attractive. My partner is exactly my height and she weighs a fair amount less than I do. Yay me.

I don't doubt you are :D I was just reinforcing the idea that different body types == different expectations regarding healthy/attractive height/weight ratios.
 
Because I'm so thin



Depends on how old you are. If you're young, wait till about 28-year-old


Fat? Why would you want to be fat?

Do you just mean big? You should strive to gain weight in muscles rather than fat. And that takes a bit of work, but it's not as impossible as you think.

If you're completely skinny you need to train to gain both, possibly it's only physically possible to gain both - I think fat is an ingredient of muscle? Anyway if you get bigger then the ratio of fat to bone increases.
Quite long ago : I had a body fat ratio of 5%, and two or three monthes of weightlifting later I was at 7.5% I believe (from the inaccurate and unscientific machine that measures it when you step your feet on it anyway). According to paper sheets hanging on a wall, below 8% is morbid.

PS : no need to wait at all for that, on the contrary :D. 28-30 year-old would be when a bit of useles fat may accumulate by doing nothing (and eating a lot, including a lot of processed food)

PPS : no idea what my body fat % is now, it is way up.
 
Last edited:
Gotta love them charts... Specially the ones comparing our bodies with an average taken from different racial types...

Racial statistics are forbidden in my country so this cracks me up.

What's more, with the subject at hand if you wish to collect good so-called "racial" data you will have look for people and take body measures of them with calipers like a goddamn 19th century "explorator" :LOL:

I think a general problem is BMI is incredibly simplistic and lame. And if you're fat, you may lower your BMI by losing muscle and be worse off but with a lower weight and BMI.
 
I work in clinical research and the only country (that I'm aware of) that you can't collect race data for is France. I don't know whether that affects what's being mentioned above though.
 
I work in clinical research and the only country (that I'm aware of) that you can't collect race data for is France.
A good thing overall most likely, since humans are quite inbred on the whole, with very low genetic diversity compared to many animals (just look at what we've done to dogs for a simple example).

Also, there is just ONE race of humans at the moment, and all of us belong to it. Trying to ascribe physical attributes to a non-existing concept (separate races) would just inject noise into your data, and conclusions drawn from said data would be largely bunk, since we're rather genetically uniform and variations would thus be mostly due to cultural/physiological factors, not genetic...
 
I was thinking about African blacks : they're all skinny like boys, right? Or they're all big, fat and muscular. And those from the "Isles" (Carribean or Indian Ocean) look different to me. So I'm making up three "races" already, perhaps I don't know what I'm doing. I will put northern Europeans that are all nearly 2 meters tall in their own race.

The stereotype of the very thin Asian seems to hold, but there are a very few exceptions : Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Un and a cook pissed off by the bad guys and good guys fighting everywhere on their way in a martial arts movie.
 
A good thing overall most likely, since humans are quite inbred on the whole, with very low genetic diversity compared to many animals (just look at what we've done to dogs for a simple example).

Also, there is just ONE race of humans at the moment, and all of us belong to it. Trying to ascribe physical attributes to a non-existing concept (separate races) would just inject noise into your data, and conclusions drawn from said data would be largely bunk, since we're rather genetically uniform and variations would thus be mostly due to cultural/physiological factors, not genetic...
I've never known any studies to actually analyse race data, it's generally used for patient identification or simply kept in the demographics datasets / case report forms just because it always has been.

It's actually quite interesting how different countries handle demographics; FDA suggests the collection of race and ethnicity (i.e., is the patient Hispanic or Latino), I presented at an investigator meeting in Spain a few years back for a US based client (investigative sites were US and EU). I distinctly remember how offended the investigators were when it was suggested that their ethnicity question should be marked as Hispanic or Latino for patients of Spanish descent, suggesting it didn't apply to them. Unfortunately this is exactly as the FDA mandates.

So I think France handle the situation very well; don't capture the details on race or ethnicity, they're not required anyway. If you report these details you will fail ethics approval. The German data protection laws are very good too, they essentially started the limitations of patient identifying variables, like initials, and the rest if the world is beginning to follow suit (even Canada do now).

The US and the UK are poor when it comes to patient identifying variables.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was thinking about African blacks : they're all skinny like boys, right? Or they're all big, fat and muscular.

What about white Europeans; they're all skinny like boys, or they're all big, fat and muscular.

I don't see the difference.
 
Back
Top