Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Intended for constructive conversations. Exhibits of polarizing tribalism will be deleted.
7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@IlliniDave: Of course heart disease is worthy of continued attention vs. skeletal fragility for the population in general. However, if you are an individual with known low risk factors for heart disease then you might want to throw greater consideration to your risk factors for skeletal fragility. Most of the heart disease risk associated with BMI is due to the mechanism by which central body obesity is linked to hypertension, blood lipids, and glucose processing. There is some remaining risk after correcting for presence/absence of these factors, but it is less than, for instance, the risk of eating a diet low in fruits and vegetables. A 22 year old man's baseline blood pressure is a better predictor of likelihood of death from CVD than the BMI of a 50 year old female. All of the remaining risk for heart disease due to BMI, after correction for known related factors, can be better predicted with waistline measure. The most conservative practice, even for somebody with no other known risk factors, would be to maintain a waist-measure of less than 31.5 if female, and less than 37 if male. There is no known health benefit to reducing your BMI beyond the level necessary to achieve this waist-measure, if you have no other confounding factors.

I am not as curvy as Iskra, so my waist-measure hits this level (magically!) right around the point where my BMI is at the top of healthy range (167 lbs. approximately.) If I was not old and lazy, and exerted myself to train as much as Iskra, I could probably achieve perfectly (not just reasonably) healthy statistics at a BMI that was classified as overweight. Ergo, I am irked by suggestions for unscientific K.I.S.S. basis for insurance rate assessment which is really nothing but a cookie-eater "vice" tax. I have never heard anybody suggest that insurance risk pools should be segregated by baseline blood pressure readings taken at age 22.

I am rather curious. Are the Crossfit upper/lower body differentials gender differentiated? I am apparently too lazy to actually attempt, but I was rather fascinated by Brett Contreras' take on great capacity for increasing female lower body strength.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3845
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by IlliniDave »

Okay, so I got confused when you said "society" focuses too much... rather than "people with certain risk factors"

I don't know if the ratio of lower body loads to upper body loads vary between men and women in the programming philosophy (when they can be isolated). Much of the lifting (e.g., the Olympic lifts and variants) requires you to recruit power from your lower body even when the goal is to get a weight overhead, so the weight is just the weight. I would guess if you had something where a workout rotated between squats and bench press (both being mainly about generating force in one half of the body) the ratios might be different, truth is I never paid attention. One thing to note is many, maybe most, people doing Crossfit scale workouts individually, so even if the "prescribed" workout had too much upper body load for a given athlete, they could adjust it to fit their present physiology (there relative conditioning as well as their size -- A woman who is 5'2", 110# probably won't use the same weight as a woman who is 5'9" and 160# in most workouts).

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

Right, the clean and jerk does not have enough differential between upper and lower body strength to be ideal for hip fracture prevention. Also, I don't like the appearance of the females who excel at Olympic lifting compared to the females in Taschen's "Big Butt Book." Of course, I would like to have my cake, eat it too, and not even have to pay for it in the first place, if possible.

black_son_of_gray
Posts: 504
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 7:39 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by black_son_of_gray »

The clean and jerk uses a fair amount of "upper body" - if by that you mean 'above the waist'. Deep core muscles and the whole back are definitely involved. Once the weight moves past the thighs on the way up, the lifter actually pulls themselves with their upper body under the bar. Similarly, after liftoff from the dip of the jerk, the lifter is essentially pressing themselves under the bar, followed by lots of upper back and shoulders during the recovery to standing position. This upper body work is less apparent in novice lifters who lift less than their body weight, but makes a lot of sense the heavier the bar gets - if the bar weighs more than you, it is easier to push/pull yourself relative to the bar than vice versa. </rant>

Olympic lifts are great for developing a sense of balance, posture/body positioning, and core stability - all things that should help prevent falls in the first place.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3845
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by IlliniDave »

If you do them right (cleans, jerks, or snatches) you're never pushing weight up with your arms, just holding it with arms locked. Find a video and watch how they do it--they use their legs and hips mostly (shoulders shrug a little on a clean or snatch) to get the bar moving up then while it's ascending they lower their body under the bar (rather than shoving the weight overhead with their arms). So from a physics perspective, virtually all the work is done by the legs and hips, very little by the arms and shoulders. Seems like a decent proxy for independently working out lower body with more weight and upper body w/less.

That seems odd that a weak upper body with a powerful lower body is better than a strong upper body and a powerful lower body. for bone density. If a certain "not athletic" appearance is desired, maybe Oly lifts are bad. They're only good if you want to maintain strength, flexibility, and bone density in your hips, legs, and core, and you'll wind up lloking like what you need to look like to achieve those things. I also wouldn't judge Olympic lifting by the appearance the girls who compete in the Olympics, unless you'd be apt make it a full time occupation. Learning the motions with light or moderate loads won't reshape ones body very much. But I understand it's not an endeavor for everyone. And I'm veering off topic which is not polite to everyone that wants to talk about legislated healthcare!

ETA: BSOG is right, when you progress up to serious weights, body weight or higher, any imperfection in form is magnified, and at the edge of your abilities it is difficult to stabalize and get up out of the squat (or split). I was speaking more to the "Crossfit-style" approach to Oly lifts where typically much lighter loads are used on the bar and more reps take the place of single lifts slinging max weights (Crossfit does do that occasionally, but not too often). Although it is amazing how easy a really big weight can fly overhead on those rare occasions everything is perfect in your form.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

@black-son-of-gray: Yeah, but you never know when you are going to hit a puddle of water your sister's dogs spilled in the middle of the night or a slick of ice on the sidewalk when you have a cup of coffee in your hand. Then you find yourself very happy to have something like unto springy mattress attached to your tailbone. At the weight I can lift above my head safely, the clean and jerk seems like almost zero exercise for my lower body. I can not imagine why I would want to be able to lift my body weight over my head, although I have been rather awestruck on the occasions when others have lifted my body weight over their heads.

@IlliniDave: Maybe I haven't done them right when attempted, but the arm part is much more difficult for me. I have never broken a bone, so I'm not super worried about bone density yet either. However, I do intend to continue to eat as much full fat yogurt and sweet potatoes as I desire. I spent almost nothing on either health insurance or health care in the last year, so I really shouldn't complain. However, everybody I know is appalled that I didn't seek treatment for my facial paralysis, so I am obviously an outlier of some sort.

classical_Liberal
Posts: 2283
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 6:05 am

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by classical_Liberal »

...
Last edited by classical_Liberal on Thu Feb 04, 2021 11:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by BRUTE »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Wed May 17, 2017 9:07 pm
At the weight I can lift above my head safely, the clean and jerk seems like almost zero exercise for my lower body. I can not imagine why I would want to be able to lift my body weight over my head, although I have been rather awestruck on the occasions when others have lifted my body weight over their heads.
brute cleans & jerks much more weight than he can "lift overhead", if lifting overhead is defined as a slow, upper-body-only pressing movement (press, strict press, military press). that's the nature of the lift - using the lower body and technique, it allows much higher loads to be lifted overhead.

as an example, brute can jerk about 200lbs overhead. brute can not press 200lbs overhead. not even close.

but if the goal is simply improving lower body strength in elderly human females from non-existent to good enough, the clean & jerk is probably not necessary. bodyweight squats and lunges are easier, safer, don't require equipment, and probably provide enough stimulus. even after that, regular back squats are a more foundational movement.

the main benefit of the olympic lifts (c&j, snatch) over the slower powerlifting moves (squatz, deadz) isn't in strength per se, but in power and explosiveness. brute also finds the c&j the most functional of all the moves he's ever performed in a gym - it allows him to lift regular day to day items to hip and overhead level easily, with safe technique.

black_son_of_gray
Posts: 504
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 7:39 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by black_son_of_gray »

@7w5: I see your point - no exercise can prepare you for everything. I must say, though, about the springy mattress - when I was doing lots of squats, my backside got to the point where buying pants that fit was a nontrivial problem. About as good fall protection as I think I'll ever have.

It's not always the exercise itself that directly matters- often the myriad fringe benefits end up being more useful in unexpected situations. E.g. having a generous "cushioning", being limber, developing quicker or more accurate reflexes, balance. Basically, if you expand your operating range through training, the more likely any given curve-ball life throws at you will stay within that range. For most people, that will mean focusing on the things you are worse at rather than developing any given physical trait to excellence.

halfmoon
Posts: 697
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 10:19 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by halfmoon »

Riggerjack wrote:
Tue May 16, 2017 8:16 pm
I am 7.5 years older than my wife. Actuarial tables make it very clear that odds of me out living her are very slim. When those late life decisions need to be made, those years left in her life will be a much higher priority than any additional months in mine.
Ah, Riggerjack...you remind me of my DH (21 years older than I). I know your motives are extremely unselfish, though it's not so clear-cut. I'm projecting here, but I'm going to go ahead and assume that you're the center of your wife's life. Switch places for a moment, because it's clear that you love her deeply. If her long-term existence is threatened in the (overwhelmingly common) absence of certain imminent death, I'm pretty sure you'll do and pay what it takes to keep her alive. She would undoubtedly do the same for you. That's how it will go regardless of avowed intention, unless of course one of you is terminal and in pain.

It's not easy to let go, and it's often not a dramatic one-time choice. More of a slow attrition.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3845
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by IlliniDave »

BRUTE wrote:
Wed May 17, 2017 9:54 pm


the main benefit of the olympic lifts (c&j, snatch) over the slower powerlifting moves (squatz, deadz) isn't in strength per se, but in power and explosiveness. brute also finds the c&j the most functional of all the moves he's ever performed in a gym - it allows him to lift regular day to day items to hip and overhead level easily, with safe technique.
I would add flexibility, coordination, and balance. Not sure those movements are great for the elderly per se, but probably good for midlifers who want to preserve physical ability longer and prevent injury from falls and the like in out years.

Clean/jerk is also the perfect movement to practice for lifting a double-wide garage door after one of the counterbalance springs breaks. I amazed my neighbor!

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

Well, my limiting factor on performing clean&jerk at the moment, is 3rd world, not 1st world health problem. I keep picking up healthy kid bugs from my grubby little recently immigrated students. I am currently suffering from acute bronchitis and viral pink eye. I may have to choose to bring the "join the Peace Corps" phase of my-do-my-20s-in-my-40s/50s lifestyle plan to an end sooner than anticipated.
black_son_of_gray wrote:For most people, that will mean focusing on the things you are worse at rather than developing any given physical trait to excellence.
True. What I am worst at in the moment is dealing with chagrin after recent viewing of video of myself riding away upon a bicycle and the tiresomeness of endlessly coughing up green sputum. However, I cheered myself up by teaching myself how to butt-clap, so now if I so choose, I can make myself totally ridiculous and offensive at wedding receptions when I am 80. I hate getting old.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3845
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by IlliniDave »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Wed May 17, 2017 9:07 pm
@IlliniDave: Maybe I haven't done them right when attempted, but the arm part is much more difficult for me. I have never broken a bone, so I'm not super worried about bone density yet either. However, I do intend to continue to eat as much full fat yogurt and sweet potatoes as I desire. I spent almost nothing on either health insurance or health care in the last year, so I really shouldn't complain. However, everybody I know is appalled that I didn't seek treatment for my facial paralysis, so I am obviously an outlier of some sort.
Yes, likely your form was an issue. For me leaning the movements was a process that took months before I attempted weights that would be a challenge because of their heaviness.

You can do all the movements with dumb bells too--smaller weights but stabilizing is more of a challenge as weight creeps up.

The arms/shoulders do exert some effort in Oly lifts, after all you holding something up off the ground. It's hard to dynamically load your lower power chain above what the top half of your body weighs without effort from your arms/shoulders/upper back, unless you want to buy machines or join a fitness place. Best bet is maybe back squats, but I don't know how helpful they would be as a preventative for octogenarian falling issues. Certainly better than doing nothing, but they are not total body movements the way the Oly stuff is.

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by BRUTE »

7Wannabe5 wrote:
Thu May 18, 2017 6:18 am
Well, my limiting factor on performing clean&jerk at the moment, is [...] acute bronchitis and viral pink eye.
that seems very non-specific to c&j and would prevent a human from probably most exercise or other physical activity.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9372
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

IlliniDave said:You can do all the movements with dumb bells too--smaller weights but stabilizing is more of a challenge as weight creeps up.
Yeah, I think that is where it went wrong for me. I was using dumb bells that could adjust to 30 lbs each, and 60 lbs. over my head was really unstable, but 60 lbs. added to body weight on squat is pretty easy for me. Something like that.

@BRUTE: I rode my bike and planted 11 bare root trees and shrubs while I was continuously coughing, but it wasn't fun.

To wrap back around to the original topic of this thread, I think I was trying to make a point about the difference between acute illness, chronic disease, and fitness. We often use the word "health" rather haphazardly to refer to any of these, and other states of being. Most of us don't think that running every day is likely to prevent us from catching pink eye if we neglect to wash our hands, but ...

Anyways, I have a bronze Obamacare plan for which I pay $0/month. When half my face suddenly became paralyzed, I looked on the internet and determined it was likely Bell's Palsy, so I didn't seek medical care. My friend whose stock market accounts topped 65 million for the first time a couple weeks ago, tried to make me go to the doctor and he would pay for it, but I wouldn't go. So, I am (once again!) agreeing with Riggerjack. The only reason why people make medical professionals the exception to the rule of self-sufficiency or free choice is that they are not willing to face their own mortality.

CS
Posts: 709
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:24 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by CS »

I haven't keep up in this thread, but just logged in to say that my State just funded money for the participants of the exchange to make up for the Republicans pulling money from behind the scenes (hence the rate jacking). My premiums went from 330 something to 560 this past year. Then the state stepped in and now my premium is 424. I am not on any sort of subsidy, since my income is so erratic.

It pays to live in a blue state. The taxes do pay for something, and I'm glad of it. Also, fyi, this support for the residents was a blue and red effort - must give credit where credit is due.

CS
Posts: 709
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:24 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by CS »

OTCW wrote:
Sat Mar 25, 2017 9:48 pm
CS wrote:
2. Premium increases are actually much less than the five years prior to it's implementation.
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/02/slower ... der-obama/
That article is over 2 years old. My premium for a bronze plan was $150 a month then. Now it is $350 a month.

Next year there aren't any exchange plans being offered in my area. I live in a medium to large city with lots of young people.

The ACA is dying and needs fixing. That mess the Republicans developed wasn't going to fix anything and it rightfully died. There is so much political theater going on on both sides over healthcare that I doubt it ever gets fixed.
The ACA is dying because it is being actively sabotaged. See what Rubio did behind the scenes to pull funding. This was an intentional move that screwed over millions of people just to win an election in 2016.

Universal healthcare works in many countries. We don't have it here because of the parasites of the insurance companies, the lack of bargaining power with the drug companies (keep us going to Canada, eh?), and greed in the medical field in general. I work in the medical field, and I'll tell you, I'm overpaid and I'm not even a doctor. I've worked for doctors that bill 4.5 Million a year. I'm actively planning on my job going away due to wages dropping significantly. And I think that's a good thing for the population.

Writing healthcare off as not being fixable lets people off the hook for not doing better. We deserve better.

Personally, I think if the insurance companies can't offer something on the exchange in a state, they shouldn't be allowed to operate in that state. They are in business off the infrastructure of that state. They can put back in and be good corporate citizens. Or they can go out of business and make room for others. Either one works for me.

IlliniDave
Posts: 3845
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by IlliniDave »

CS wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2017 9:09 am

It pays to live in a blue state. The taxes do pay for something, and I'm glad of it. Also, fyi, this support for the residents was a blue and red effort - must give credit where credit is due.
I live in the reddest of red states now. The state's flagship university's sports teams are even named after the color. But once I ER I'll be hanging my hat in one of three states in order of likelihood: Illinois, Wisconsin, or Minnesota (blue, purple/temporarily red, and about as blue as it gets, respectively). So I'm sort of cheating by earning and accumulating in a red state then heading to a blue state as a not-in-the-labor-force sub-median "fixed-income" person. It's not a financially-driven choice, so I don't feel guilty.

Of course all that's still a couple years in the future, and the future is murky.

BRUTE
Posts: 3797
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by BRUTE »

looking at the county map, Illinois is only blue around Chicago. the rest is entirely red. this is likely true for all "blue" states.

i.e. there are almost no blue or red states, there are states dominated by their metro areas (blue) or not (red).

IlliniDave
Posts: 3845
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: Who'd a thunk it? Obamacare not repealed

Post by IlliniDave »

BRUTE wrote:
Fri Jun 02, 2017 10:03 am
looking at the county map, Illinois is only blue around Chicago. the rest is entirely red. this is likely true for all "blue" states.

i.e. there are almost no blue or red states, there are states dominated by their metro areas (blue) or not (red).
That's correct. But if you zoom in more maybe, nearly every significant city in Illinois is Blue. The same is true in Alabama. I imagine it is true nearly everywhere. We're at the tipping point where soon the urban populations will call all the shots. DT may be the last president elected without widespread support from the major urban centers, or at least a good share of them.
Last edited by IlliniDave on Fri Jun 02, 2017 12:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Locked