Hopefully this isn’t removed as personal context, as I am not a bodybuilder by any means whatsoever. I am bizarre after exploring both fitness and nutrition separately, and noticing there tended to be two opposite points of the spectrum: Where fitness tends to gravitate towards “Aim for your macro-nutrient requirements to build muscle/ maintain width/ lose flab, calories in/ calories out by any means necessary”, and nutrition emphasizes the importance of a balanced and diversified diet to maintain healthy internal capacity and overall’ health ‘.
These beings are commonly found in the fitness’ orbit ‘, where meal-prepping chicken and rice is common, and an’ aesthetic’ physique is prioritized above all else. Their physiques are undeniably superb, and are the standard of’ healthy’ but are they in someway a product of malnutrition? If there are no immediate health issues or reduced function that they are aware of through their limited foods; would an preamble of these commonly recognized’ health’ rules transgress, enhance or remain indifferent on their physique? And if so, how? Is this a case of lack of knowledge that will eventually cause issues, or is there method to the madness in not am concerned about difference and’ correcting’ it with complements?
I would be interested to see how a bodybuilder who focuses on nutrition before calories equates in physique when compared to someone focused on calories. My assumption is that increased metabolic office would grow with a nutritionally seemed nutrition when compared to calorie focused and that maybe there’s area for further education in fitness communities.
Read more: reddit.com