In defense of mediocre fitness...

[Anonymous]

I prefer my life span end with a glorious orgy of indulgences rather than have it painfully peter out in wasteful medical expenses.

The way to ensure your life is shorter, less enjoyable, and ends with lots of medical expenses is to quit exercising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate this take on “mediocre fitness” especially since I am just getting back into fitness. I’m new to strength training and still need to modify, go slowly, and learn. I am just not strong, flexible, balanced, or coordinated enough to always follow along with the instructor. But I am trying my best, learning, working hard, being consistent, and being patient. I am seeing and feeling gains. I suppose I am mediocre—in high school, a coach actually told me I was mediocre.

I do have a problem with people who make excuses not to start at all, or start and quit, or are too inconsistent to make any gains. They don’t take care of their health because it’s too much work. Is this the type of “mediocre fitness” you’re talking about? I know someone who is proud of her mediocrity in that she refuses to diet or exercise and thinks of those who do as “compulsive” or type A.

I’m op and judgement just reeks out of that last paragraph. It’s not what I was talking about, but your attitude is. If someone walks three times a week are their making ‘gains’? I think mediocre fitness means maybe not even knowing what a gain is, or caring, just focusing on going out and moving your body.

Everyone is on their own journey. I made excuses not to start at all in my 20s, I’m way fitter now, 10 months out from a pregnancy, than I was at 22, drinking and eating pizza. Why do you want 22 year old me to know you have a problem with them. It wouldn’t have made me more active, it wouldn’t have made me understand the value. I knew I was overweight and unhealthy. I had to decide I wanted to be healthy.

I see basically no judgement in making it harder for people to start by claiming there is a ‘right’ level of fitness. If you’re more active than you were last week, thats great. Keep it up. If you’re 200 pounds and you go from nothing to four hours of walks a week, that’s actually an improvement. Even if it seems like nothing to someone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate this take on “mediocre fitness” especially since I am just getting back into fitness. I’m new to strength training and still need to modify, go slowly, and learn. I am just not strong, flexible, balanced, or coordinated enough to always follow along with the instructor. But I am trying my best, learning, working hard, being consistent, and being patient. I am seeing and feeling gains. I suppose I am mediocre—in high school, a coach actually told me I was mediocre.

I do have a problem with people who make excuses not to start at all, or start and quit, or are too inconsistent to make any gains. They don’t take care of their health because it’s too much work. Is this the type of “mediocre fitness” you’re talking about? I know someone who is proud of her mediocrity in that she refuses to diet or exercise and thinks of those who do as “compulsive” or type A.

I’m op and judgement just reeks out of that last paragraph. It’s not what I was talking about, but your attitude is. If someone walks three times a week are their making ‘gains’? I think mediocre fitness means maybe not even knowing what a gain is, or caring, just focusing on going out and moving your body.

Everyone is on their own journey. I made excuses not to start at all in my 20s, I’m way fitter now, 10 months out from a pregnancy, than I was at 22, drinking and eating pizza. Why do you want 22 year old me to know you have a problem with them. It wouldn’t have made me more active, it wouldn’t have made me understand the value. I knew I was overweight and unhealthy. I had to decide I wanted to be healthy.

I see basically no judgement in making it harder for people to start by claiming there is a ‘right’ level of fitness. If you’re more active than you were last week, thats great. Keep it up. If you’re 200 pounds and you go from nothing to four hours of walks a week, that’s actually an improvement. Even if it seems like nothing to someone else.

All the examples you cite are people who are trying to get fit in whatever way they can muster (time-wise, activity level, any amount of “more active than you were last week”.) kudos to all of them. Walking 3x’s a week, or 200 lbs and walking 4 hours? That’s grit and determination that I respect. That’s how I started and I still have a ways to go. But all yr examples are of people who are doing something. I’m talking about people who are proud of their mediocrity and are all for accepting their unhealthy diet and lifestyle and even celebrating it. And then criticize for people for being “eating disordered” or a compulsive exerciser.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate this take on “mediocre fitness” especially since I am just getting back into fitness. I’m new to strength training and still need to modify, go slowly, and learn. I am just not strong, flexible, balanced, or coordinated enough to always follow along with the instructor. But I am trying my best, learning, working hard, being consistent, and being patient. I am seeing and feeling gains. I suppose I am mediocre—in high school, a coach actually told me I was mediocre.

I do have a problem with people who make excuses not to start at all, or start and quit, or are too inconsistent to make any gains. They don’t take care of their health because it’s too much work. Is this the type of “mediocre fitness” you’re talking about? I know someone who is proud of her mediocrity in that she refuses to diet or exercise and thinks of those who do as “compulsive” or type A.

I’m op and judgement just reeks out of that last paragraph. It’s not what I was talking about, but your attitude is. If someone walks three times a week are their making ‘gains’? I think mediocre fitness means maybe not even knowing what a gain is, or caring, just focusing on going out and moving your body.

Everyone is on their own journey. I made excuses not to start at all in my 20s, I’m way fitter now, 10 months out from a pregnancy, than I was at 22, drinking and eating pizza. Why do you want 22 year old me to know you have a problem with them. It wouldn’t have made me more active, it wouldn’t have made me understand the value. I knew I was overweight and unhealthy. I had to decide I wanted to be healthy.

I see basically no judgement in making it harder for people to start by claiming there is a ‘right’ level of fitness. If you’re more active than you were last week, thats great. Keep it up. If you’re 200 pounds and you go from nothing to four hours of walks a week, that’s actually an improvement. Even if it seems like nothing to someone else.

All the examples you cite are people who are trying to get fit in whatever way they can muster (time-wise, activity level, any amount of “more active than you were last week”.) kudos to all of them. Walking 3x’s a week, or 200 lbs and walking 4 hours? That’s grit and determination that I respect. That’s how I started and I still have a ways to go. But all yr examples are of people who are doing something. I’m talking about people who are proud of their mediocrity and are all for accepting their unhealthy diet and lifestyle and even celebrating it. And then criticize for people for being “eating disordered” or a compulsive exerciser.

Why are you spending any time thinking about those people? What effect do they have on you or your journey? There’s plenty of annoying people in the world, plenty of hypocrites and weak people. What do you get from making this point that you have a problem with these people? What you describe, generally the people I’ve met like that are unhappy and feel bad about themselves and try to make themselves feel better by putting others down. That’s objectively bad, but I’m just happy I’m not them.

[Anonymous]

100% agree OP! I see this path as a life goal if living well, doing good things for your body. I commit to 30 minutes every day. I might bike, walk outside, lift free weights, go for a swim or hike, or dance! You get the idea... I just want to feel alive.

[Anonymous]

" The way to ensure your life is shorter, less enjoyable, and ends with lots of medical expenses is to quit exercising. "

OP is 22 years old. I am six weeks shy of 75 but two days ago I felt 20 doing four rollercoaster miles in 1:22.06 and yesterday 22 or so doing a 1:23.42. I'm going to try to get my best time even lower and then jog and run again. If you call that exercise then I'm definitely not going to be a quiter.

My goal, however, is to drop out at my cut-off - if life span is such a step-function - and not feed the doctors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:" The way to ensure your life is shorter, less enjoyable, and ends with lots of medical expenses is to quit exercising. "

OP is 22 years old. I am six weeks shy of 75 but two days ago I felt 20 doing four rollercoaster miles in 1:22.06 and yesterday 22 or so doing a 1:23.42. I'm going to try to get my best time even lower and then jog and run again. If you call that exercise then I'm definitely not going to be a quiter.

My goal, however, is to drop out at my cut-off - if life span is such a step-function - and not feed the doctors.

I’m 35! When I was 22 I was a lazy person!! But I had a lot of other things going on too.

Are you saying you’re going to take yourself out of life in 6 weeks pp? Don’t do that! You have life left to live and people who love you I’m sure. I also don’t want to die slowly with many medical conditions and want to go out on my own terms if I make it that far, but don’t give up with nothing wrong <3

[Anonymous]

Is there a cut-off at 75 years of age?

Just read this in the NYT this morning:

"Still, there’s been a long-simmering debate as to whether statins are advisable for people over 75, even though the risk of suffering life-threatening cardiovascular disease rises precipitously with age. Concerns have been raised about side effects associated with statins, potential adverse effects of the drugs on other ailments common in the elderly and possible harmful interactions with the many other medications they often take."