Dan, et al,
Here's a thread from the old mailing list that gives more info on the
ectomorph question.  I agree with Art on this, i.e., that there's really
no such thing.  I think Arnold started this categorization (or borrowed
it from someone), but I don't really think there's any substance to it.
Additionally, as a former "ectomorph," I can tell you that by your
mid-thirties, your metabolism radically changes (you're not awash in
Growth Hormone (GH)) and you suddenly start gaining weight in the same
way as your stockier peers.  Finally, I never knew tall, skinny guys to
be strong in the same sense that the stockier, football players were.
Quicker, more agile, maybe but not particularly powerful.
Rick

From: [log in to unmask]
To: Multiple recipients of list <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Paleo-eating and ectomorphs

The paleo diet is based on our evolutionary past, and is how our HG
ancestors lived. However, HG's had to have been endomorphs or mesomorphs
to survive, since ectomorphs, with their very fast metabolisms, and
their
seeming inability to store fat no matter what they eat (I have friends
who eat fast food and donuts all day and are still skinny as rods),
could
not survive long during the periods of lean hunting. Thus the ectomorph
is somewhat of a novelty  that sprang up with the agricultural
revolution
(where cheap carbohydrate could satisfy his high caloric needs). Thus,
should an ectomorph be following the paleo diet as Professor De Vany
presents it, or should he make minor adjustments such as eating more
carbs (perhaps low glycemic starchy carbs such as sweet potatoes, beans,
and oats)? It seems to me that the paleo diet is perfect for all of us
with endomorphic tendencies, but should a thin person who is not
concerned about losing fat eat slightly differently? I know that
diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, etc. can still be found in thin
people, so that is why I suggested low glycemic carbs with a high
soluble
fiber cantent, and not stuff like pasta, bagels, breads, and potatoes.
Any feedback would be appreciated.
-Tamir


From: Art De Vany <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: On chitin, LDL, and ectomorophs


Thin people are thin because they have no muscle.  They can have
fairly high levels of body fat and often do because they have low
basal metabolic rates, being light on the muscle.  One runner in
my neighborhood is "skinny" and yet carries high body fat
(probably around 25%).  [Personal observation: most of the joggers
I see in the neighborhood and on my way to the gym have high body
fat.  Lean people are different from skinny people.  Lean people
have muscle and low fat.]

Those kids who are staying thin on donuts and what have you have
high GH levels.  When these decline (and high carb diets will
speed the process) as they grow older, they will fatten up.  They
probably already show symptoms of atherosclerosis, many young
people do now (some insipient cases as young as 12).  The
accumulation of insulin poisoning from elevated insulin is a
primary aging mechanism: western aging is a form of insulin
poisoning and muscle wasting.

I just do not accept the endo/ecto dicothomy.  We are
biochemically unique and any ex post classification is just
classification without a theory.  What is a fast metabolism?  Is
it independent of what you do or what you eat?  Of body
composition?  Of course not.

It is not cholesterol, but oxidized LDL particles that produce the
foam cells that lodge in the plague that builds to constrict blood
vessels.  HDL carries lipids back to the liver, LDL carries it out
into the blood stream.  High HDL relative to LDL reduces the
"inventory" of products to be oxidized into foam cells.
Management of cholesterol is overrated as a strategy (I think)
relative to preventing the oxidation of the trigylcerides and ldl
bodies.  By the way, a high carb diet coats the ldl particles
(glycosylation) so that the liver does not recognize them and
fails to shut off the production of ldl.  A low carb diet does not
do this so the liver will cease to produce ldl when the blood
stream has adequate levels.

The chitin thing sounds like another hyped mechanism that fails to
recognize the non-linearities that Dale pointed to.  Chitin can be
metabolized and, so, is a source of energy in its own right.  But
it is the linear thinking that is at fault.  Soak up fat and there
will be less fat?  No.  This is frequent trap: put less fat in
(substituting carbs in an isocaloric experiment) and you should
have less fat in the blood.  Right?  No, it's not linear and you
will actually have more blood triglycerides for reasons I have
previously indicated.

Cholesterol is under tight control by the body by the way and is
only weakly related, if at all, to fat intake.  Poor Italian
women, who eat mostly pasta and lack fresh vegs and meat, had
dramatically lower health and worse cardio risk than women from
families with higher income.

Art



"Dan C." wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> Over the years, I have observed the lives of many people, friends and gym
> goers, and one thing always strikes me: ectomorphs (the "tall, skinny" type)
>
> Correct me if I am wrong, but I get the feeling they GENERALLY are more
> gifted in the nervous system functions (stronger and faster on a pound per
> pound basis, quick learners too) and are almost never sick.
>
> I have once heard that bodyfat acts as a reserve of energy, mostly for times
> of sickness.
>
> So here is my hypothesis:
>
> Since ectomorphs have a more gifted nervous system, and are rarely sick,
> isn't is just logical that they have more difficulty storing fat / making
> muscular gains because they just plain don't need to?
>
> Open to any discussion.
>
> That's my 2 cents.
>
> Dan C.
>
> [log in to unmask]
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.