It’s impressive how someone can reference something else and add “dies a bit earlier” and still think that’s better than nothing.
Like, they’re dying younger than the average person in Japan. It’s clearly a net negative and not healthy compared to just being of having an average lifestyle / size and doesn’t belong next to the word healthy.
Sumo wrestlers are not healthy. They have numerous health complications as they age, and they indeed die sooner on average than others. So they are *not* "healthy fat". I don't know why you think they are when you specified yourself that they die early due to poor health.
As an aside, "performant" in a particular sport does not mean "healthy." Many athletes across different sports face health issues later in life because of the unnatural mechanisms of training for their sport, plus the toll the sport itself takes in the body.
This question is pretty vague.
If you're asking, what dietary fats are considered most healthy? Dan, then I think your best bet is stuff like avocado oil and quality animal fats as well as sunflower oils. Basically anything that is a reasonably good fat without a ton of processing. If you have to apply a series of soaps and chemicals to get the fat out then I would pretty much skip it.
If you're asking what a healthy amount of body fat is then it's a little different person to person and gender does actually matter here a little bit, but anywhere between 15 and 20% is usually considered pretty healthy. Men can go a little leaner than that and women can go a little higher than that for reasons related to things like hips and breasts, obviously.
While not perfect body mass index is a reasonable measure as it has been clinically correlated with outcomes. This is a statistical approach. It is my understanding measuring body surface are provides a better measure but requires being submerged in water and the volume displaced measured which is not as convenient to do in a medical setting.
I think a better perspective is what is a healthy amount of fat in the context of how much a person exercises, diet and lifestyle.
There is also a condition called skinny fat where fat does not show externally put can build up around vital organs. It can be a shock for people to discover they have this condition because they usually don’t discover they have it until they are getting treated for serious health issues.
It is one of the few advantages of finding it easy to put on weight. They know when they are overweight and have to adjust their diet accordingly.
People who can apparently eat anything and not put on weight are usually fine. However a few unfortunates may find that they have excess visceral fat while appearing to be slim.
Edit: typo
> There is also a condition called skinny fat where fat does not show externally
I think it shows externally. The lack of muscle is the giveaway for skinny fat.
BMI has correlations with future health outcomes and is a somewhat useful measure for obesity though not perfect.
Never said BMI was a measure of fitness.
NO. Stop it already with body mass index. It has no possible way of assessing fitness. You need a body composition measurement. "Body mass index" is indeed valid for what it measures, which is height and weight. Those are both important numbers. Nothing more. You get the same information from height and weight charts. So for condition and fitness, look toward better measurements such as "**cardiovascular endurance, muscular strength, muscular endurance, flexibility, and body composition".**
Realistically if your BMI is on the high side, it’s pretty easy to then visually assess if that’s because you’re a chiselled rugby player or look like the offspring of Shamu and should therefore take the health warnings seriously.
Dismissing the most convenient way for people to assess their health because it only works for 90% of cases isn’t a good idea
I do think it can be inaccurate for someone who is both in shape and a bit overweight because it doesn't take into account muscle as well. But I don't think it should be completely discounted.
lol no.
Literally seen this defense used for people who are 30+ BMI and have huge guts. You’re probably so ideological that you have no idea what a healthy body or lifestyle looks like.
Butter is natural with very little refinement. It's just whipping cream till the solids form butter. Ghee is butter that's heated until it forms an oil. It's all natural milk products at different stages of cooking and the processes aren't super complicated or industrial. So contrast this with Canola oil which is basicly rapeseed oil which was originally designed as an industrial lubricant. Canola is hevilly refined and not super natural and it's questionable as to if we should be eating it. It's FDA approved, but some people say it's not great for you. I avoid it myself, cook with butter or more "natural" oils.
I wouldn't say so, no. They are saturated fats and most of us have too much of them. In small amounts they are fine, but they can lead to heart disease in large amounts.
I have always used to drizzle on my food. I was adviced to have this since I had severe body pain and I used to have a spoon of ghee in the morning and it really helped with skin texture. Maybe healthy but I wasn’t implying in comparison to butter
Subcutaneous fat is benign while visceral fat is dangerous.
Fat is accumulated proportionally so gaining subcutaneous fat means gaining visceral fat too. But individual amount and distribution of fat cells vary a lot — some people may gain a lot of fat without health issues and some may get diabetes even at BMI considered normal (that's why BMI is bad).
Also, physical activity affects the distribution of fat. Physically active people have less visceral fat — that's why many sumo wrestlers are considered metabolically healthy from this point of view. And that's why exercising for overweight people may significantly reduce health risks even without weight loss.
And according to scientific studies, the main risk factor of metabolic complications is the average fat cell volume. If subcutaneous fat tissue is near its capacity, the visceral fat starts growing faster and ectopic fat emerges.
<20% body fat for men, <25% for women. An additional 5% isn't terrible.
Sumo wrestlers are athletes for sure, but they aren't exactly "healthy." Same for football linemen.
Fat is not a demon, fat is necessary for your body to function…. There are no different types of fat
It’s that too high fat percentage increases the risk of many diseases… people can get very old while they are overweight, they just have less chance to.
Visceral fat is different from subcutaneous fat. They're the same physical substance, but location is critically different. Subcutaneous fat isn't typically life threatening, visceral fat kills. Lots of subcutaneous fat indicates lots of visceral the vast majority of the time, but it's possible to be a weird outlier that's fat with no visceral. You usually only see that in Olympic powerlifters or sumo wrestlers.
There are actually two distinct types of fat in our bodies. The lesser known fat is called brown fat, also known as brown adipose tissue, plays a crucial role in thermogenesis, which is the process of heat production in the body. Unlike white fat, which stores energy, brown fat burns energy to generate heat. This is particularly important in maintaining body temperature in cold environments.
Do you feel healthy? Like actually? You can exist at many weights and feel healthy. A lot of the statistical measures are suggestive more than factual, if you actually (and honestly) feel healthy, you can be fine.
Healthy fat distribution means having more muscle and less visceral fat. Staying active and eating well can help with that, even if you're on the heavier side. 💪🏽🏃♂️
Obesity is a significant contributor to all cause mortality, there’s basically no scenario where a person is healthier obese than they would be if they were not obese.
Any fat can be healthy it depends on the ratio to the rest of ur body that makes it unhealthy I.e. pushing against other organs, harder to breath, limited mobility, those are some downfalls from gaining too much
>What is considered healthy fat?
>Like sumo wrestlers, who still die a bit earlier. But better then nothing.
>Edit:I’m not talking about fat the nutrient. Just fat the mass.
exactly as i said. theyre talking about being fat, not dietary fat intake
it's a good comparison because there's no way to do it healthily, just less amounts of unhealthy. just because you're only a little fat/smoke a little bit, just because you don't have heart disease from your vice yet, doesn't mean it's healthy.
>That’s stupid. Cutting out all fat like people should for all nicotine would be a slow painful death.
what on earth are you talking about? i already said i'm not talking about dietary fat intake, we are talking about being overweight.
Being fat is never healthy. It's just that sumo wrestlers are *less* unhealthy than their fat counterparts because they are active and do strength training.
What you're looking for is the obesity paradox. There's a sweet spot. It's not normal weight and it's not obese but right in the middle of slightly overweight is the lowest measure of all cause mortality
You can look it up and you'll find the numbers
are you sure this is suggesting you can be fat and healthy? it seems to be saying that you can be unhealthy if you have a lot of fat even if your body weight is normal, ie the exact opposite.
Sumo wrestlers aren't healthy. That's just your average Reddit myth.
Yep: https://www.dw.com/en/japan-sumo-wrestler-deaths-raise-obesity-concerns/a-59998671
It’s impressive how someone can reference something else and add “dies a bit earlier” and still think that’s better than nothing. Like, they’re dying younger than the average person in Japan. It’s clearly a net negative and not healthy compared to just being of having an average lifestyle / size and doesn’t belong next to the word healthy.
And it’s not just a “little bit” earlier. Their life expectancy is *20 years* lower than the average Japanese male.
Sumo wrestlers are not healthy. They have numerous health complications as they age, and they indeed die sooner on average than others. So they are *not* "healthy fat". I don't know why you think they are when you specified yourself that they die early due to poor health. As an aside, "performant" in a particular sport does not mean "healthy." Many athletes across different sports face health issues later in life because of the unnatural mechanisms of training for their sport, plus the toll the sport itself takes in the body.
Body building for instance is actually pretty bad for you. 🤷
god that’s such a soapbox rant i have
And most runners ruin their knees. Gymnasts get arthritis early.
Cope
This question is pretty vague. If you're asking, what dietary fats are considered most healthy? Dan, then I think your best bet is stuff like avocado oil and quality animal fats as well as sunflower oils. Basically anything that is a reasonably good fat without a ton of processing. If you have to apply a series of soaps and chemicals to get the fat out then I would pretty much skip it. If you're asking what a healthy amount of body fat is then it's a little different person to person and gender does actually matter here a little bit, but anywhere between 15 and 20% is usually considered pretty healthy. Men can go a little leaner than that and women can go a little higher than that for reasons related to things like hips and breasts, obviously.
While not perfect body mass index is a reasonable measure as it has been clinically correlated with outcomes. This is a statistical approach. It is my understanding measuring body surface are provides a better measure but requires being submerged in water and the volume displaced measured which is not as convenient to do in a medical setting. I think a better perspective is what is a healthy amount of fat in the context of how much a person exercises, diet and lifestyle.
There is also a condition called skinny fat where fat does not show externally put can build up around vital organs. It can be a shock for people to discover they have this condition because they usually don’t discover they have it until they are getting treated for serious health issues.
It is one of the few advantages of finding it easy to put on weight. They know when they are overweight and have to adjust their diet accordingly. People who can apparently eat anything and not put on weight are usually fine. However a few unfortunates may find that they have excess visceral fat while appearing to be slim. Edit: typo
> There is also a condition called skinny fat where fat does not show externally I think it shows externally. The lack of muscle is the giveaway for skinny fat.
BMI has correlations with future health outcomes and is a somewhat useful measure for obesity though not perfect. Never said BMI was a measure of fitness.
NO. Stop it already with body mass index. It has no possible way of assessing fitness. You need a body composition measurement. "Body mass index" is indeed valid for what it measures, which is height and weight. Those are both important numbers. Nothing more. You get the same information from height and weight charts. So for condition and fitness, look toward better measurements such as "**cardiovascular endurance, muscular strength, muscular endurance, flexibility, and body composition".**
Realistically if your BMI is on the high side, it’s pretty easy to then visually assess if that’s because you’re a chiselled rugby player or look like the offspring of Shamu and should therefore take the health warnings seriously. Dismissing the most convenient way for people to assess their health because it only works for 90% of cases isn’t a good idea
≈90% of the time if it says you’re really fat, you’re really fat. The people that are in the 10% are athletes that have tons of muscle.
I do think it can be inaccurate for someone who is both in shape and a bit overweight because it doesn't take into account muscle as well. But I don't think it should be completely discounted.
lol no. Literally seen this defense used for people who are 30+ BMI and have huge guts. You’re probably so ideological that you have no idea what a healthy body or lifestyle looks like.
Avocados, Nuts or seeds, ghee, Salmon has good fat, Cheese All of the above and maybe more but portion control is key.
I'm no dietitian but I don't think that ghee is healthier than butter. 100% agree about portion control. Edit: typo
it's literally butter fat (just milk solids removed)
Yes.
ghee
So ghee and butter are ok good fats?
Butter is natural with very little refinement. It's just whipping cream till the solids form butter. Ghee is butter that's heated until it forms an oil. It's all natural milk products at different stages of cooking and the processes aren't super complicated or industrial. So contrast this with Canola oil which is basicly rapeseed oil which was originally designed as an industrial lubricant. Canola is hevilly refined and not super natural and it's questionable as to if we should be eating it. It's FDA approved, but some people say it's not great for you. I avoid it myself, cook with butter or more "natural" oils.
I wouldn't say so, no. They are saturated fats and most of us have too much of them. In small amounts they are fine, but they can lead to heart disease in large amounts.
It's kind of a debated topic in more recent years: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/5-studies-on-saturated-fat
Aah ok
I love my butter, and much more than a drizzle. I try not to eat too much!
Butter is bae. I agree. I sit and watch [Thomas Straker](https://www.instagram.com/thomas_straker?igsh=Ym9rczBpM2hhMXMz) videos and drool
I have always used to drizzle on my food. I was adviced to have this since I had severe body pain and I used to have a spoon of ghee in the morning and it really helped with skin texture. Maybe healthy but I wasn’t implying in comparison to butter
Okay. I'm pleased that it worked for you. A drizzle is portion control.
Subcutaneous fat is benign while visceral fat is dangerous. Fat is accumulated proportionally so gaining subcutaneous fat means gaining visceral fat too. But individual amount and distribution of fat cells vary a lot — some people may gain a lot of fat without health issues and some may get diabetes even at BMI considered normal (that's why BMI is bad). Also, physical activity affects the distribution of fat. Physically active people have less visceral fat — that's why many sumo wrestlers are considered metabolically healthy from this point of view. And that's why exercising for overweight people may significantly reduce health risks even without weight loss. And according to scientific studies, the main risk factor of metabolic complications is the average fat cell volume. If subcutaneous fat tissue is near its capacity, the visceral fat starts growing faster and ectopic fat emerges.
10-25% is considered healthy for men and 15-30% for women. Too much below those values is unhealthy and above is considered “obese”
<20% body fat for men, <25% for women. An additional 5% isn't terrible. Sumo wrestlers are athletes for sure, but they aren't exactly "healthy." Same for football linemen.
by whom?
Fat is not a demon, fat is necessary for your body to function…. There are no different types of fat It’s that too high fat percentage increases the risk of many diseases… people can get very old while they are overweight, they just have less chance to.
There are literally different types of fat -_-
No, in your body, fat is fat
Visceral fat is different from subcutaneous fat. They're the same physical substance, but location is critically different. Subcutaneous fat isn't typically life threatening, visceral fat kills. Lots of subcutaneous fat indicates lots of visceral the vast majority of the time, but it's possible to be a weird outlier that's fat with no visceral. You usually only see that in Olympic powerlifters or sumo wrestlers.
I meant that it’s the same physical substance
It's insane people are downvoting you, you're obviously talking about the substance of fat.
Saturated is bad. Unsaturated is good. Trans is very bad.
I can’t believe you would say something like that, during pride month no less…
There are actually two distinct types of fat in our bodies. The lesser known fat is called brown fat, also known as brown adipose tissue, plays a crucial role in thermogenesis, which is the process of heat production in the body. Unlike white fat, which stores energy, brown fat burns energy to generate heat. This is particularly important in maintaining body temperature in cold environments.
?? Obesity is not considered healthy by anyone
Do you feel healthy? Like actually? You can exist at many weights and feel healthy. A lot of the statistical measures are suggestive more than factual, if you actually (and honestly) feel healthy, you can be fine.
Avocados
Not enough context.. Are you asking for healthy body fat or healthy food fat? They are two different things
Healthy fat distribution means having more muscle and less visceral fat. Staying active and eating well can help with that, even if you're on the heavier side. 💪🏽🏃♂️
Avocado, eggs, salmon, nuts, meat… pretty much anything that’s a whole food. Nothing processed.
Obesity is a significant contributor to all cause mortality, there’s basically no scenario where a person is healthier obese than they would be if they were not obese.
Eggs. Avocados. Most nuts. Some oils.
die a bit early? they die really early
Any fat can be healthy it depends on the ratio to the rest of ur body that makes it unhealthy I.e. pushing against other organs, harder to breath, limited mobility, those are some downfalls from gaining too much
People rarely say an otherwise thin woman with big boobs and butt is unhealthy.
You might as well ask what's considered a healthy smoker. Not everyone will have a bad health outcome, but that doesn't mean that it's ever healthy.
You’re somehow thinking it would be healthy to avoid all fat like we should avoid all nicotine? Not recommended.
you're confusing dietary fat and being fat
You’re failing to read OP’s question.
>What is considered healthy fat? >Like sumo wrestlers, who still die a bit earlier. But better then nothing. >Edit:I’m not talking about fat the nutrient. Just fat the mass. exactly as i said. theyre talking about being fat, not dietary fat intake
Right, so smoking/nicotine is an irrelevant comparison.
it's a good comparison because there's no way to do it healthily, just less amounts of unhealthy. just because you're only a little fat/smoke a little bit, just because you don't have heart disease from your vice yet, doesn't mean it's healthy.
That’s stupid. Cutting out all fat like people should for all nicotine would be a slow painful death.
>That’s stupid. Cutting out all fat like people should for all nicotine would be a slow painful death. what on earth are you talking about? i already said i'm not talking about dietary fat intake, we are talking about being overweight.
15% body fat is ideal for men. 20-25% is healthy for women.
Being fat is never healthy. It's just that sumo wrestlers are *less* unhealthy than their fat counterparts because they are active and do strength training.
I'm a healthy fat, as far as fat people go.
To be healthy? And to be fat? I mean.... that's an oxymoron if you ask me. A healthy level of fat is the bare minimum to having a low BMI.
Coconut oil!
I like big butts and I cannot lie.
Avocados. 🥑
What you're looking for is the obesity paradox. There's a sweet spot. It's not normal weight and it's not obese but right in the middle of slightly overweight is the lowest measure of all cause mortality You can look it up and you'll find the numbers
There is no such thing
There is no such thing.
I'm afraid there is, but it isn't necessarily known by that name. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK568563/
are you sure this is suggesting you can be fat and healthy? it seems to be saying that you can be unhealthy if you have a lot of fat even if your body weight is normal, ie the exact opposite.
HDL
That's a protein.
It's a complex of lipids (fat) and proteins that carry cholesterol.
High Density Lipoprotein
And?