|
|
|
#16 |
|
fistful of dynamite
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 97
vCash: 1000 |
1% body fat is BS; a ridiculous claim by Khan.
His body shape has certainly changed though; he had bigger shoulders as a lightweight, as opposed to the thicker neck and legs he has now. |
|
| Sponsored Links |
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Champion
East Side Guru
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: I'm not your buddy, pal.
Posts: 6,581
vCash: 202 |
And how would you choose where to metabolise muscle?
Perhaps Roach simply got him off the bodybuilding exercises that gave him the out of proportion upper body in the first place, the principles that did it are called reversibility and specificity. |
|
|
|
#21 |
|
fistful of dynamite
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 97
vCash: 1000 |
Not once in this thread have I claimed it was acheived through spot reduction; in fact i had never even mentioned spot reduction (its a myth for a start).
His body shape was simply changed by the way muscle groups were excercised. |
|
|
|
#23 |
|
fistful of dynamite
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 97
vCash: 1000 |
How??? You replied with a pretty random and out of the blue "no such thing as spot reduction", therby implying that I thought he'd acheived it through spot reduction, that's why I pointed out that spot reduction refers to fat not muscle, therefore making it clear (as dishwater) that spot reduction wasn't even on the agenda. As I said, spot reduction hadn't even been metioned......and, as we all know, is a complete myth! I think this is a classic case of crossed wires! Peace |
|
|
|
#28 |
|
ESB Junkie
East Side VIP
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: East London
Posts: 32,975
vCash: 1900 |
well when i made the spot reduction comment he could have said "i never said you can spot reduce etc etc" instead he argued that spot reduction is only to do with fat and not muscle.
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|