Really stupid question here. Why doesn't your body just turn excess calories into muscle? It's much more practical for the human body and muscle can be broken down for energy just like fat.
>>35621591
>ice age
>fat keeps body warm
>fat can be consumed by body in event of serious caloric loss
>
>>35621600
>fat can be consumed by body in event of serious caloric loss
So can muscle, but your point about bodyheat makes sense.
>>35621591
its about survival in extreme conditions
to maintain muscle is way more expensive energy and nutrients wise than fat which is basically a dead blanket that sits over your body
also, fat stores energy more efficiently, as in to build fat you need less energy per pound than muscle, and you get more energy by burning it
while food is not plenty
>>35621600
so you're tellin' me that the fucking ICE AGE is the reason why I can't eat a delicious caloric surplus of food?
>>35621684
to build muscle you do need a controlled caloric surplus of food in relation to your tdee (as well as exercise and making sure that the caloric surplus contains the macros and micros you need)
>>35621684
Of course. Are you retarded?
Muscles specifically require amino acids for growth. They can't just use any macronutrient and slap together some Frankenstein gains.
>>35621591
Fat is more than just a "storage of energy" it is an integral part of the body that plays many roles in maintaining homeostasis. It effects every organ, hormones, nervous system functions, the immune system and much more. Sadly, few have looked into the true importance of its role on the body and the research is fairly new and under developed.
>>35622286
Providing some sauce. Search on Adipose system for more if you want
http://press.endocrine.org/doi/full/10.1210/jc.2004-0395
>>35621591
>muscle can only be made from protein, so it's not as good for storage as fat which can be made from protein, carbs, or fat
>muscle is more expensive for the body, it takes more energy to maintain than fat
>fat has an insulating property which muscle doesn't
>fat is also more than twice as energy dense as muscle 9 calories per gram compared to 4, which means you can carry more fuel with less weight which is much more efficient
>>35621591
Why does the human eye have an optic nerve that causes a blind spot where it attaches, rather than split before it reaches the eye, like the cephalopod eye?
Is it because we are a species that was evolved through trial and error and not designed to be highly efficient flawless living gods?
>>35623656
>he isn't a living God
>>35621636
catabolising lots of muscle has a horrible biochemical fallout
look up rhabdomyosis, shit kills people
you can't break down muscle in the same way that you can break down fat, which is basically just glycogen
plus muscle takes extra energy to maintain
anyway evolution, form which we are not exempt, is not conscious of the changes that it makes to things, it is directional, but not directed, you just get what you end up with, I'm afraid, and that is as much a product of the environment as it is a product of what you start with.
look up the adipose system and also how evolution works
>>35621591
I would like to add. Even though in our society our fat storage is our downfall. In a survival situation, our fat storage is a blessing. We can literally live without food for 30 days or greater.
Of the top of my head, I'm not sure if this is exactly correct, but I don't think other animals have a system as efficient as we have, and I read a paper saying that is part of the reason why we are such a dominate species.
honestly, the reason why our fat storage is a bad situation is because we were some dominate at survival that we created a situation, where we no longer needed a efficient fat storage system.
>>35621591
muscle can't be converted back to energy or stored for long periods as efficiently as fat. If stored as muscle, the body would actually burn more energy while storing it as well.
Survival.
>>35623667
We are, only compared to the flock, anon.
It's only a poor reflection on them until we can train to lift mountains and piss lightning.
>>35621591
Some people's bodies do that. It's genetic diversity. BBC did a documentary on it and everything (put a bunch of people at double theyr TDEE in calories per day, jap dude got muscular without exercise, other dude barely got any fat even though he ate double, some just couldn't eat all those calories without barfing, etc).
I suppose if the food industry stopped having it their way we could just let evolution take it's pick and maybe we'd reach a point where the majority of the population works like that. Assuming food scarcity remains not being a thing, of course.
But here's the thing: muscles also are expensive. You need a lot of calories to make them and then you need more calories every single day just to work them like usual. They are dangerous, if you stop thinking about life in modern society and revert back to the days of old.
So we have people with a predisposition to getting fat because at some point this was useful, we also have people with a predisposition to getting muscly because at some point this was useful.
Hell, even today being muscular is not all that good. Most people will NOT be using that kind of strength in their day-to-day, other than for good looks, so the muscle will not help with survival, but will have a recurrent cost...
>>35623723
the reason we are a dominant species is because of our huge brains, vocal cords and opposable thumbs you fucking mongoloid, not our ability to store fat. Bears can hibernate for months without eating, why aren't we their slaves?
>>35623810
This
The body operates purely on needs, it's not going to build muscle when it doesn't need it.
