3 ms·
I would take a pill that will take care of your muscles in background any day when it's offered. I.e. why does it even have to require input from my side? You
by thriftwy 9y ago
I would take a pill that will take care of your muscles in background any day when it's offered.
I.e. why does it even have to require input from my side? You don't have to train your peristaltics, why are other muscles different? I guess it just boils to a mutation 100 thousands years ago which decreased default muscle power to save on energy, we could roll that back, get extra colories burned as a bonus.
Animals don't work out. They also don't push the envelope every day.
- MrBuddyCasino 9y agoOne just has to look at Chimpanzees or Gorillas to know that this is true. I suspect that it stops being a signal of sexual fitness though once it becomes effortless, and therefore worthless.
- TangoTrotFox 9y agoAnimals constantly 'work out'. If you've ever had an indoor cat they seen as generally one of the lazier creatures but they will every once in a while just spaz out and start bouncing off the walls. It's not just for fun - it's an instinct that helps keep them in shape. It's the same for all animals. They will constantly work out. It looks like play, but it serves a valuable purpose -- somewhat like how young predators will regularly play fight with each other. That's not just for fun. Evolution and life is primarily an optimization game. And our bodies are product of that. When we do things, we tend to become better at them. When we don't do things, we tend to lose our ability to do them well, hopefully in lieu of new focuses. Even the brain works this way - as becomes readily apparent when you age and can see in your acquaintances who continues to work with their brain, and who instead spends their time watching television and imbibing.
- textor 9y agoNot really. Cats do "spaz out" episodically but a typical human with the same amount of exercise would probably be a flabby sack of fat with cardiovascular issues. The activity isn't predictive of the rate of muscle atrophy to the same degree across species, because loss of muscle is mediated by a specific, variably effective biochemical cascade and is not a consequence of inactivity per se. Similarly, loss of memories or cognitive skills is an active process that may have negligible speed even without much utilization. But I'm nitpicking.