4 ms·
Look for some very fit celebrities who made millions through their looks. Do what they do.
by 21 8y ago
Look for some very fit celebrities who made millions through their looks.
Do what they do.
- Skunkleton 8y agoNo problem. I will hire a personal nutritionist, get a magic hormone cocktail, spend more time then I have at the gym, and travel back in time and edit my parents DNA.
- lj3 8y agoDon't forget a blood boy. You gotta have a blood boy.
- lisper 8y agoIt's hard to imagine worse advice. Looking good by societal standards and being healthy are probably anti-correlated.
- keithwhor 8y agoI agree with what you said, if what you meant by "worse" is "better" and by "anti-correlated" you actually meant "correlated." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_selection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_selection
- jdbernard 8y agoExcept we're no longer in an environment that exerts the same actual selective pressures. This leads to an unhealthy excess, just like it does with many of the other natural urges like the preference for highly processed, high-calorie, sugar-dense foods.
- keithwhor 8y agoAha, but that's not true. We're an in environment that exerts more real and perceived selective pressures than ever before, and influenced by orders of magnitude more people than we were even a hundred years ago. Health and fitness, physically, are indicators that (A) somebody has time to invest in their wellbeing, (B) actively invests that time (C) is more likely to survive illness, injury, etc. (D) is more likely to be successful due to social implications halo effect, yadda yadda. I'm not going to argue that there aren't maladaptive traits related to health and beauty that pop up all over the place: physical ones like eating disorders, behavioral ones like narcissism. But, "train regularly -- three to five times a week -- plus eat a high-protein low-processed sugar diet, like celebrities do when they're training for roles" is nowhere close to unhealthy excess. A lot of people just find it very difficult to do.
- lisper 8y agoThe thing you're missing is that evolution selects for reproductive fitness of genes. That is a very different quality metric than individual well-being.
- DoreenMichele 8y ago"Evolution selects for" sounds a lot more planned than it is. Reality: Fitness primarily means "these genes survived the winnowing process." It's a little more complicated in that, for example, you see more mutations of genes (at least in germs) in high stress environments. But genes don't sit around asking each other how we are going to take over the world like little DNA movie criminal masterminds. Instead, the ones that don't die the most "win."
- lisper 8y agoExactly right. But the point is that what looks good or is socially or sexually attractive is not necessarily healthy. You genes don't care if you're happy or if you feel good. All they "care" about is that you make babies that survive long enough to make babies themselves. (And they "care" about this in the same way that water "cares" about going downhill.)
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- Fricken 8y agoThey hire personal trainers, bust their ass for six months to look good in a scene, and a year later they're on the cover of the national enquirer in a bathing suit looking like shit again. That is exactly what not to do.
- nradov 8y agoA lot of those fit celebrities are heavily geared. It's pretty obvious if you know what to look for. They would never pass a WADA test. It will be interesting to see how many of them end up with serious long-term health problems.