The notion of an “optimal body type” is somewhat convoluted, as there are various mechanisms by which a body type could be considered the best. A body type may be the best because it is the natural result of eating habits and physical exercise that causes well-being and longevity, or it may be the best because the body itself has an effect on health. Different body types may also be best for different things - for example, a body with very low body fat will be very attractive, but might not be the best for health (spoiler: low body fat is either optimal or at the very least not deleterious). Personally, I like to stick with mortality as a proxy for health, because it is the hardest one to fiddle with statistically.
Unless you're full time body building influencer, there's no way you can "gain too much muscle" that'll be bad for your health. Most people don't lift. The ones that do lift regularly have regular jobs and are not taking performance enhancing drugs. It's not possible for a natty gym bro to build so much muscle that he has to be concerned about life expectancy of body builders.
Not building muscle is a health hazard especially when one gets old. Death from fall injuries is a big cause of mortality. And that's caused by not having good balance or grip strength because of weak muscles.
Looking at the chart it seems to tell you the relative stress index of those activities on the body beyond hormesis... constant protein shakes, constant creatine, constant pumping and upping. The latter activities at the end like horseriding and skiing don't seem to exert too much exogenous stress on the body when you think about it. Artistic gymnastics, fencing and whatnot are like short-burst activities -- not to mention shooting and the latter activities are confounded by wealthier quantiles of the population with low sizes. Basically the latter activities are characterized mostly by NEAT or intermediate activity, periodically like what we did in the past with tool-making, or whatever, an occasional hunt or two, sprint. Left hand side is more endurance-based, more strenuous, more repetitive.
Also you need subcutaneous fat for hormone regulation and whatnot. Bodybuilders destroy this and end up... eliminating their heart altogether. That thin layer is necessary.
I agree with your general point but competitive cross country skiing is one of the most physiologically demanding sports out there. It’s essentially long distance trail running on skis. The world record holders for cardiovascular capacity (VO2 max) are disproportionately cross country skiers.
Most of the olympic sports with the highest mean years of life are usually associated with wealth, artistic gymnastic with women and cross country skiing with nordic countries, all factors correlated positively with longevity.
I think bodybuilders simply take much more steroids than anybody else and also aren't that intelligent(I would guess less intelligent than cylclists, though I don't know) which is a particularly bad combination. Also you can see that a lot of their exercises aren't healthy. Ronnie Coleman taking painkillers to get through his workout, Markus Rühls back turning blue when he does lat pulls etc.
Unless you're full time body building influencer, there's no way you can "gain too much muscle" that'll be bad for your health. Most people don't lift. The ones that do lift regularly have regular jobs and are not taking performance enhancing drugs. It's not possible for a natty gym bro to build so much muscle that he has to be concerned about life expectancy of body builders.
Not building muscle is a health hazard especially when one gets old. Death from fall injuries is a big cause of mortality. And that's caused by not having good balance or grip strength because of weak muscles.
Looking at the chart it seems to tell you the relative stress index of those activities on the body beyond hormesis... constant protein shakes, constant creatine, constant pumping and upping. The latter activities at the end like horseriding and skiing don't seem to exert too much exogenous stress on the body when you think about it. Artistic gymnastics, fencing and whatnot are like short-burst activities -- not to mention shooting and the latter activities are confounded by wealthier quantiles of the population with low sizes. Basically the latter activities are characterized mostly by NEAT or intermediate activity, periodically like what we did in the past with tool-making, or whatever, an occasional hunt or two, sprint. Left hand side is more endurance-based, more strenuous, more repetitive.
Also you need subcutaneous fat for hormone regulation and whatnot. Bodybuilders destroy this and end up... eliminating their heart altogether. That thin layer is necessary.
I agree with your general point but competitive cross country skiing is one of the most physiologically demanding sports out there. It’s essentially long distance trail running on skis. The world record holders for cardiovascular capacity (VO2 max) are disproportionately cross country skiers.
Fascinating! Do you have a citation for the Olympic Sport/ Mean years of life chart?
Most of the olympic sports with the highest mean years of life are usually associated with wealth, artistic gymnastic with women and cross country skiing with nordic countries, all factors correlated positively with longevity.
I think bodybuilders simply take much more steroids than anybody else and also aren't that intelligent(I would guess less intelligent than cylclists, though I don't know) which is a particularly bad combination. Also you can see that a lot of their exercises aren't healthy. Ronnie Coleman taking painkillers to get through his workout, Markus Rühls back turning blue when he does lat pulls etc.