nycman530
New York, NY
64, joined Dec. 2010
|
I know there is a lot of controversy among the fitness crowd. But which of these carry the most impact when it comes to gains? Genetics, training, or diet? In my opinion, genetics is about 50%, training 25%, and diet 25%. I think my genetics are about average or maybe slightly above, but my training and diet combined resulted in my being well over average, especially for my age. Your thoughts? Discuss!
Meet singles at DateHookup.dating, we're 100% free! Join now!
|
josecuervosilv
Downey, CA
42, joined Jun. 2010
|
Across the population, I would also say genetics are a big factor. You see it when people on crappy overall programs make good gains and people on great overall programs don't make good gains.
|
dingobarramacus
Boston, MA
89, joined Nov. 2013
|
Genetics and diet are kind of inversely proportional- the better your genes, the less important is your diet...
But if genetics were all equal, I'd say it's 65% nutrition and 35% training
|
saddestangel7
Santa Clara, CA
55, joined Apr. 2011
|
I think genetics plays a big role. If you are predisposed to being fat then even with diet and training once you achieve your goals you must continue the same program for a lifetime otherwise will they'll gain all plus, more weight back. A person who is average/normal genetics and doesn't have a weight problem only needs to do a minimal amount of training to keep to maintain their fitness level.
|