Fat no defense

[John_Clements]

Francisco, did you mean to say you agree it was "not" a defense?

Fat is very easy to cut through, I should say "almost" like cutting through water.

From the Old Testament there is an account of how Ehud slew Eglon the king of Moab, where we read: “And Ehud made for himself a sword with two edges, a cubit in length; and he girded it on his right thigh under his clothes. And he presented the tribute to Eglon king of Moab. Now Eglon was a very fat man….And Ehud reached with his left hand, took the sword from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly; and the hilt also went in after the blade, and the fat closed over the blade, for he did not draw the sword out of his belly…” (Judges, 3:16-3:22).

I suppose bulky body weight can have its advantages at times, in grappling or in dealing powerful blows. But, you are right about its hindrances. The animal kingdom is a good example. Naturally fat animals exist only in the artic regions and even there, they are fit.

I have had to laugh the few times when sparring ignorant obese opponents who have more than once used the lame excuse, "That cut would not have really killed me, my fat would have protected me."

JC

[TimSheetz]

LOL!!!!

I have been thinking about EHUD and Eglon ever since this thread opened!

Judges is one of my very favorite books of the Bible, frankly. Shamgar being my favorite character - only one verse about him.

Tim

[Rod-Thornton]

I think I read earlier in this thread from someone to look at the animal kingdom.... Okay. I did. It seems to suggest that FAT is no sort of defence. Here's the logic:

1. In the animal kingdom, there is only the pragmatic...that which works and survives to breed and evolve.
2. In the animal kingdom, most "attacks" are from tooth, nail, and claw....i.e., edged or crushing weapons.
3. In the animal kingdom, many species must endure either hot, or cold climates....thus all species in a given climate could possibly benefit from fat layers as insulation, stored body energy, etc.
4. THE ONLY ANIMALS that I can come up with that have natural FAT layers are bears, whales, walrus, etc.
5. These animals have no natural enemies. I.e., I doubt that they need concern themselves overmuch with attacks of tooth and nail and claw.

Some may find it a weak argument, but it certainly does suggest that if fat layers provided significant protection, it would have evolved as a normal component of many more species than actually have it, eh?

Besides, as I can attest to, carrying any amount of excess body mass in endeavors of rapid, explosive, lightening-quick maneuvers only slows those actions down...hardly an argument for an attack with an edged weapon in either the animal or human worlds.

Incidentally, if you think about it, none of those animals are known for being "fast-movers" or explosive.... I for one am firmly in the camp of fat not being beneficial for defense, except maybe as a padding to cushion a blunt trauma like a punch. ( I consider a bullet being a form of rapid, blunt trauma)...certainly not against any cutting actions, however. Others may disagree with my logic however.

[TimSheetz]

The fat animals are the ones where surviving through hibernation or extreme cold is a factor.

TIm

[Rod-Thornton]

Yeah, Tim, agreed. -I guess that's my whole point. If fat provided for anything else, like a "natural armour" as someone postulated...then nature would have given many herbivores more fat and less "fleet of hoof" as it were. Sadly, I missed the program JC referenced on the History Channel, but if indeed fat offered any sort of armour to cuts, it had to be incidental and a corollary effect of diet, certainly not a focused endeavor of over-eating.....except maybe the sumo wrestling.

[Logan Weed]

Well bears do have natural predators - other bears. Against which thier very long, thick fur seems to be an excellent defense. Likewise dogs can play quite roughly with no ill effects. I guess hide and metal is our fur, we just don't grow it quite as easily.

[Francisco Uribe]

JC,

Fat is no kind of bio-armor. I also agree with the idea that "it can be cut like water"
I do not agree with the statement that fat is mostly water. That is incorrect. By it bichemical composition fat tissue excludes water.

What I can infer of the type of gladiatorial diet, and the type of physical activity that they were subject to is:
1) Gladiators may have very well depended on aerobic metabolism, using as primary source of energy body fat.

2) A fast way to replenish body fat, is by eating fat. Seeds are a cheap, abundant and healthy source of oils . Barley and beans make excelent source of vegetal oils (liquid fat).

Considering that these guys had to "go to battle" way more often that your average soldier, it would make sense to sustain this sort of diet.
But not with the idea of getting into a bio-armor, but with the idea of physical conditioning and preparation for strenous excercising.

Am I clear now?

Fco

[John_Clements]

That's logical. good. Thanks.

JC

[JeffGentry]

Hey gent's


Vegan's/vegetarian eat alot of nut's, grain's and bean's, can we say tofu, I have never seen a fat vegan/vegetarian, i am still pondering how the guy made a hypothosis that gladiator's were fat when you think of vegan's or vegetarian's in the modern world there diet's seem very similar, bean's, rice, barley, millet, bread, some eat a little animal product's such as cheese, milk, egg's, and even a litte meat from time to time(although they are not considered true vegan's).

Jeff

[Joachim Nilsson]

I have never seen a fat vegan/vegetarian, i am still pondering how the guy made a hypothosis that gladiator's were fat when you think of vegan's or vegetarian's in the modern world

Because most vegans and vegetarians don't eat big enough portions when they eat. They've supplanted the usual diet that most of us eats with veggie-portions of the same size. Which isn't enough (calorie-wise). Vegetable foodstuffs usually don't contain that much calories in the first place, so to get a calorie intake that is similar to that of a person with a more mixed diet, one would have to eat double (or even tripple) portions.

[Mike Cartier]

I dunno about that Joachim
I have been vegetarian for about 7 or 8 years now and I eat the same amount of food i always did when i was a carnivore.
Depends on the food i think, I also supplement with massive amounts of beer.
I weigh 5 pounds more than I did at 18 and I just hit my 40th birthday

[Joachim Nilsson]

I also supplement with massive amounts of beer.

Well, there ya have it, Mike. <img src="/forum/images/icons/grin.gif" alt="" />

But... Of course it depends on the vegetable source used, but that seems to be the one thing that most (note: most) vegetarians more often than not have overlooked somehow. This is just something I have oberved on my own from studying various types of veggie-eaters.

Besides, at 40 you have a slightly slower metabolism than most average 18 year olds. <img src="/forum/images/icons/smile.gif" alt="" />

Best,