Why would bodybuilders know more about health and fitness than triathletes, tennis players, or powerlifters? They read a lot of sciencey-sounding material, but are they savvier consumers of information than the average dieter? The faddishness of bodybuilding routines and bodybuilding nutrition doesn't build much confidence, and the nature of bodybuilding competition doesn't test whether a body has any functional capacity. I'm not saying bodybuilders aren't fit, just that their hobby doesn't demonstrate their fitness the way a triathlon demonstrates that a triathlete has good endurance and cardiovascular capacity, or squatting a heavy weight demonstrates that a powerlifter is strong.

In general, my good sense rebels at the notion of connecting bodybuilding with health. Bodybuilding is the game of hacking one particular, and particularly superficial, way of judging health and fitness. That's fine and good -- anything that gives people fun and satisfaction is great -- but there are many other ways of judging health and fitness that seem prima facie far superior to an obsession with body fat and muscularity. And there are many people busy hacking those superior measures: triathletes, powerlifters, soccer players, boxers, wrestlers, tennis players, and so forth. You have to assume that nutritional knowledge in those sports is pretty far behind bodybuilding before you would assume that an ideal powerlifter's diet is as healthy as an ideal tennis player's diet.

> connecting bodybuilding with health

Strength is perhaps the single best predictor of longevity and health. That's not to say vigorous strength training has been clinically shown to increase lifespan, but strong people are much healthier than weak people overall. Geriatric care givers get dramatic results out of strength training. I don't think one can make a similar case for jogging or tennis, or whatever. Strength training has uniquely powerful benefits.

"Body Building" as an aesthetic goal or a "sport" is stupid. But there a ton of reasons to think everyone should try to keep up a respectable ten rep bench/squat.

All of the sports I mentioned benefit from strength training, and I mentioned powerlifting twice. I know strength training is valuable. The thing is, a bodybuilder caring how much he can lift is like a poker player caring how well he can roll chips on his knuckles: it might correlate with dedication and therefore indirectly with performance, but it doesn't win him any points in competition.

Lifting weights is great and most people could benefit from a sensible diet and a regime of weightlifting involving correctly performed compound exercises (ie squats, deadlifts, military press, bench press, pull/chin ups).

Can't say I agree with listening to bodybuilders though. Bodybuilders are (generally speaking) genetic freaks who are taking exogenous testosterone, HGH and insulin. They're also using training/diet programs appropriate for people who're in their circumstances.

This is completely incorrect and frankly your statement mirrors the problem. A "Bodybuilder" isn't only a professional (and even then your statement about substances is not grounded in fact). It can be anyone who is deeply interested in getting results out of their bodies. Most bodybuilders don't take steroids and other substances, they are just in tune with what makes their body build muscle and burn fat.

I really suggest doing some research.

To add some extra support -

Weight training requires 3 things:

  1. Proper nutrition and eating habits.

  2. Proper sleeping and recovery habits.

  3. Proper weight training regimen.

It's better to miss out on a training session than miss a meal or not get enough sleep. So in this way yes, bodybuilders are certainly not just gym rats.

Most people don't want nor need to train and look like a bodybuilder. Bodybuilders do things that might be great for aesthetics, but not always necessarily straight forward nor healthy for the beginner. If you feel that you are at a decent level of fitness and want to take it to the next level, I would first look at the strength and conditioning programs of "normal" athletes.

The GP isn't saying people should want to look like a bodybuilder, he is saying that we all have something to learn from people who are able to affect such drastic changes in their own bodies (bodybuilders).

Most "normal" athletes simply live a lifestyle unbeknownst to them. It's just "natural" to be that way. Any bodybuilder has had to actively shape their appearance, which is the ultimate test for anyone actively wishing to modify their fitness or appearance.

It is funny. Whenever people ask for nutrition advice I refer them to forum.bodybuilding.com because they have a couple of dedicated support forums for nutrition / weight loss.

Most people almost never listen or bother to do. For some reason they have an aversion to taking advice from body builders even though those guys spend more of their time on fitness and nutrition than others.

Body builders (specifically that forum) have some good and some bad information. The problem I've noticed over the past year or so is with the amount of people answering questions based on "what they heard", not what has been proven or tested. Cliches aside, it's a giant case of citation needed. I find it mind-boggling how many "body builders" make claims to the effect of, "nutritionists don't know what we need, they're not the ones in the gym and they don't have testimonials." Yes, serious athletes (including body builders) have specific requirements, but basing your logic on individual testimonials instead of thorough trials is a bit presumptuous.