This reads like coping material from someone with no abs. 10-12% is definitely _not_ unhealthy.

Agree on the unhealthy BF% for bodybuilders though

The article points out that for visible abdominals one needs to maintain less than 10%, typically 8%, and that doctors recommend between 15% and 20%

10% is at the outskirts of what is generally considered acceptable, it is not a disaster such as the 3% that some body builders go for, but gaining more is definitely better and to achieve 10% one must in general consciously malnutitrion and avoid eating food that the body can use to synthesize fat.

Just an anecdote, but I've had multiple dexa scans in the 8-12% range spanning across years of bulking and cutting and I've never had better than what I consider mediocre abs - probably much better than the average adult male in the U.S. but never magazine photo worthy or anything like that. Other people did comment on them at ~8%, though, so my own perspective may be negatively biased.

> to achieve 10% one must in general consciously malnutitrion and avoid eating food that the body can use to synthesize fat.

No, no! If you are eating foods that humans should eat and exercising about an hour a day, you will naturally fall below 10% no matter what else you do.

I never limit the amount of food I eat and in no sense am I "malnourished". I am 80 kilos at around 8% body fat and I still have a lot to spare before it would start to affect my athletic performance as a sprinter. Go take a look at the typical 100m sprinter physique and tell me that any of them are malnourished!

> No, no! If you are eating foods that humans should eat and exercising about an hour a day, you will naturally fall below 10% no matter what else you do.

Perhaps if you mean with that what human beings should eat without that exercise.

> I never limit the amount of food I eat and in no sense am I "malnourished". I am 80 kilos at around 8% body fat and I still have a lot to spare before it would start to affect my athletic performance as a sprinter. Go take a look at the typical 100m sprinter physique and tell me that any of them are malnourished!

Sprinters are very much malnourished to keep weight to a minimum.

You will notice that in other sports that do not rely on reducing weight such as shot put or powerlifting, the athletes tend to develop a very different physique.

> Sprinters are very much malnourished to keep weight to a minimum.

This is NOT how any professional sprinter trains. Due to the nature of the exercise and the massive caloric expenditure that happens during sprinting, the mindset is more about trying to fit in in as much food as possible (while keeping to reasonable macro-nutrient ratios) rather than attempting to "keep weight at a minimum".

Haven't you ever seen how practically every 100m sprinter looks? It is not a physique that could be described as minimal, at all! My PB for the 100m is ~10.4s, so not quite pro but very fast.

why would you link an article from "fatherly.com" as a reputable source

contest bodybuilders get lean and that has detrimental hormonal effects and tanks their metabolism / NEAT, but evidence on post-contest weight rebounds suggests these are acute effects and don't have long-term adverse health outcomes. if you want to read more, look for papers on "metabolic adaptation" by Helms, Trexler, or Schoenfeld

Nonsense, if your abs aren't visible as a man then you are carrying too much fat.

What's unhealthy about body bulding, beyond the direct effects of the roids, is that these guys are like 300+ lbs. That and becoming severely dehydrated from taking diuretics before competitions.

Then I'm sure you can produce a source that runs contrary to my own on that matter, because even searching with neutral phrases such as “Is having a sixpack healthy?” returns nothing but results to me with experts saying that it isn't, and that to achieve it one must go below the minimum recommended body fat percentage.

In countries that aren't undergoing an obesity epidemic it is completely normal for men to have visible abs. Any man who does aerobic and anaerobic exercise for an extended period of time (and doesn't eat garbage, like 90% of Americans) will develop a six pack without even trying.

You cannot possibly think that men like this are malnourished...

https://yorkshireccc.com/uploads/crop_image/260/270/20140516...?

https://www2.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Sainsbury+British+Champi...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-cJwna2z0LQI/TeJHl4AZW9I/AAAAAAAAAO...

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/1b/8b/fc/1b8bfcef69fdb3c9aae7...

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/06/04/article-2647902-1...

> In countries that aren't undergoing an obesity epidemic it is completely normal for men to have visible abs.

Umm, which countries are you talking about here? I've been to several countries and I really don't think I've been anywhere where it's "completely normal" for men to have visible abs (let's say for definition's sake, I don't think I've been to a country in which >10% of the adult male population has abs). Not that I could necessarily tell most of the time, most people have shirts on during the day.

I do agree with your point though - I don't think visible as are unhealthy.

Not only do I do think they are, but I couldn't help but notice your lack of source as I asked.

They are very much malnourished and their body fat percentage is lower than is optimal for good health and they most likely suffer from the associated complications of too little body fat.

This is what they call unrealistic expectations acquired from media.

It is not, and in fact any man that actually uses their body (instead of filling it with shit) will have visible abs.

So you continue to assert, but you provide no source for your claim in the face of many sources that claim otherwise.