How to get a toned body?

Susan James42 said:Just a heads-up: you can work your tail off on muscle density and definition, but you’re never going to look like a Black woman who just happens to catch the bus once a month... they just have a different muscle structure. They always seem more toned and compact than white people...

I get that, but honestly? I'm not a huge fan when a girl is overly muscular either. Moderation is key. I guess I just "envy" how they don't show cellulite as much because of their skin tone. But if I'm being real, when I was traveling through the States, hardly any Black women I met were actually slim. Most of them were carrying at least 30 pounds extra. It's a shame, really, because they have such a massive head start when it comes to building muscle. Maybe the younger girls were a bit leaner.

George Bailey2 said:What comes to mind when you say "chemicals"? Are we talking anabolic steroids here?

Honestly, if you look at anything containing even a tiny fraction of synthetics—I’m talking about those artificial vitamins and stuff people take daily—that counts as "chemistry." Just think about it for a second. 😉

I just hope there isn't too much "chemistry" in my Budweiser... 🙂 😁 👍

frozenlynx33 said:Anything containing at least 1% synthetic material—like all those artificial vitamins—is "chemistry." Just think about that. 😉

I certainly hope there isn't any "chemistry" in my Bud Light... 🙂 😁 👍

Synthetic stuff in food??? Are you actually sure you know what you're talking about?

By the way, what do you mean by "artificial vitamins"? There is only one kind of vitamin—they are natural. It doesn't matter if you get them from eating fruit and vegetables or if you take them in pill form after they've been isolated from that same fruit and veg.

granitesailor33 said:That woman from the movie you mentioned was just born that way. You aren't going to magically grow curves, especially when it comes to breasts. It’s unrealistic to think that working out with 25s is going to turn you into a 34D. Your butt might change, sure, but you'll have to work your tail off for it.

I get it. But personally, I'm more of a 34B, and for my height, it works fine. I lucked out because my body is built in a way where everything stays pretty proportional. So even if I lose a little size up top, my bottom half will probably shrink too, keeping things balanced. And by "bottom half," obviously I mean my ass. My whole goal isn't about being huge; it's about staying toned. I want to keep some curves—even if they're smaller than what I have now—so I don't end up looking like a coat hanger. Honestly, props to you for pulling off what you did. It proves it can actually be done.

George Bailey2 said:Synthetic stuff in food??? You sure you even know what you're talking about?

Anyway, how can you say that—artificial vitamins? There’s only one kind of vitamin: natural. It doesn't matter if you get them from actual fruit and veggies or from a pill after they've stripped everything else away.

Yeah, synthetic food additives. They aren't pulling those things out of produce; they're cooking them up in a lab. That's why it's synthesized, not natural.

Grab yourself a home workout kit.
It’s a small investment, but man, does it pay off big time.
😁

granitesailor33 said:Precisely so, and don't even get me started on how elastic his skin is. My boyfriend is Black, and he has a physique that defies description, paired with skin so supple it seems almost unbelievable... Given my excellent cooking skills, he has developed a bit of a midsection, but because his skin is so remarkably elastic, you can't quite grasp or feel any excess weight...
That woman from the movie you mentioned is just naturally built that way; achieving curves, especially when it comes to the bust, is an uphill battle. It isn't realistic to expect that simply doing some floor exercises will magically transform your glutes, though it does happen eventually, if one is willing to endure the struggle...
I have been working out for a year now, though I only truly committed to an intensive routine about three months ago—meaning every other day, sometimes even daily, for two to two and a half hours at a time—and the results are finally manifesting. I am most impressed by my core; it has become so firm that my abs are actually starting to show, though I should mention I dedicate at least thirty minutes solely to abdominal work, combined with running and cycling for about forty minutes total to burn through the fat...
Anything is possible, provided you don't lose heart. I used to spend all my time making excuses to avoid the local gym, but now, I find I cannot function without it. I was always slender, but my body lacked tone, and what I have achieved thus far feels quite significant...

What nonsense... all this talk about Black people being inherently different. Just because someone has certain physical traits doesn't mean they are superior. Lately, there seems to be this growing obsession with glorifying Black physiques, almost bordering on a cult of admiration, but they aren't inherently better than anyone else. If someone trains, they will look good, whether they are Black or white. The choice is yours: either commit to the work or just sit there watching TV and admiring everyone else...

And please, enough with the constant focus on race...

Karen Gonzalez38 said:Yeah, synthetic stuff in food. They don't pull those nutrients from actual fruit; they synthesize them in a lab. That’s why it isn't natural—it’s synthesized.

Exactly. I was explaining this very same thing to a friend the other day regarding glutamine. I take it every single day, and I had to ask him: is that "chemistry" and "synthetic" too? It's isolated from sugar beets, yet he’s completely obsessed with this idea of "chemicals" and labs where they cook up things called vitamins. There's also this widespread belief that protein powders are purely chemical products because "it's cheaper than isolating them from whey," and people just accept that as "chemically produced."
Unfortunately, people are blinded by prejudice. They cling to the idea that natural equals healthy and artificial equals unhealthy, which is absolute nonsense.
I’m not even going to get into an argument about synthetic vitamins because it’s a waste of breath. Personally, I take Eclipse 2000 complex 24 vitamins. On the label for every single vitamin, it clearly states the source. For example, next to Vitamin D, it says "from fish liver oil," and so on. Sure, there are cheap vitamins on the market that are "cooked up" by God knows who—especially the effervescent ones—but when we are discussing vitamins here, I assume we are talking about reputable, top-tier manufacturers.
Regards

George Bailey2 said:Synthetic additives in our food?? Are you actually serious right now—do you even have a clue what you're talking about?

By the way—how can you even wrap your head around the whole "synthetic vitamin" argument? It’s a bit of a reach, isn't it? To me, vitamins are just... vitamins. They are what they are—purely natural. Whether you're getting them from a crisp apple or a handful of kale, or if you're swallowing a pill that was isolated from those exact same fruits and vegetables, the essence remains the same. It's all the same stuff once it hits your system.

Look, any kind of synthetic chemistry in the body—no matter how much or how little—is inherently problematic. I’m trying to be careful with my wording here; I really don't want to step on any toes or offend the chemists lurking in these forums—heaven knows we need them—but I have to say it. I’m specifically talking about those vitamins manufactured by Big Pharma. We aren't talking about anything that looks like actual fruit or vegetables; nothing that would even make sense on a postcard, let alone something actually extracted from nature. Just think about it for a second—how exactly does a giant like Pfizer source its "produce"? I highly doubt they're out there picking organic peaches in Georgia. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if their lab walls were just covered in cheap wallpaper featuring pictures of fruit to hide the fact that it's all just white powder and test tubes. 😉 😁

I see where you're coming from—you’re thinking about those "all-natural" vitamins, the ones supposedly extracted straight from real fruits and veggies and packed into supplements. It sounds great on paper, right? But honestly, you really have to stop and ask yourself: which ones are actually the real deal, and which ones are just clever marketing fluff? It’s easy to get swept up in the labels, but how can you actually be sure? How do you tell the difference between a legitimate nutrient profile and something that’s basically just expensive, processed dust? You’ve got to look a little deeper than the shiny packaging—it’s not always as simple as it seems. 😕 🙄

Karen Gonzalez38 said:Oh, let's talk about that "synthetic" stuff they're pumping into our food—it’s a whole thing. You see, they aren't exactly out there picking fruit from an orchard to get those additives; no, they’re busy synthesizing the whole mess in a lab. It’s just not natural—it’s purely manufactured. Honestly, it reminds me of those old science experiments we had to do back in high school—you know, the ones where you'd try to create something "new" only to realize it looked nothing like the real deal? Same exact energy here. It's synthesized, plain and simple.

Look, let’s not get ahead of ourselves by painting everyone with the same brush—generalizing is a slippery slope, isn't it? There are actually still companies out there producing vitamins that are genuinely natural rather than just some lab-grown, synthetic concoction. The catch? They’re becoming increasingly rare. The technology required to extract nutrients from actual plants is incredibly expensive, and frankly, most corporations look at those overhead costs and decide it's simply not worth the headache. It's much easier—and significantly more profitable—to just stick to the chemical route without having to bother with the massive investment needed for real fruit and vegetable processing. Why deal with the complexity of nature when you can just cook up a formula in a vat? 🙄 😉

George Bailey2 said:Yeah, I was actually having this exact same conversation with a buddy of mine just the other day—I was trying to explain that the glutamine I take every single morning (and honestly, is it even "synthetic" or "chemical" at all? I mean, who knows these days?) is actually isolated from sugar beets. He just looked at me like I had two heads. He’s one of those people who is absolutely obsessed with avoiding anything labeled "chemicals"—you know the type—who thinks everything made in a lab, including basic vitamins, is some kind of sinister concoction. There’s also this widespread, almost unshakable belief that protein powders are all purely synthetic because, apparently, "it's cheaper than isolating them from whey." It’s become this general consensus where if it isn't pulled straight from a cow in a field, people just shrug and label it "chemistry." It's funny how we define "natural" versus "chemical" nowadays—it feels more like a lifestyle choice than actual science.
It’s honestly exhausting how people cling to these deep-seated biases—it's almost pathological at this point. You see it everywhere, especially with that tired old cliché that "natural" automatically means healthy while anything "artificial" is somehow toxic. It’s absolute nonsense, really—pure, unadulterated nonsense. People just want a simple label to cling to because thinking critically about nutrition or chemistry feels like too much work—though, I suppose that's a bit harsh, isn't it? But still, the logic is fundamentally flawed.
Look, I’m not even going to bother getting into a heated debate about synthetic vitamins—it’s honestly a lost cause at this point. Personally, I stick to my Eclipse 2000 complex 24 regimen. What I appreciate about them is that they actually bother to list the specific source for every single nutrient right there on the label; for instance, next to the Vitamin D, it’ll explicitly state "from fish liver oil," and so on. It just gives me a bit of peace of mind. I mean, sure, the market is absolutely flooded with those cheap, "processed" vitamin concoctions—especially those fizzy effervescent tablets that feel more like science experiments than nutrition—but when we're having a conversation here, I'm operating under the assumption that we're discussing reputable, top-tier manufacturers.
Hey there.

I’m right there with you—there is definitely a massive amount of prejudice surrounding supplements—but since you clearly know your stuff, I think you realize just how much absolute garbage is actually sitting on the shelves these days. It’s getting harder and harder to be certain about what we’re actually putting into our bodies, even when we stick to those "big-name brands" you mentioned. Then again, I suppose it isn't exactly in the best interest of a giant like Pfizer to have some massive scandal or a scathing exposé ruin their reputation overnight—they have too much at stake for that—so if we truly have a choice in the matter, I completely agree: we really ought to be scrutinizing exactly who we're buying from and what's actually inside the bottle. It’s a bit of a minefield out there. 🙂 👍

ps: just curious—how often are you actually taking that Eclipse 2000 complex 24? Like, what's the daily frequency we're talking about here?

frozenlynx33 said:ps: let me know how often you take that "Complex 24"—like, how many times a day? [/B]

The label says to take two daily, but I just stick to one. Honestly, given the potency, one is plenty. Also, look at the price difference. Even after factoring in customs, the total cost is incomparable to what you'd pay for vitamins here in America, especially when you consider the quality. I pick up all my other supplements on iHerb, too; everything is roughly 30% of the retail price you find in the States.
I’ve got a shipment arriving from iHerb later this week, so I can email you the invoice and the customs breakdown if you want to see the actual math for yourself.

George Bailey2 said:Even though the label says to take two a day, I just stick to one—it’s plenty enough given how much is packed in there.

Alright, let’s break this down logically, shall we?
- Do you honestly believe you’re more of an expert on your specific vitamin requirements than the actual scientists who formulated the recommendation?
- Is providing your body with its necessary nutrients just once a day really sufficient?
- Don't you think your body deserves better—that there's actually a case for receiving high-quality ingredients at least three times a day?
- How many meals are you eating daily, and what’s the reasoning behind that frequency?
- Are you familiar with how absorption works—specifically, how much the body can actually process at any single moment?
- Do you truly believe that "cheaper" or "more expensive" is always a direct indicator of quality?

I could certainly go off on my own little tangent about my own perspective, but I’m genuinely curious to hear your thought process here... since you seem to have quite a few theories on the matter. 🤔

frozenlynx33 said:>
Alright, let's break this down step by step:
- Do you actually believe you know more about your specific vitamin requirements than the experts who established those official guidelines?

What’s printed on the label of this product, or any similar supplement, isn't a medical recommendation; it's simply a breakdown of the ingredient amounts per dose.

- Do you think providing the body with its necessary vitamins just once a day is sufficient?

I get my vitamins through my meals every single day, and I only take supplements—specifically Vitamin C—twice a day in tablet or powder form.

- Don't you feel your body deserves more, or perhaps has a need to receive high-quality nutrients at least three times a day?

That is exactly what I am doing. I’m not one of those people eating greasy hamburgers, pork, lamb, or anything else fried in oil, nor do I touch foods loaded with high-glycemic carbohydrates.

- How many meals do you eat a day and why?

On average, I eat five times a day. Why? To keep my metabolism revved up, to ensure I can hit my protein targets, to aid digestion, and honestly, because I enjoy eating.🙂

- Are you aware of the body's absorption limits, or how much it can actually process at any given time?

I'm not entirely sure I follow the question. If I understand you correctly: yes, I follow specific rules regarding what I eat. Generally, I have fibrous carbs and protein in the morning; before training (running, hitting the gym, playing pickup basketball...), I go for complex carbs and some protein; after training, I opt for high-glycemic carbs plus whey protein; and before bed, it's strictly protein alone (like low-fat cottage cheese).

- Do you think everything that is cheaper (or more expensive) is inherently better or worse?

Generally speaking, high-quality food costs more. I know this firsthand because my diet is completely different from the rest of my household, and the price difference is obvious. Aside from items I buy regularly that most "normal" people wouldn't dream of touching (flaxseed oil, low-fat cottage cheese, oats...), the meat I eat is usually more expensive, and even the bread I consistently buy is higher end.

- I could give you my own opinion, but I'm genuinely curious about your perspective, since you clearly know your stuff... 🤔

Look, I’m not just theorizing here—this is how I actually eat. Knock on wood, but at 32 years old, my health is flawless. I can't even remember the last time I caught a flu, and those throat infections that used to plague me twice a month? Completely gone. For context, I'm 6'2" and 205 lbs.

George Bailey2 said:The stuff printed on the label of this or any similar product isn't a suggestion—it’s just the specific amount of ingredients contained in every single dose.

Actually, you're mistaken there; it clearly states "Serving size: 2 Tablets, Servings per Container: 30," which implies they recommend two tablets a day—meaning one bottle lasts you 30 days.
In my humble opinion, the body really needs multivitamins at least three times a day—I'll get around to explaining my reasoning for that later, if I can find my notes.

George Bailey2 said:I try to get vitamins in with every meal, though I only take supplements in tablet or powder form—like Vitamin C—twice a day.

That's pretty much my strategy. I'm not one of those people who goes grabbing greasy burgers, pork, lamb, or anything else fried in oil—or frankly, any food packed with high-glycemic carbohydrates.

Okay, I see you do realize that the body requires vitamins and minerals throughout the entire day, which means we should ideally be taking them with every meal.
But here’s the kicker: how can we ever be certain that the meals where we *don't* take supplements (vitamins, minerals, etc.) actually contain what we need? The reality is, we can't exactly walk into a lab with our lunch to get it analyzed just to be 100% sure.
So, we *assume* we're getting enough if we watch our diet, eat balanced, and load up on fruits and vegetables, but let's face it—that produce doesn't have nearly as many nutrients as it did maybe 10 or 20 years ago, and those are cold, hard facts. Even the World Health Organization is aware of this; they've moved from simply suggesting vitamin and mineral intake to warning that using dietary supplements is essentially NECESSARY in this day and age.

Athletes obviously have higher nutritional demands, and I can tell you're quite mindful of that, but I still don't think a once-a-day multivitamin cuts it for you. Even if you're being careful with your diet, you can never truly know exactly how much you're actually absorbing through standard meals alone.
Antioxidants are especially critical for athletes because intense training increases oxygen intake, which brings along free radicals that go on a rampage against unprotected cells in our bodies—cells we protect using antioxidants. Scientists suggest that to hit a sufficient daily antioxidant target (for an average person), you'd need to eat roughly 6 or 7 pounds of fruits and vegetables a day, which—let's be honest—is something almost nobody actually does. Of course, doing it that way would mean consuming far too many calories, which is why people turn to supplements. They are vital for athletes, certainly, but even more so for smokers who are constantly inhaling "dirty air"—you know, toxins.

George Bailey2 said:On average, five times a day. Why? To kickstart the metabolism, to allow for higher protein intake, to aid digestion, and honestly... because I just love to eat.🙂

Those are all excellent answers, and credit to you for sticking to them. I'd just add that the body can't absorb everything at once if we only eat once a day; if we want to ensure we're getting enough nutrients, we really ought to be doing it multiple times a day in smaller, more manageable doses.

George Bailey2 said:I’m not entirely sure I follow the question—but if I am, then yes, I definitely stick to certain rules regarding my diet. Generally speaking, I go for fibrous carbs and protein in the morning; before training (whether it's running, hitting the gym, or a pickup game of soccer...), I opt for complex carbs paired with some protein; after a workout, it's high-glycemic carbs plus whey protein; and right before bed, just pure protein (like cottage cheese)...

This whole thing actually ties back a bit to my previous point.
Absorption capacity is a massive factor here—let me give you an example to illustrate.
If the recommended daily dose of "something" is, say, 900mg, but we take it all at once while our body's absorption limit at any given moment is only 300mg, then we’ve essentially flushed 600mg down the drain. In that specific scenario, it would be much more effective to take 300mg three times a day so the body can actually utilize it (though, of course, there are other variables involved, like staying properly hydrated... and so on). I hope that makes the point I was trying to get across.

George Bailey2 said:Basically, high-quality food costs more. I know this firsthand because my grocery cart looks nothing like what the rest of my household buys, and the price difference is glaring. Beyond the staples, the things I regularly buy—which most people wouldn't even think to stock—are pricier, like flaxseed oil, cottage cheese, oats... even the meat I eat tends to be more expensive, and the bread I pick up is higher end too...

Exactly, and high-quality supplements are also more expensive. 🙂
The thing is, you mentioned earlier that your vitamins are cheap (Serving size: 2 Tablets $13.95, then on sale for $6.99), so it makes me wonder: what's the guarantee they’re actually high quality? And why the discount? In my experience, premium goods rarely go on clearance (think La Coste, Levi's... etc. 😉 )
Specifically, the label states: "Warnings: Always consult your physician before taking any dietary supplement. No health claims intended. Keep this and All medication out of The reach of children. In case of accidental overdose, seek professional assistance or contact a poison control center immediately."

Now, if these vitamins truly are natural—meaning they are isolated from actual fruits and vegetables—then there shouldn't really be a risk of overdosing, even for little kids or anyone else; the body simply absorbs what it needs and passes the rest through the digestive tract. If you overeat fruit, the worst that happens is a bit of indigestion, but otherwise, there's no cause for concern. I’ve heard of cases where kids have "overdosed" on natural vitamin sources and were perfectly fine. Just something to think about.
Perhaps I’m just a bit behind the curve since I haven't heard of this particular company (Complex 24), though maybe the answer is hidden in their name—interpreting "(2000)" as being founded in the year 2000, which would mean they've only been around for five years? I couldn't say for sure, as their website doesn't provide that kind of info. I know dozens of much more established brands doing the exact same thing, so I'm genuinely curious why you settled on this one—was it a recommendation or something?
And honestly, everything is significantly cheaper here in the US than it is in Europe, so you don't need to explain the pricing to me.

George Bailey2 said:Look, these aren't just "philosophies"—this is literally how I eat. Knock on wood, at 32 years old, I don't deal with any health issues; I can't even remember the last time I had the flu, and those sore throats that used to plague me at least twice a month are a distant memory. And yeah, I'm 6'2" and about 205 lbs.

If you’re hitting the gym regularly, that’s great—for me, standing at about 6'1", 200 lbs is the sweet spot.
I’m honestly glad everything is playing out exactly how you described and that you’re seeing those health improvements... 🙂
I have plenty of buddies who are absolute sticklers about what they eat, yet even among them, I've seen people struggling with anemia or various allergies. It really just reinforces my theory—which, granted, isn't mine alone—that if we want a truly balanced diet, we need to focus more on addressing nutrient deficiencies (basically, all the good stuff we're accidentally denying our bodies). That's where a lot of health issues stem from, though most people haven't even realized it yet.
My advice? Always aim to learn something new or hear a different perspective, and for heaven's sake, double-check your facts—especially when you're looking into similar supplements.
I used to try just about everything—brands like Optimum Nutrition, MuscleTech, or MusclePharm... I can't even remember them all at this point 😁—but nowadays, I’m much more skeptical. If a company stays vague about its history, doesn't say when it was founded, or keeps its leadership under wraps, then I don't consider that enough proof of quality. Good luck. 👋

frozenlynx33 said:................

Hey MacGregor, how have you been?
It looks like business is really booming for you!

frozenlynx33 said:You're wrong. It clearly states "Serving size: 2 Tablets, Servings per Container: 30," which means they recommend two tablets a day, making the bottle good for a 30-day supply.

No, that's just their suggestion, but they have no clue what my actual requirements are. They don't know if I worked a ten-hour shift or just sat on the couch watching TV. They don't know if I went for a run 6.2 miles or spent the entire day playing Football Manager...

Antioxidants are especially critical for athletes because intense exercise increases oxygen intake, which brings in more free radicals that attack unprotected cells in our bodies (cells we protect using antioxidants).

I agree. Personally, I fight off free radicals with flaxseed oil—which is loaded with alpha-lipoic acid, a potent antioxidant—along with an extra 200 IU of Vitamin E.

Exactly, and high-quality supplements cost more. 🙂
Since you mentioned your vitamins are cheap (60 Tablets for $13.95, then discounted to $6.99), I'm wondering what guarantee there is that they're actually high quality.

Those vitamins aren't cheap by American standards; they're only considered cheap compared to prices back home where these things are incredibly expensive.

Specifically said:"Warnings: Always consult your physician before taking any dietary supplement. No health claims intended. Keep this and All medication out of The reach of children. In case of accidental overdose, seek professional assistance or contact a poison control center immediately."

Of course. That kind of warning appears on absolutely every single dietary supplement, regardless of who manufactures them. It has nothing to do with the actual quality of the ingredients inside.

Hey, what kind of issues are you dealing with?

Is it just genetics, or are you naturally built that way? I’d love to be a bit more relaxed, even at 64. I'm solid as a rock—even my stomach is hard rather than soft.😁 🙄

Hey, what kind of issues are we talking about?

Is that just how your family is built, or are you naturally just really tense? Personally, I’d love to be a bit more relaxed, even at 64. I'm as stiff as a board—even my stomach is rock hard instead of being soft.😁 🙄

Hey, what kind of issues are we talking about?

Is this just how you're built, or is it a matter of being naturally tense? I'd love to feel a bit more relaxed, even at 64. I'm as stiff as a board—even my stomach feels rock hard instead of having any natural give.😁 🙄

George Bailey2 said:Nah, look—that’s just their general recommendation, but they have no clue what my specific needs are from one day to the next. They don't know if I’ve been grinding through a ten-hour shift at the office or if I’ve just been lounging on the couch watching Netflix; they certainly don't know if I went out for a long run 6.2 miles or spent the entire afternoon glued to Football Manager...

So, you're actually suggesting you know exactly what your body requires? 😕
We are talking about vitamins and minerals here, not protein!
(When you're more active, you obviously need more protein to prevent muscle breakdown and fuel performance.)

Our bodies demand minerals and vitamins regardless of whether we're out running marathons or just sitting around—they're essential for stress management and all those countless biochemical reactions happening under the hood that we can't even predict. The human body is essentially a perfect machine; it takes whatever raw materials (food) we give it and optimizes them for survival—our only real job is to make sure the machine actually gets the supplies it needs.

It isn't as simple as just tossing a random handful of vitamins or minerals together whenever we feel like it (you know, "oh, I need a bit of Vitamin C here, maybe some calcium, iron, or beta-carotene there"). That's just throwing money down the drain without seeing any real results. This is why nutrition is treated as a rigorous science in the first place.
Because, see, vitamins and minerals have to be in a form that exists in nature—they need to be natural equivalents, perfectly balanced, bioavailable, and capable of being assimilated right down to the cellular level!

I'll concede that there is a difference and that every single person has unique requirements, but honestly, trying to obsess over that is a losing battle—it's nearly impossible to quantify accurately. There's a standard average (the daily value) used as a baseline, which should ideally be spread out throughout the day rather than taken all at once... and if the vitamins are truly natural, and we're consuming enough, the body will simply take exactly what it needs at that moment and flush out the excess.

Systema said:What nonsense. All this talk about race, this obsession with certain groups being superior—it’s ridiculous. Lately, it feels like there's a cult forming around glorifying one specific demographic, but they aren't inherently better than anyone else. If someone works out, they'll look good regardless of their skin color. It’s up to you: either hit the gym or just sit on the couch staring at the TV admiring everyone else.

And enough with the... rhetoric regarding race.

I'm just speaking from experience. Of course, people aren't monoliths, but what I've observed in Black athletes—that specific skin elasticity—is something I simply haven't seen in white athletes.