Chimps are impressively muscly

[arknor]

If that image is real I am absolutely speechless...

but the moon is tiny i can cover it with the palm of my hand, you cant do that with an elephant

 

[edscdk]

So how do their bodies build such density of muscle when they are only eating low protein foods?

they eat a lot?

anyway cows are strong and they only eat grass so protein cannot be essential to grow muscle....

I believe they will pretty much kill anything thats not fast enough to get away, they will also kill and eat members of other groups...

or as one woman found out the will eat your hands and face....

 

[Amp34]

Pretty much. We only need enough muscle to get about our daily lives, the brain has got the rest covered.

Hope we don't end up like the skinny ass 'greys' though. Now that would be unsightly.

You're ok, we're actually going the other way now, just ending up as fat blobs instead.

 

[Banzai_Joe]

For some reason that orangutan v sumo had me in stiches.
I just kept hearing "surrenderrrrr the orang-oootannnggg!"
Lol, sumo got totally rented.

 

[D83]

So how do their bodies build such density of muscle when they are only eating low protein foods?

Chimps are carnivores.

 

[Guerrilla]

Once upon a time humans were not so weak though, when they had to catch their food in the jungle and stuff. Reminds me of that recent BBC docu series that went around the world looking at how humans live from all reaches of mankind, some were extraordinary.

No doubt your right, but even then we still relied 99% on weapons to do all the work. Do you know what the documentry was called? Sound's interesting, I may give it a watch.

Wasn't Human Planet was it? If not it's also worth a watch, it was a good series.

 

[mrk]

^^That's it! Human Planet

Worth watching in HD, glorious vistas as you'd expect from a BBC production.

 

[Efour]

The people that lived in the trees and the ones that spent their entire lives afloat..... complete and utter mind blowing piece of TV that show well worth watching

 

[mrk]

Yeah those people were not ripped either but they were damn strong all the same.

I think it's okay to say that:

1) Proteins are not a fundamental requirement for muscle development
2) ^ For strength too

Unless I missed a beat!

 

[V4NT0M]

Strangest chimp-crush thread ever.

 

[Cosimo]

The people that lived in the trees and the ones that spent their entire lives afloat..... complete and utter mind blowing piece of TV that show well worth watching

Yes it was rather good.

 

[robgmun]

Yeah those people were not ripped either but they were damn strong all the same.

Ripped does NOT equal strong! You can be as strong as a body builder and not look so muscley

 

[mrk]

That's NOT what I was saying.

I was hinting along with what you posted there because people automatically assume ripped = strong but used the tree people as an example that to be strong = no ripping requirement.

 

[Merlin5]

Ripped does NOT equal strong! You can be as strong as a body builder and not look so muscley

How is that possible then? I can understand a human with less muscle being able to take down a massive bodybuilder if the less muscly person has good skill as a fighter. But how can a less muscly person be physically stronger if muscle mass is what determines physical strength?

 

[Cosimo]

Strangest chimp-crush thread ever.

A lot of people want to be chimps.

 

[V4NT0M]

A lot of people want to be chimps.

A lot of people ARE chimps!

 

[Cosimo]

A lot of people ARE chimps!

Indeed!

 

[Raikiri]

Chimps are carnivores.

No they aren't.

 

[ThomasTheTankEngine]

So how do their bodies build such density of muscle when they are only eating low protein foods?

Lots of the leaves they eat are surprisingly high in protein. When dried, a lot of them contain around 20-25%. More than enough, considering they're building their muscles slowly over the course of their life; Unlike a bodybuilder, who's trying to increase their size quickly.

Much of their strengh comes from 2 factors. Their muscles are attached to their bones in a more efficent manner than with humans. We all know that moving a pivot point has a great amount of effect on the load that can be moved. That applies to their muscles. Human biceps are attached to the forearm very close to the elbow. Move that attachment an inch further up the forearm, and you'll gain a huge amount of effeciency using a muscle of equal strengh. (ie, you can lift more).

The other factor is the human central nervous system. To keep our massive brain's ticking over, our CNS has had to sacrifice its efficiency in muscle activation. You might have the same number of fibres in a muscle as a chimp, but 99% of the time, you can't activate them all, where as the chip can.

The only time you see humans achiving "ape-like" muscle activation, is under extreme stress... like when you hear stories about 50kg women lifting cars off their children when they're trapped.

 

[Skull]

How is that possible then? I can understand a human with less muscle being able to take down a massive bodybuilder if the less muscly person has good skill as a fighter. But how can a less muscly person be physically stronger if muscle mass is what determines physical strength?

That's where you're incorrect. Muscle mass is a factor in physical strength, but neurological efficiency is a massive factor - that is what percentage of muscle fibres you are able to recruit. The body limits the % you can voluntarily use to prevent injury and has to be trained to raise this. If two people have exactly the same amount of mass but one is only able to recruit 50% of his fibres and the other recruits 90% , the latter will be far stronger.