I can't even tell you how many times I have heard this. A client recently asked me, "What AB exercises will remove the tire around my waist?" I informed her that there aren't any AB exercises to target fat loss in a certain area. It is a huge misconception that we can get rid of our "trouble spots" by training specific sites of the body.
Although it is well-established that there is a site-specific response in bone density with upper and lower body resistance training (Winters-Stone et al.), this is not the case for adipose tissue. Instead, significant weight changes only occur with a total change in body composition, which results from gains/losses in fat-free mass and body fat. (Kyle UG., Melzer K et al.). Even with a decrease in body fat, one's genetic make-up is a major determinant of where fat loss occurs on the body.
For example, genes that metabolize estrogens and androgens are important in body fat regulation. In a study measuring the effects of exercise on fat loss in postmenopausal women, genetic polymorphisms showed a change in "BMI, total and percentage body fat, or subcutaneous and intra-abdominal fat during a year-long exercise intervention trial." This means that there are genetic factors involved in total body fat regulation. (Tworoger SS et al).
That's not to say one can't get rid of her "trouble spots." By expending more energy and decreasing caloric energy, she will increase total lean body mass, which is known to help raise metabolism. A training program must comprise of both cardiovascular activity AND weight training for this reason. In order to keep those "trouble spots" away, muscle is necessary to keep up a high metabolic rate. (Kyle UG., Zhang FF et al).
References
Kyle UG. Melzer K. Kayser B. Picard-Kossovsky M. Gremion G. Pichard C. Eight-year longitudinal changes in body composition in healthy Swiss adults. Journal of the American College of Nutrition. 25(6):493-501, 2006 Dec.
Kyle UG. Zhang FF. Morabia A. Pichard C. Longitudinal study of body composition changes associated with weight change and physical activity. Nutrition. 22(11-12):1103-11, 2006 Nov-Dec.
Tworoger SS. Chubak J. Aiello EJ. Yasui Y. Ulrich CM. Farin FM. Stapleton PL. Irwin ML. Potter JD. Schwartz RS. McTiernan A. The effect of CYP19 and COMT polymorphisms on exercise-induced fat loss in postmenopausal women. Obesity Research. 12(6):972-81, 2004 Jun.
Winters-Stone KM. Snow CM. Site-specific response of bone to exercise in premenopausal women. Bone. 39(6):1203-9, 2006 Dec.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I love reading this blog, the energy comes across so vibrantly.
That said, I completely disagree with your theory. I achieved my six pack abs via the love handler.
http://douglascress.blogspot.com/2007/02/newest-thing-to-shake-foundation-of.html
you, friend, are an anomaly: a rare, physiological specimen, gifted with an efficient metabolism. That said, I would like to take some credit for your love-handling abs ;)
I'm not certain I believe the above commenter. While genetics are the "lucky dice", working muscles simply doesn't burn fat (quickly). If this love handler integrates a cardio and strength workout, maybe then yes, but aside from that, no.
Right now, I'm 5'11, 229 lbs. I have 21% body fat (roughly 48.1 lbs). I professionally wrestle at a local venue, and on a big night, I can burn upwards of 1200 calories on one night. Outside of the ring, I have to train hard to keep in "ring-shape" - usually i'm limited to two 20 minute running days (staggered intervals of 2.5 mph, 5 mph and 7.5 mph @ 1% incline), and two 45 minute high intensity strength training days (day 1- show muscles [arms, abs] day 2- go muscles [legs, chest, shoulders/back].) You can see I'm extremely active. I don't overeat either. Where's the problem you ask?
Between college, running a web development business, and wrestling, I have little time to make NUTRITIOUS meals. Vitamin deficiency has been my achille's heel, and tablets have a low absorption rate for me. I have a faint 4-pack, but a good 90% of my ab fat is intra-abdominal.
In conclusion: Don't rely solely on vitamin tablets (even natural tabs), for training nutrition. Make sure the FOOD you eat is high in iron, zinc, and chromium.
I'd like to know Ms. Beck's opinion on all this; she seems quite knowledgable. Cheers!
I'm not certain I believe the above commenter. While genetics are the "lucky dice", working muscles simply doesn't burn fat (quickly). If this love handler integrates a cardio and strength workout, maybe then yes, but aside from that, no.
Right now, I'm 5'11, 229 lbs. I have 21% body fat (roughly 48.1 lbs). I professionally wrestle at a local venue, and on a big night, I can burn upwards of 1200 calories on one night. Outside of the ring, I have to train hard to keep in "ring-shape" - usually i'm limited to two 20 minute running days (staggered intervals of 2.5 mph, 5 mph and 7.5 mph @ 1% incline), and two 45 minute high intensity strength training days (day 1- show muscles [arms, abs] day 2- go muscles [legs, chest, shoulders/back].) You can see I'm extremely active. I don't overeat either. Where's the problem you ask?
Between college, running a web development business, and wrestling, I have little time to make NUTRITIOUS meals. Vitamin deficiency has been my achille's heel, and tablets have a low absorption rate for me. I have a faint 4-pack, but a good 90% of my ab fat is intra-abdominal.
In conclusion: Don't rely solely on vitamin tablets (even natural tabs), for training nutrition. Make sure the FOOD you eat is high in iron, zinc, and chromium.
I'd like to know Ms. Beck's opinion on all this; she seems quite knowledgable. Cheers!
Anonymous, thank you—I will try my best to provide you with feedback. The above comments from Douglas Cress and me should probably be seen in jest.
As for your recommendations about getting nutrients from food over vitamins—GOOD! What method of body fat measurement did you use in order to determine your 21% worth? As you may or may not know, there is a large range of error depending upon the tool used. If you think you are active, not overeating, but still have abdominal fat, it can certainly be a result of your food preferences. But before you jump to that, you may want to double check your caloric intake. Sometimes we underestimate. The Mifflin-St Jeor equations are the most accurate to date: Male: BMR = 10×weight + 6.25×height - 5×age + 5 and Female: BMR = 10×weight + 6.25×height - 5×age – 161. According to your stats, I would have to know your age in order to get a baseline BMR, at which point we could enter in an activity coefficient
• 1.200 = sedentary (little or no exercise)
• 1.375 = lightly active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/week)
• 1.550 = moderately active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/week)
• 1.725 = very active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days a week)
• 1.900 = extra active (very hard exercise/sports and physical job)
It seems that you are a very active individual, as you mentioned.
If you think you’re eating within the range that your body needs, stick to the basics: fruits, vegetables, whole grains and healthy oils from fish and plants. Protein sources from lean meats and fish. Those are and always have been the recs. I wouldn’t worry about which vitamins you are or are not getting enough of-- if you are following these guidelines, you really shouldn’t be deficient in anything. Remember that deficiencies do not occur on a daily basis, and that your habits over time cause a cumulative effect. Cheers to you, too!
Post a Comment