cannot spot reduce?

[BlahBlahYouToo]

while this is likely true, how about this scenario.

i am 5'10 170'ish. due to unhealthy eating, i packed on a bit of flab in my gut region that i would like to trim down a bit. the rest of my body, namely my limbs, are what i would describe as slim, meaning there's not much fat, nor is there much muscle.

now if i start doing some cardio and weight training, cut my calorie intake and improve my diet, i don't see how i can't slim down the mid-section and at the same time build a little muscle on my arms, legs, chest, shoulders, back, etc.
i may not get huge or a 6 pack right away, but this sounds reasonable right?

 

[rstrohkirch]

You basically answered your own question

If you're particular body places fat almost entirely in one area, then in most cases that is the area that would present the most improvement.

 

[purbeast0]

to build muscle you need a calorie excess.

to lose fat you need a calorie defecit.

 

[jiggahertz]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
to build muscle you need a calorie excess.

to lose fat you need a calorie defecit.

What he said.

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
to build muscle you need a calorie excess.

to lose fat you need a calorie defecit.

i can still tone right?

 

[jiggahertz]

Originally posted by: BlahBlahYouToo

Originally posted by: purbeast0
to build muscle you need a calorie excess.

to lose fat you need a calorie defecit.

i can still tone right?

What do you mean by tone?

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: BlahBlahYouToo

Originally posted by: purbeast0
to build muscle you need a calorie excess.

to lose fat you need a calorie defecit.

i can still tone right?

"toning" has nothing to do with building muscle. it has to do with losing fat.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

The idea of "spot reducing" fat usually describes the reduction of fat on a particular area of the body as a result of exercising the same muscles in that area, like saying situps would better reduce belly fat than squats would. This idea is indeed a myth.

If your genetics cause your body to accumulate fat on a particular area of your body, however, it only stands to reason that as you lose fat, it will come off that area at a rate proportional to that at which it accumulated. That isn't "spot reducing," though.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt
The idea of "spot reducing" fat usually describes the reduction of fat on a particular area of the body as a result of exercising the same muscles in that area, like saying situps would better reduce belly fat than squats would. This idea is indeed a myth.

If your genetics cause your body to accumulate fat on a particular area of your body, however, it only stands to reason that as you lose fat, it will come off that area at a rate proportional to that at which it accumulated. That isn't "spot reducing," though.

Winnar!

 

[TheNinja]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
to build muscle you need a calorie excess.

to lose fat you need a calorie defecit.

I do not totally agree with that. If you are just starting out lifting you can lose fat and gain muscle at the same time. Granted it takes a little longer but it is easily possible for a newbie.

People might mention "bulking" and "cutting", but in all honesty if you haven't lifted much in the past you can gain muscle and lose fat at the same time. Once you hit a plateau of sorts then you might want to "bulk" and "cut" but I would recommend doing what is called a "recomp". Resistance training with weights is critical though. If you just do cardio you'll end up as a skinny fat guy....basically a thin person with no muscle mass so you'll still look flabby and weak.

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: BlahBlahYouToo
while this is likely true, how about this scenario.

i am 5'10 170'ish. due to unhealthy eating, i packed on a bit of flab in my gut region that i would like to trim down a bit. the rest of my body, namely my limbs, are what i would describe as slim, meaning there's not much fat, nor is there much muscle.

now if i start doing some cardio and weight training, cut my calorie intake and improve my diet, i don't see how i can't slim down the mid-section and at the same time build a little muscle on my arms, legs, chest, shoulders, back, etc.
i may not get huge or a 6 pack right away, but this sounds reasonable right?

You're confused about what spot removal is, and what you're describing here.

You can't affect the fat storage pattern of your body by exercising certain parts of it (i.e. crunches to reduce fat storage over the abdomen). The reason you have your soft chunks over the middle is because that's where men typically store it. It's called the android body type, the other common option being gynoid.

What you're describing above is lowering your overall bodyfat and increasing your body's percentage of lean mass.

Spot removal being impossible isn't "likely true", it is fact.

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: TheNinja

Originally posted by: purbeast0
to build muscle you need a calorie excess.

to lose fat you need a calorie defecit.

I do not totally agree with that. If you are just starting out lifting you can lose fat and gain muscle at the same time. Granted it takes a little longer but it is easily possible for a newbie.

I don't care if you agree with it or not, the physiological science on this is crystal clear: When you have an energy (caloric) deficit, your body goes into catabolic processes, and in order to go into anabolic processes, you MUST have a caloric excess.

People who are unfit and begin a weight training regimen appear to gain muscle primarily because bodyfat being lost is no longer concealing definition.

 

[AbAbber2k]

Originally posted by: BlahBlahYouToo

Originally posted by: purbeast0
to build muscle you need a calorie excess.

to lose fat you need a calorie defecit.

i can still tone right?

Please strike that word from your lexicon.

 

[TheNinja]

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: TheNinja

Originally posted by: purbeast0
to build muscle you need a calorie excess.

to lose fat you need a calorie defecit.

I do not totally agree with that. If you are just starting out lifting you can lose fat and gain muscle at the same time. Granted it takes a little longer but it is easily possible for a newbie.

I don't care if you agree with it or not, the physiological science on this is crystal clear: When you have an energy (caloric) deficit, your body goes into catabolic processes, and in order to go into anabolic processes, you MUST have a caloric excess.

People who are unfit and begin a weight training regimen appear to gain muscle primarily because bodyfat being lost is no longer concealing definition.

Well I don't know the science behind it but I can guarentee you that people are able to build muscle and burn fat at the same time...especially people new to lifting. I have witnessed it first hand and even can do it myself. So you can try and come in with a cut and dried answer but then explain how I was able to get stronger and look bigger while losing weight in my gut?

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: TheNinja

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: TheNinja

Originally posted by: purbeast0
to build muscle you need a calorie excess.

to lose fat you need a calorie defecit.

I do not totally agree with that. If you are just starting out lifting you can lose fat and gain muscle at the same time. Granted it takes a little longer but it is easily possible for a newbie.

I don't care if you agree with it or not, the physiological science on this is crystal clear: When you have an energy (caloric) deficit, your body goes into catabolic processes, and in order to go into anabolic processes, you MUST have a caloric excess.

People who are unfit and begin a weight training regimen appear to gain muscle primarily because bodyfat being lost is no longer concealing definition.

Well I don't know the science behind it but I can guarentee you that people are able to build muscle and burn fat at the same time...especially people new to lifting. I have witnessed it first hand and even can do it myself. So you can try and come in with a cut and dried answer but then explain how I was able to get stronger and look bigger while losing weight in my gut?

I *do* know the science behind it, and I can assure you things are not what they seem initially...

The look bigger portion is already answered in my post you quoted. Less fat leads to the appearance of more definition, which gives the illusion of looking bigger. Furthermore, if it was coming off your torso, that helps even more to provide the appearance of gaining size as a smaller waist (the focal point of the body) causes the shoulder girdle to look broader and give a more muscular impression overall.

This is a very common pattern most people go through when they begin an exercise regimen. They lose a significant amount of adipose mass in their bodies due to two primary reasons:

1) Increased caloric burn from the activity itself and

2) Higher BMR. Active individuals have been shown to have a higher base metabolic rate than non-active, again resulting in greater caloric expenditure even at rest.


As for strength:

Initial strength gains (first 4- 8 weeks after beginning a strength training routine) are not from growth of muscle tissue - they are from increased neurological recruitment of existing muscle fibers. It's still heavily debated among exercise scientists whether or not the number of muscle cells actually changes at all due to training (hyperplasia) or simply get larger due to the increased demand on the tissues (hypertrophy). Evidence is starting to shift mostly to support of the latter.

So to give you a boiled-down basic answer: You were more able to see what muscle was already in place, and your body learned to better utilize it. A lot of people confuse this for building muscle and losing fat at the same time. Not entirely so.

AFTER that period, you may have started to actually gain muscle size, depending on your dietary regimen and exercise activities.



We're on the very cusp of a much much much more complicated discussion regarding metabolic pathways, fuels for different types of activity, and how the body physiologically adjusts to exercise. I'm not entirely sure I feel like typing half of an exercise physiology textbook up on an internet forum, so I will link you to an excellent text on the subject at Amazon:

Exercise Physiology: Theory and Application by Powers

And suggest you do your own research. It's easier on me that way.

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt
The idea of "spot reducing" fat usually describes the reduction of fat on a particular area of the body as a result of exercising the same muscles in that area, like saying situps would better reduce belly fat than squats would. This idea is indeed a myth.

If your genetics cause your body to accumulate fat on a particular area of your body, however, it only stands to reason that as you lose fat, it will come off that area at a rate proportional to that at which it accumulated. That isn't "spot reducing," though.

But I take it situps would still be a good idea? Or crunches, or whatever?

I imagine, any exercise that has the stomach muscles flexing would "help" lose flab or at least become less flabby in that particular area?

 

[KoolDrew]

I imagine, any exercise that has the stomach muscles flexing would "help" lose flab or at least become less flabby in that particular area?

No, that would be spot reducing. Your body loses weight by being in a calorie deficit. If exercising brings you into a calorie deficit, you will lose weight because of it. Where you lose it first depends on genetics.

 

[NGC_604]

Exactly. Your body will burn the fat from wherever it can grab it. You can do ab exercises all you want, your body might grab the fat from your ass, thighs, or even your ears. If you keep reducing the fat, then eventually you'll lose some in your target area, but you can't do spot reduction. Not possible, your body does not work that way.

 

[spamsk8r]

Originally posted by: TheNinja

Originally posted by: purbeast0
to build muscle you need a calorie excess.

to lose fat you need a calorie defecit.

I do not totally agree with that. If you are just starting out lifting you can lose fat and gain muscle at the same time. Granted it takes a little longer but it is easily possible for a newbie.

People might mention "bulking" and "cutting", but in all honesty if you haven't lifted much in the past you can gain muscle and lose fat at the same time. Once you hit a plateau of sorts then you might want to "bulk" and "cut" but I would recommend doing what is called a "recomp". Resistance training with weights is critical though. If you just do cardio you'll end up as a skinny fat guy....basically a thin person with no muscle mass so you'll still look flabby and weak.

This man knows what he's talking about. Beginners to weight training can almost always gain muscle and lose fat at the same time. It's really when you get down to lower body fat percentages that it becomes more difficult (read: almost impossible). Now, I'm not saying you would gain a huge amount of muscle, but a few pounds is not unreasonable. I'm not a newbie to lifting myself, but I took a few years off, and when I came back into it I lost fat while gaining muscle (lost 12 lbs. of fat, gained 2 of muscle, according to my body fat percentage readings, and some simple calculations). So yeah, eat a caloric deficit, lift hard and heavy (focus on large compound movements like deadlift, squat, dips, pullups, etc.), and get in some cardio and you'll get where you want to be.

 

[spamsk8r]

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: TheNinja

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: TheNinja

Originally posted by: purbeast0
to build muscle you need a calorie excess.

to lose fat you need a calorie defecit.

I do not totally agree with that. If you are just starting out lifting you can lose fat and gain muscle at the same time. Granted it takes a little longer but it is easily possible for a newbie.

I don't care if you agree with it or not, the physiological science on this is crystal clear: When you have an energy (caloric) deficit, your body goes into catabolic processes, and in order to go into anabolic processes, you MUST have a caloric excess.

People who are unfit and begin a weight training regimen appear to gain muscle primarily because bodyfat being lost is no longer concealing definition.

Well I don't know the science behind it but I can guarentee you that people are able to build muscle and burn fat at the same time...especially people new to lifting. I have witnessed it first hand and even can do it myself. So you can try and come in with a cut and dried answer but then explain how I was able to get stronger and look bigger while losing weight in my gut?

I *do* know the science behind it, and I can assure you things are not what they seem initially...

The look bigger portion is already answered in my post you quoted. Less fat leads to the appearance of more definition, which gives the illusion of looking bigger. Furthermore, if it was coming off your torso, that helps even more to provide the appearance of gaining size as a smaller waist (the focal point of the body) causes the shoulder girdle to look broader and give a more muscular impression overall.

This is a very common pattern most people go through when they begin an exercise regimen. They lose a significant amount of adipose mass in their bodies due to two primary reasons:

1) Increased caloric burn from the activity itself and

2) Higher BMR. Active individuals have been shown to have a higher base metabolic rate than non-active, again resulting in greater caloric expenditure even at rest.


As for strength:

Initial strength gains (first 4- 8 weeks after beginning a strength training routine) are not from growth of muscle tissue - they are from increased neurological recruitment of existing muscle fibers. It's still heavily debated among exercise scientists whether or not the number of muscle cells actually changes at all due to training (hyperplasia) or simply get larger due to the increased demand on the tissues (hypertrophy). Evidence is starting to shift mostly to support of the latter.

So to give you a boiled-down basic answer: You were more able to see what muscle was already in place, and your body learned to better utilize it. A lot of people confuse this for building muscle and losing fat at the same time. Not entirely so.

AFTER that period, you may have started to actually gain muscle size, depending on your dietary regimen and exercise activities.



We're on the very cusp of a much much much more complicated discussion regarding metabolic pathways, fuels for different types of activity, and how the body physiologically adjusts to exercise. I'm not entirely sure I feel like typing half of an exercise physiology textbook up on an internet forum, so I will link you to an excellent text on the subject at Amazon:

Exercise Physiology: Theory and Application by Powers

And suggest you do your own research. It's easier on me that way.

In general what you are saying is true. However, people that are new to strength training can and do build muscle while reducing fat. I've seen it happen (using body fat percentage measurements, from which you can extrapolate lean body mass. Since I doubt a trainee would be gaining bone or organ mass it makes sense that if lean body mass increases, it would make sense to assume that it's probably muscle mass or volume). It is, in general, a relatively small quantity of muscle compared to someone who is in caloric excess, but it does happen. Whether it's just increased volume due to water retention or actual real muscle increase I couldn't say, but in the strictest sense it is *possible* to gain some quantity of muscle weight while in caloric restriction.

 

[ja1484]

Originally posted by: spamsk8r
In general what you are saying is true. However, people that are new to strength training can and do build muscle while reducing fat. I've seen it happen (using body fat percentage measurements, from which you can extrapolate lean body mass. Since I doubt a trainee would be gaining bone or organ mass it makes sense that if lean body mass increases, it would make sense to assume that it's probably muscle mass or volume). It is, in general, a relatively small quantity of muscle compared to someone who is in caloric excess, but it does happen. Whether it's just increased volume due to water retention or actual real muscle increase I couldn't say, but in the strictest sense it is *possible* to gain some quantity of muscle weight while in caloric restriction.

You're almost there.

People gain a bit of lean mass, but they don't build muscle. Again, that takes a caloric excess.

What's happening in the type of situation you describe above is almost, if not completely, a water weight gain. As the body adapts to the new stimulus of resistance training on a consistent basis (i.e. moving heavy loads regularly that require improved anaerobic metabolism efficiency and greater stores of anaerobic fuels), PCr stores and glycogen stores in muscle cells rise appreciably. Additional water enters muscle cells due to the osmolarity difference this incurs.

To actually build hypertrophy, you need an energy excess, period. No ifs, ands, or buts (except incredibly dangerous steroids and hormones).

Ever see someone get bigger and heavier from creatine and then lose it all when they stop cycling? Yeah. Water. H2O. Same thing here, except it's due to a change in lifestyle, not supplementation, so the change remains as long as the regimen does.

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

ok, let me see if i can sum this up.

in order to gain muscle, you need a caloric surplus.
in order to lost fat, you need a caloric deficit.
therefore you cannot reduce fat and build muscle at the same time.

common sense still tells me i can build my calves if i do calf raises and lose my gut if i do cardio and situps and eat healthy (low fat, low carb, high protein).
i guess i'm stubborn.

 

[spamsk8r]

Originally posted by: ja1484

Originally posted by: spamsk8r
In general what you are saying is true. However, people that are new to strength training can and do build muscle while reducing fat. I've seen it happen (using body fat percentage measurements, from which you can extrapolate lean body mass. Since I doubt a trainee would be gaining bone or organ mass it makes sense that if lean body mass increases, it would make sense to assume that it's probably muscle mass or volume). It is, in general, a relatively small quantity of muscle compared to someone who is in caloric excess, but it does happen. Whether it's just increased volume due to water retention or actual real muscle increase I couldn't say, but in the strictest sense it is *possible* to gain some quantity of muscle weight while in caloric restriction.

You're almost there.

People gain a bit of lean mass, but they don't build muscle. Again, that takes a caloric excess.

What's happening in the type of situation you describe above is almost, if not completely, a water weight gain. As the body adapts to the new stimulus of resistance training on a consistent basis (i.e. moving heavy loads regularly that require improved anaerobic metabolism efficiency and greater stores of anaerobic fuels), PCr stores and glycogen stores in muscle cells rise appreciably. Additional water enters muscle cells due to the osmolarity difference this incurs.

To actually build hypertrophy, you need an energy excess, period. No ifs, ands, or buts (except incredibly dangerous steroids and hormones).

Ever see someone get bigger and heavier from creatine and then lose it all when they stop cycling? Yeah. Water. H2O. Same thing here, except it's due to a change in lifestyle, not supplementation, so the change remains as long as the regimen does.

Yes, that's what I sort of hinted at in my earlier post. I have seen through first-hand experience that lean body mass does increase. The water causes an increase in intramuscular volume and glycogen storage, causing the muscle to become engorged and physically larger. So I think most people would think of this as a gain in muscle mass (while not strictly gaining any appreciable weight in dry muscle).

 

[spamsk8r]

Originally posted by: BlahBlahYouToo
ok, let me see if i can sum this up.

in order to gain muscle, you need a caloric surplus.
in order to lost fat, you need a caloric deficit.
therefore you cannot reduce fat and build muscle at the same time.

common sense still tells me i can build my calves if i do calf raises and lose my gut if i do cardio and situps and eat healthy (low fat, low carb, high protein).
i guess i'm stubborn.

In order to gain an appreciable amount of muscle tissue, you will need to eat a caloric surplus. If you work your muscles you will get stronger without a doubt, but strength is mainly a neurological adaptation (your nervous system is able to better control your muscle tissue). And like I said in my earlier post, you will most likely feel and look a bit bigger and harder, due to both leaning out and increased water retention in the muscles. Eating healthy is number one, though.

 

[Ballatician]

so what are some recommendations for losing fat from the stomach/belly region without having to sacrifice muscle from the rest of your body because of a caloric deficit?

does someone just have to lose all fat that they want to before seriously taking up a weight lifting regimen?