0

I run a lot and skip a lot, I also weight lift, I have been losing weight rapidly and I am happy about it. But I really want to loose weight around my side and lower back, it isn't directly my lower back it is like on the side coming onto my lower back if that makes sense.

From working out I know that I can't spot reduce it, eating good and lots of long long cardio is what is doing the trick, that is the hard honest truth. I also recently killed my chocolate eating habits that all of a sudden came out of nowhere, I found out that it was a magnesium deficiency and solved it with Epsom bath salts and magnesium spray.

I can also appreciate that genetically, the belly, the side and back is genetically where my fat is prone to accumulate the most first.

But are there any tips and tricks, diet or exercise wise that people could suggest that would help me keep it off those areas, they don't have to be orthodox and I don't mind if some suggestions sound skeptical, I am open to new things, idc how far out they sound. For example, I found out recently that I am an endomorphic body type, I put muscle on fast and fat...so I have kept the weight training to lower weights because I just put mass on so quickly, it is a little annoying, perhaps there are things that work best for that body type?

I would also love some articles and things just to educate myself about these areas of the body and food etc.. if people think I would find them helpful, even if they are basic ::)

  • 7
    Spot reduction is a myth. The only way to not put it on there is not have enough fat that your body wants to put it there. Bodyfat works on the LIFO (Last In, First Out), so if you put fat on there first, it will come off from there last. – JohnP Sep 10 '14 at 16:28
  • Aside from liposuction no, fat loss occurs across your whole body, it does not matter how you train. – PStag Mar 12 '16 at 12:17
  • @JohnP I agree with you. There is no spot reduction. Also read this article about Regional Fat Changes: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23222084. As a summary: Our results show that when a muscle group is trained, changes in fat mass may take place in body areas not necessarily adjacent to the trained muscle group. Therefore, trunk body fat may be modified by training arm or leg muscles. This may be very useful in rehabilitation settings, where subjects, using their able body segment, may favorably impact the fat content in any other body part. – bantandor Mar 14 '16 at 8:39
1

I concur. Spot reducing is not possible. Typically fat comes off the last place you put it on. So if it has been sitting there for awhile, it may take awhile to get it off. Be patient.

I would concentrate on making your training sessions (w/weights) a bit more challenging. Take shorter breaks (60 seconds) and up your volume a bit. Perform 4 or more sets per exercise and focus on compound lifts (squats, deadlifts, rows, presses, etc).

If when you say 'run', you mean long distances for a greater duration than 30 minutes, I would cut back on that and start performing sprints instead. Hill sprints are great. Find a hill that is 30-40 yards, run up it as fast as you can, and then walk down and repeat when your heart rate has come down. Do that 7 or 8 times a session a couple of times a week and you will burn a ton of fat. Avoid the steady state long drawn out jogging. That will eat away at your muscle and do very little for fat burning.

Hope that helps,

Mike

  • High intensity exercise such as sprinting up hills relies heavily on carbohydrate mechanisms for fuel. Exercise at lower intensities relies on fat mechanisms for fuel. Endurance training has been shown in studies to increase fat metabolism while training. – JohnP Dec 10 '14 at 20:06
  • 1
    John- If the above user is looking to burn body fat, then there is nothing more effective than sprinting to accomplish that. It is not the carbohydrates that you burn when you are performing the work that are important, it is the calorie burn that follows over the next 24-36 hours. EPOC- Excess Post Exercise Oxygen Consumption. Perform too much endurance work and your body will start using your muscle for fuel. Less muscle equals a slower metabolism. It is counter productive. Take a look at the physique of a marathoner runner and compare it to a sprinter. No comparison. More muscle andless fat – Michael Pullam Dec 12 '14 at 3:15
  • I know what EPOC is, thank you. It will account for anywhere from 50-150 calories over that 36 hour period. Not as much as people think. I was more addressing the misconception you were promoting that steady state does little for fat burning. – JohnP Dec 12 '14 at 4:36
  • 1
    In the long run it does very little for fat burning John. It is really good at breaking down muscle though if that is your goal. The only steady state work I would recommend is walking. – Michael Pullam Dec 12 '14 at 20:34
  • Actually, endurance exercise is very good for fat burning. While there is some debate about HIIT burning a higher percentage of fat for a shorter period, or burning at a lower rate for a longer period, exercise will burn fat, and the lower the intensity, the more you will utilize a fat substrate instead of a carbohydrate substrate. Here's one study for you (Obese women at a 55% intensity level) - ajpendo.physiology.org/content/261/2/E159 If you care to research it, I have other studies I can give you. – JohnP Dec 12 '14 at 22:51
0

Besides visceral fat vs subcutaneous fat, there is no way of changing what fat is burned, but there are ways of changing how you look anyway, by building muscle. 5 kg of fat on your arm will look worse with 2 kg of muscle than with 5 kg of muscle.

So, build your core muscles or lose more fat.

  • How do you make your body burn visceral vs. subcutaneous fat? – JohnP Dec 10 '14 at 14:54
  • I'm not certain, but I think high intensity training will favour burning of visceral fat since it's more accessible. Also, you can affect your visceral fat storage by avoiding sugars and thus increase your net loss of visceral fat. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18845966 – Mårten Dec 12 '14 at 14:20
  • The study you cite mentions nothing about sugars, and all types of abdominal fat were affected, not just one type. – JohnP Dec 12 '14 at 14:59
  • Problem is, building core muscles often times doesn't make you look that much better :D. Thick obliques and abs aren't what most people nowadays want in terms of a physique - as opposed to say having muscular shoulders or chest or arms with fat on them. In that situation the muscle makes a great difference. – hamza_tm Mar 13 '16 at 19:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.