Spot reduction

jimmmer

In light of the long standing advice on here that spot reduction is a myth, what do board regulars make of this:

http://www.t-nation.com/training/targeted-fat-mobilization

Apologies if this has already been posted in another thread. I searched, but didn't find it.

_Zardoz_

As they're trying to sell you stuff. I'd take it all with a very large pinch of salt

jimmmer

Well the article is based of the work of Lowery (who has a previous T-Nation article on it from a couple of years ago) who seems to draw mostly on Stallknecht, 2007:

"More calories are expended during aerobic, whole body exercise than by exercise with local muscle groups, and, accordingly, a person seeking to lose fat must be advised to perform whole body exercise. However, the present study has shown that blood flow (Fig. 2) and lipolysis (Figs. 4 and 5) are stimulated more in adipose tissue adjacent to contracting muscles than in adipose tissue adjacent to resting muscles."

So, whether or not T-Nation has a pony in the race, they didn't write (nor influence) the work of Stallknecht. So put aside that this is posted on a site devoted to, amongst other things, supplement sales, what do you make of it?

Lowery notes in his own article that:

"If your body fat percentage is in the mid-teens or below – if your fat layer is an inch thick or less – then this method should give you visible results [......] this method will not help the guy with the giant paunch to develop a six-pack in four weeks. No one is saying that you don’t need cardio, lifting, and a good diet plan."

tigersword

I believe it's been shown that the amount of work needed to be done would be incredibly excessive for almost imperceptible results. It's more theoretically possible, but incredibly impractical.

jimmmer

They are really talking about guys/girls with large muscle masses near smaller fat deposits. i.e. people preparing for shows, etc.

So for 99% of the population there's going to be no real effect. It's whether the effect is significant for the remaining 1% with the optimal starting conditions that interests me.

Cherimoose

The study is cautious about the conclusions:

"it cannot be foreseen if specific exercises can induce spot reduction, since triacylglycerol (TG) stores could be fully replenished or even supercompensated between exercise sessions."
http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/292/2/E394

DavPul

bodybuilders have believed for a long time that intramuscular fat located in specific areas is something that can be targeted. that said, the difference is so minute that it is only noticeable in people already at an extremely low BF%. And even in those people, I'm not sure how long they believe the effect lasts. so if it exists at all, it may as well not exist for the typical "what type of crunches should i do for my tummy" and "how to target back fat" type post created by the 23-28 BF% MFP'er.

so it's pretty much irrelevant for MFP purposes and I'll sleep soundly at night after typing "you can't spot reduce" at the next hundred people that ask about it.

jimmmer

bodybuilders have believed for a long time that intramuscular fat located in specific areas is something that can be targeted. that said, the difference is so minute that it is only noticeable in people already at an extremely low BF%. And even in those people, I'm not sure how long they believe the effect lasts. so if it exists at all, it may as well not exist for the typical "what type of crunches should i do for my tummy" and "how to target back fat" type post created by the 23-28 BF% MFP'er.

so it's pretty much irrelevant for MFP purposes and I'll sleep soundly at night after typing "you can't spot reduce" at the next hundred people that ask about it.

For sure, it's the right advice for almost everyone on this site (although people prepping for shows do use this site/app too). Just wanted to hear the thoughts of those of us that give out the advice, knowing that it's at least theoretically possible. Do you feel like you ever want to add a qualification to your advice? I'm guessing you don't :P

PikaKnight

l think it is funny how they state it is backed by science and quote some researcher but don't provide links to the actual study.

DavPul

I don't feel the need to qualify it because even mentioning the possibility on this site would lead to a frenzy of crunches and leg lifts.

There are other things that I feel guilty about withholding at times, but that definitely isn't one of them. Besides, I'm not even sure if it's true. It could be a side effect of pump, for all I know

jimmmer

I don't feel the need to qualify it because even mentioning the possibility on this site would lead to a frenzy of crunches and leg lifts.

There are other things that I feel guilty about withholding at times, but that definitely isn't one of them. Besides, I'm not even sure if it's true. It could be a side effect of pump, for all I know

I can't read pump without hearing it in Arnie's accent....

jimmmer

l think it is funny how they state it is backed by science and quote some researcher but don't provide links to the actual study.

Well it's basically a re-hashing of the article that Lowery did for them 2 years ago. That one had the references to papers. They are just riffing on that article. So it's kinda third hand by the time we get to the recent one....

The actual study that it's all gleaned from was helpfully linked to by Cherimoose above, if you want to take a look.