sugar and belly fat?

lol. you can't spot reduce. as you lose weight, your body will take fat from where it needs to. all crunches will do is strengthen your abdominals. it will not just disappear despite "how many crunches you do."

btw, i'm sure it's not lately that's caused it. it didn't take you overnight to get where you are, and it won't take overnight to get where you want to be.

Bah...you beat me to it. Nothing but truth here.

Luckily for you jadey, it's actually faster to lose the weight than it took to gain it, assuming you do it right. I've knocked off 10 years worth of sloth and food induced damage in less than three months.

Crunches and other exercise does not burn fat specifically where the exercise is done, it does however build muscle which can aid in burning fat over time. Building muscle can also bulk underneath fat, as your body will burn muscle over fat for survival. Basically, everyone's body is different and you can't burn fat off a specific body part. I'd suggest cutting down on sugar in general just for health and weight loss, and continuing to eat right in the hopes your pouch will become smaller.

as your body will burn muscle over fat for survival.

not so sure about that one. i was under the impression that fats purpose was to supplement energy when not enough energy is taken in. ur body doesnt want to burn muscle 4 energy. its not efficient.

This is very true. Generally, the only time the body is going to start stripping the muscles is when you aren't taking in enough protein for vital functions, barring some wasting diseases and the like, or you have no fat/glycogen stores for it to use. Then again, that's not hard to do, given how little protein the average person actually eats. (It doesn't help that the USRDA for protein is only about 50-60g for a 2000 calorie diet, which is just stupid.)

to add on to the post above, look at marathon runners, very low fat but very low muscle, compare that to Olympic sprinters, very muscular and big, very low body fat, HIT (high intensity training) revs your metabolism much higher, and had a much longer 'after' burn effect that long cardio, meaning over all you will burn more fat (assuming your not replacing it with poor quality food!)

What does sprinters vs marathon runners tell us ?

The former is a high output short duration effort fuelled primarily by glycogen in muscles.

The latter is a lower output long duration effort using more fat and less carbs hence able to sustain performance over a long period?

as your body will burn muscle over fat for survival.

not so sure about that one. i was under the impression that fats purpose was to supplement energy when not enough energy is taken in. ur body doesnt want to burn muscle 4 energy. its not efficient.

Muscle is your bodyies last choice for energy. Long cardio boutes will eventually use muscle for energy as the other sources get depleted. Look at long distance runners for example. They are usually very thin and without a lot of muscle.

This has more to do with their training (lack of weights) and not their "long bouts of cardio".

another reason marathon runners r not muscular is due to their extremely high caloric needs. often the protein they take in is needed to fuel their activities rather than grow muscle. both body types r healthy.

why do people always insist at comparing elite athletes to common people?

at elite levels, people excel first and foremost because their genetic body types are suited to that sport. the sport doesnt give them the genes. for instance, elite swimmers have long limbs because their bones are longer, not because swimming gave them longer bones.

so yes at an elite level sprinters and marathoners look different but that really has nothing to do with most of us on this site since we arent elite. in that sense people with low muscle mass can sprint and people with high muscle mass can run marathons.