spot reduction- scientifically proven

[fmr_trackstar]

This month Fitness RX published several articles on how to spot reduce, specifically in the hamstring and glute area. They claim that a new study proves that spot reduction is possible and design a program based on this study. Below are NOT my opinion just a summarization of the article(s).

“Spot Reduction Accelerated Fat Loss Works!” A Majgic Formula to Lose Lower Body Fat.
This article recognizes that conventional wisdom says that spot reduction doesn’t work. However, a revolutionary study by Dr. Bente Stallknecht in Denmark showed that spot reduction is possible. In one study 10 young men did a 1 leg knew extension exe3rcise at 25% max capacity for 30 mins followed by exercise at 55% max effort for 120 min with the other leg. They then exercised at 85% of max for 30 min with the first leg. Subjects rested for 30 mins btw exercise periods. The results showed that blood flow and fat breakdown was higher in the fat next to the exercising muscles than fat adjacent to resting muscles. It used radioactive tracers to precisely measure fat metabolism. The conclusion was that exercising specific muscles increases fat blood flow and fat breakdown in nearby adipose tissue and cold cause spot reduction of fat. However, IT IS YET TO BE DETERMINED HOW LONG THE FAT REDUCTION LASTS. AND THE RESULTS MAYNOT APPLY TO WOMEN .

This article is basing its workout on stimulating temp and blood flow in target fat and increase stress hormones such as adrenaline which will speed up the fat breakdown in targed adipose tissue b/c of the increased blood flow.

[fmr_trackstar]

Based on this study the writers of Fitness RX suggest the following for reducing fat in the lower body area:

aerobics before weight training (45-90 min)
- it clams tunning on the treadmill uses more muscles in the upper body and trunk and wont “provide the focused effect of more isolated aerobic exercise.”
Rest 2 mins then:
Intensely interval train after the aerobic sessions
- They suggest 5 sets of 1 min sprint/ rest intervals
Rest 2 mins then:
Focused weight training 2 sets of 30 reps w 1 min rest btw sets and 2 btw exercises
- in one workout do
o 2 leg squats on Smith
o 1 leg squats on Smith
o butt kicks w cable
o step ups
o db lunges
o standing leg curlts
o lying leg cursl
o hip abduction
o hip adduction
Stretch then:
After workout apply focused heat during recovery for 20- 30 mins but don’t immerse in hot water (ie sit in hot tube)


There is also some things about diet that are pretty straightforward. But this workouts are suppose to be done BEFORE BREAKFAST ONLY ON 2 cups of coffee and done in the pattern of for 2 days straight , rest, 2 days straight , 2 days rest.

[fmr_trackstar]

Opinions? I am not an exercise scientist by any means but I think Fitness RX kind got ahead of them selves with 1 study of a small pool. Now the study doesn’t suggest this workout but suggest high rep and increase temp in the muslcles areas can cause spot reductions. I think a much stronger study is needed to go against YEARS of studies.

[Eileen]

I read the article, and about the study that the spot reduction was based on, and I strongly suspect that they pretty much made up that whole routine without any basis for it.

I mean, 60 regular squats and then single leg squats four days a week??? You gotta be kidding me. And that's in addition to a whole pile of other leg work and massive amounts of cardio. I know I couldn't do that routine without wrecking my knees.

[Mango]

FitnessRx=****.

[CassBH]

Originally Posted by TricepGirl

FitnessRx=****.

Thank you!! Finally someone else who feels that magazine is the "Inquirer" of the Fitness rags! Yuck!

[fmr_trackstar]

Originally Posted by TricepGirl

FitnessRx=****.

Originally Posted by CassBH

Thank you!! Finally someone else who feels that magazine is the "Inquirer" of the Fitness rags! Yuck!

I agree. The only reason why I tried it was b/c my friend thats in med school rec and I had a store credit I needed to spend. LOL

[ms_moneypenny]

Has no one read the paragraph towards the end of the article?

"The researchers concluded that while specific exercises caused increased blood flow and fat breakdown in adjacent fat stores, it wasn't known whether the fat was restored after exercise. So spot reducing occurs during exercise, but we don't know how long it lasts. Also, the study used men as subjects, so the results may not apply to women."


What a waste of printed paper.

[fmr_trackstar]

Originally Posted by ms_moneypenny

Has no one read the paragraph towards the end of the article?

"The researchers concluded that while specific exercises caused increased blood flow and fat breakdown in adjacent fat stores, it wasn't known whether the fat was restored after exercise. So spot reducing occurs during exercise, but we don't know how long it lasts. Also, the study used men as subjects, so the results may not apply to women."


What a waste of printed paper.

Yes I caught that. I mentioned it above also, see last sentence or two of the 1st post its in caps.

[catbaloous]

I agree, Fitness RX is crap. It will say one thing on a certain page and then a few pages later it prints an article totally contradicting itself. And the models, are beautiful girls, but I might as well be looking at Cosmo. They are very thin with little muscle. They certainly remind me of the "cardio bunny" stereo type. When I read a fitness mag, I want to be inspired to throw around some iron and be powerful. Personally, I find the men's muscle mags to have the best information on latest studies and new supplements. And most of the girls have some healthy meat on their bones.

[Defiant1]

I actually posted the original study recently.

IMO, the way to look at it is this:

It now shows that the MECHANISM exists. Instead of saying "One can't spot reduce", the question now becomes "Is the effort worth the results"?

I find it interesting that MANY of the old school ideas that were dismissed as myths seem to be proven correct at least to some degree.

Here is the abstract:

Are blood flow and lipolysis in subcutaneous adipose tissue influenced by contractions in adjacent muscles in humans?
Bente Stallknecht1*, Flemming Dela1, and Jorn Wulff Helge2
1 Department of Medical Physiology, The Panum Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
2 Medical Physiological Department, Panum Institute, Blegdamsvej 3, Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Medical Physiology, The Panum Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: b.stallknecht@mfi.ku.dk .
Aerobic exercise increases whole-body adipose tissue lipolysis, but is lipolysis higher in subcutaneous adipose tissue (SCAT) adjacent to contracting muscles than in SCAT adjacent to resting muscles? Ten healthy, overnight-fasted males performed one-legged knee extension exercise at 25% of maximal workload (Wmax) for 30 minutes followed by exercise at 55% Wmax for 120 minutes with the other leg and finally exercised at 85% Wmax for 30 minutes with the first leg. Subjects rested for 30 minutes between exercise periods. Femoral SCAT blood flow was estimated from washout of 133Xe and lipolysis was calculated from femoral SCAT interstitial and arterial glycerol concentrations and blood flow. In general, blood flow as well as lipolysis was higher in femoral SCAT adjacent to contracting than adjacent to resting muscle (time 15-30 min: blood flow: 25% Wmax: 6.6 ± 1.0 vs. 3.9 ± 0.8 ml 100 g-1 min-1, P < 0.05; 55% Wmax: 7.3 ± 0.6 vs. 5.0 ± 0.6, P < 0.05; 85% Wmax: 6.6 ± 1.3 vs. 5.9 ± 0.7, P > 0.05; lipolysis: 25% Wmax: 102 ± 19 vs. 55 ± 14 nmol 100 g-1 min-1, P = 0.06; 55% Wmax: 86 ± 11 vs. 50 ± 20, P > 0.05; 85% Wmax: 88 ± 31 vs. -9 ± 25, P < 0.05). In conclusion, blood flow and lipolysis are generally higher in SCAT adjacent to contracting than adjacent to resting muscle irrespective of exercise intensity. Thus, specific exercises can induce "spot lipolysis" in adipose tissue.

[fmr_trackstar]

Originally Posted by Defiant1

I actually posted the original study recently.

IMO, the way to look at it is this:

It now shows that the MECHANISM exists. Instead of saying "One can't spot reduce", the question now becomes "Is the effort worth the results"?

I find it interesting that MANY of the old school ideas that were dismissed as myths seem to be proven correct at least to some degree.


[/i]

BUMP on that ! Though it only proved it exsist for at least a temp amount of time.

LMAO at your signature.

[Defiant1]

Originally Posted by fmr_trackstar

BUMP on that ! Though it only proved it exsist for at least a temp amount of time.

LMAO at your signature.

What's kind of funny, is that the studies that supposedly showed that spot reduction DOESN'T exist are very shaky.

The main one used had to due with subcutaneous fat measured on tennis players arms-the reasoning being that since tennis players use one arm more, there would be spot reduction there. But a tennis swing is an ATP fueled activity if there ever was one-meaning it would tax glycogen not lipids at least the way that is done.

I also like the way people DEFINITIVELY say it is a "myth", but have no reason why. If one checks for reasons (example, googling "spot reduction"-you get a bunch of info saying it can't be done, but no one says why, or gives evidence) My thinking is that if people believe it is true, the casual burden is on those to prove it ISN'T.

This reminds me of the "shape-training" debate that went on. Bodybuilders believed that one COULD shape train (isolate sectors of muscles not delineated anatomically). Then science hinted that we couldn't. People immediately jumped on the bandwagon to say "Can't do it". Guess what? They were wrong. The good ole dumb gym rats were right.

Something to consider: localized energy production is the norm, not the exception. Glycogen is used locally, and protein degradation/remapping happens locally also. In fact, it is a FACT that lipolysis occurs locally. Since glycogen is also metabolized systemically, and protein can be used for gluconeogenisis systemically, the fact that lipolysis occurs systemically does not preclude localized LONG TERM lipolysis-meaning, it is not either/or.

[fmr_trackstar]

Defiant1- well I guess what do you mean by spot reduce? B/c I have come across many readings in mag that quote many studies that have proven you can do more exercises only and reduce fat. For example there was a study that had subjects do hundreds of crunches and other abs exercises and they found that while the muscle got bigger the fat cells remained unchanged.

I do believe that one can spot reduce to a certin extent like lose more bf lets say in the lower body than upper body w/ proper weight training but it reduce fat in 1 area only, no I dont think it can be done. Though I have to say from personal experience genes play a large role of what some ppl may think of as "spot reduction". Put it like this I know many of ppl that have work out and weight train only certain areas and have these thick legs and but and the smallest waist. Though there overall bf has reduced b/c they have lost the most bf in the waist etc the small changes in the legs are often overlooked.

Bottom line you cant do some crunches and not change diet and think your gut is gonna go away.

[Defiant1]

Originally Posted by fmr_trackstar

Defiant1- well I guess what do you mean by spot reduce? B/c I have come across many readings in mag that quote many studies that have proven you can do more exercises only and reduce fat. For example there was a study that had subjects do hundreds of crunches and other abs exercises and they found that while the muscle got bigger the fat cells remained unchanged.

I do believe that one can spot reduce to a certin extent like lose more bf lets say in the lower body than upper body w/ proper weight training but it reduce fat in 1 area only, no I dont think it can be done. Though I have to say from personal experience genes play a large role of what some ppl may think of as "spot reduction". Put it like this I know many of ppl that have work out and weight train only certain areas and have these thick legs and but and the smallest waist. Though there overall bf has reduced b/c they have lost the most bf in the waist etc the small changes in the legs are often overlooked.

Bottom line you cant do some crunches and not change diet and think your gut is gonna go away.

The study shows localized lipolysis-fat used for fuel locally-spot reduction.

Despite what amounts to a knee-jerk reaction-if one says "spot reduce" people say "can't do it", there is NO DOUBT one can spot reduce via localized glycogen use. Muscle glycogen is unique in that it is used locally. Of this there is no doubt. The problem is, muscle glycogen is also REPLENISHED locally, actually as a priority (the order is muscles, liver, bodyfat). So it is not permanent in that case. Localized protein degradation IS relatively permanent.

So, if someone says "you can't do it" they are wrong. The question (as stated before) is a. whether it is practical and b. what type of training would be optimal for it.

Again, I'm not advocating it, or saying it is now a non-issue, I am simply saying what the study says. I am also saying it happens to be what trainers believed for years and years. Many of these "beliefs" while initially supposedly disproven have been proven correct recently (i.e. high protein intake, low carbs to lose bodyfat, shape training, free weights better than machines etc).


Edit: regardless, diet is by far the most important aspect of fat loss.