"love Handles"

[old] grams · Post by **[old] grams** » December 21st, 2004, 1:44 am

I had 3 kids, 40 years ago. Now the fat stores are for getting through the winter. Lightweight post-menopausal women just don't need as much food as cute young things do. Or as much as you macho guys. My switchover from stored energy to fat burning is about 42-45 minutes. Maybe because I erg long & slow, maybe because my metabolism is efficient. I verified it by testing with a diabetic blood sugar test kit during some rows. You can tell when it hits-its when you think'I've had enough of this- I can't keep going.' Re eating after exercise. Thats what the fruit juice (carbs) with a gelatin packet dissolved in it (protein) is for right after exercise. Its a fine line, losing fat and building muscle at the same time without losing muscle too. If I'm not trying to lose a pound or 2, oatmeal cookies work well also. I put this in a previous forum response several months ago. Here is more than you wanted to know about a SUGAR SPIKE: My husband learned this stuff yesterday at the sports nutrition center. He is diabetic, and is going there to figure out how to balance his insulin intake, diet and long-distance cycling. There are 3 glucose-related things: + insulin GLUCOSE: Commonly called blood sugar, it is the simplest form of carbohydrates. The body digests carbohydrates in foods, transforming them into glucose, which serves as the primary fuel for the brain and muscles. Surplus glucose is converted to glycogen in the liver and stored in muscles or turned into body fat. GLYCOGEN: Carbohydrate stored in the liver and muscles. Glycogen is used as a fuel during exercise. The body generally has enough glycogen stored to sustain 65-85 minutes of exercise. It is converted by glucagon to glucose when your body needs some fuel. Carbo-loading is a technique used by long distance athletes to increase the amount of glycogen available for a long event such as a marathon. GLUCAGON: This is an endocrine hormone secreted by the pancreas which is stimulated by the protein in your diet or by a rapid fall in your blood sugar. It prevents blood sugar levels from going too low, thereby decreasing hunger and maintaining peak mental focus. Glucagon is considered a mobilization hormone in that it helps release the stored energy in our bodies by releasing glucose stored in the liver as glycogen. WHAT HAPPENS When you eat a big sugar hit (fudge-major candy bars, etc. which contain a lot of sucrose) your blood sugar level shoots up. In response your pancreas kicks out more insulin to bring your blood sugar level back down to normal. However, because the sugar hit is so big, your pancreas puts out too much insulin. The insulin inhibits the release of the glycogen stored in your muscles because its trying to lower your blood sugar level. This means your body doesn't have access to the glycogen it needs. When your blood sugar goes low enough, then your pancreas says, OK, time to put out some glucagon and convert some of the glycogen stored in your muscles and liver to glucose. The fluctuation in the insulin and glucagon levels and resulting temporary inhibition of access to the glycogen/glucose stored in your body is what causes a 'sugar crash'. Eventually you run out of stored glycogen energy andy your body begins to break down muscle and fat to keep you going. The trick is to provide some energy in the form of glucose to your body in a measured way to minimize the swings. I did several long rows before eating much of anything (2 hours at a slow steady pace) and paid a lot of attention to when the lows hit. I have a consistent pattern. 45 minutes, 70 minutes, 2 hours, then more frequently after that. My solution is to keep some glucose tablets by the erg, and have 1 or 2 about 5-10 minutes before each crash time. This smoothes out the ups and downs for me. Then I have something to eat or drink after the session to replenish the glycogen and protein depletion that happened during the exercise. Grams

[old] DIESEL · Post by **[old] DIESEL** » December 21st, 2004, 1:56 am

informative stuff, thanks grams! could it be possible that metabolism shifts changes along various points in your life?? Food for thought.... I guess my question is - do you think your metabolism was at 42 minutes back at say when you were 20? hmmmm.... one other question - I always thought the reason that women stored fat around their hips and abdominal area was for protection against the rigors of childbirth - protection against the winter doesn't really fly with me - because in the end you do control what goes into your mouth - i.e. if you are not putting in surplus calories you wouldn't just put on extra weight just because your body's mechanism senses the drop in temperature... or does it? For all we claim to know about human physiology the body's functions are in many ways still a great mystery. If they weren't, we wouldn't have so many different training protocols would we? Of course, I could be totally wrong... take care, D

[old] b sayyed · Post by **[old] b sayyed** » December 22nd, 2004, 5:22 pm

Try 10-20 hard sprints (running) 2 or 3 times a week. I dont know the science behind it, but I think it would work.

[old] pduck · Post by **[old] pduck** » December 22nd, 2004, 10:44 pm

</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE (b sayyed @ Dec 22 2004, 03:22 PM)</td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Try 10-20 hard sprints (running) 2 or 3 times a week. I dont know the science behind it, but I think it would work. </td></tr></table> Doing High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) is supposed to be a great way to lower your bodyfat. Even though you are burning fewer calories during the actual exersize, studies have shown that you can lose up to 9 times more fat than someone doing long continuous cardio. Scientist guess that it is because of a stronger "afterburn" effect <a href='http://www.wsu.edu/~strength/hiit.htm' target='_blank'>http://www.wsu.edu/~strength/hiit.htm</a> One word of caution: Doing hard sprints is VERY hard on your tendons. It is very easy to get injured or pull a muscle. I have been doing HIIT on my erg. I just do the same types of workouts that I'd be doing if I were running.

[old] Dodsy1974 · Post by **[old] Dodsy1974** » December 28th, 2004, 3:42 pm

Weight, or rather fat loss, is easy, in principle at least. Less calories in than you're expending. It doesn't matter what you eat, or in what ratios, GI's, etc. Less in than out! It's that basic. Dodsy

[old] DIESEL · Post by **[old] DIESEL** » December 28th, 2004, 9:11 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td class='genmed'>QUOTE </td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Weight, or rather fat loss, is easy, in principle at least. Less calories in than you're expending. It doesn't matter what you eat, or in what ratios, GI's, etc. Less in than out! It's that basic. Dodsy </td></tr></table> You're only partly right... you do need a negative balance to lose weight - but you can't say that macronutrient ratios and the types of food you are eating don't matter. Yeah, you'll lose weight following your advice. But you'll look like crap, have no energy, much less any strength. Notice how they like to tout crap like the Subway diet - I'd love to see Jared with this shirt off and see what he's got under there.... I guarantee you it's not a pretty sight...

[old] kentuckyliz · Post by **[old] kentuckyliz** » January 23rd, 2005, 12:23 pm

Yeah, a soloflex commercial has Jess (the buff former porker) saying, "I don't see that sandwich guy with HIS shirt off." LOL We have not evolved very much. Female fat storage patterns, and the propensity for hoarding and storing calories as fat, is basically our prehistoric wiring. What if I get pregnant during a famine in winter? Hoard hoard hoard hoard hoard. Remember, until very recently in human history, the challenge was to get enough calories. Scarcity. Subsistence. Hunger. Even my father remembers going hungry. Now, in prosperous countries, the challenge is abundance! Food is cheap and easily available everywhere. The cheapest and most available food is the nutritionally most bankrupt and the most inconvenient to prepare. Our prehistoric tastebuds/tongues liked hoarding fat and sugar when possible for survival. Now the McDonald's drive-thru is killing us. (I have a friend from India who emigrated to theUSA...saying he wanted to live somewhere where even poor people were fat.) So...ladies...don't go blaming yourself for our unevolved prehistoric make-up. Just know what it is and how the deck is stacked against all of us...and that it takes an effort to eat properly and nutritiously to resist the overfeeding in the abundance of crap out there. Not saying I don't give in sometimes...and that I'm not still working on getting rid of the stores from my previous indulgence.....the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. LOL

[old] Ged Musto · Post by **[old] Ged Musto** » January 29th, 2005, 1:22 pm

Mark. I feel p[ersonally sorry for you because the crux of your question has not been answered by anyone so far. Your question is an exrecise related question not a nutrition which evryone has jumped on the band wagon!!! The pure and simplistic answer to the question is Alternate Sit-Ups and Cross Over Sit-Ups/Crunches. I am still doing 3-5 x 100 reps and these targets the Side Obliques which is your love handles... Please feel free to contact me on ged@bmcfitness.co.uk or visit my website www.bmcfitness.co.uk Good luck Mark. Cheers. Ged.

[old] Sirrowsalot · Post by **[old] Sirrowsalot** » January 29th, 2005, 1:37 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(Ged Musto @ Jan 29 2005, 12:22 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Mark. I feel p[ersonally sorry for you because the crux of your question has not been answered by anyone so far. Your question is an exrecise related question not a nutrition which evryone has jumped on the band wagon!!! The pure and simplistic answer to the question is Alternate Sit-Ups and Cross Over Sit-Ups/Crunches. I am still doing 3-5 x 100 reps and these targets the Side Obliques which is your love handles... Please feel free to contact me on ged@bmcfitness.co.uk or visit my website www.bmcfitness.co.uk Good luck Mark. Cheers. Ged. </td></tr></table> You can't specifically target the love handles. That may build your oblique muscles, but it's not going to burn the fat. You can't target fat-burning. It's definitely a nutrition question.

[old] amheward · Post by **[old] amheward** » January 29th, 2005, 2:05 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(Ged Musto @ Jan 29 2005, 12:22 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I feel p[ersonally sorry for you because the crux of your question has not been answered by anyone so far. </td></tr></table> The reason his question was not answered is because there is no way that a particular exercise can remove fat from a particular area of the body. That's simply not how fat storage works, and explains why the answers immediately shifted to dietary considerations. Fat goes onto the body in a genetically programmed way, and it comes off the body in the reverse--so the first place you see it appear (hips on the ladies, love handles on the guys) is unfortunately also the last place you'll see it disappear. Crunches or situps or whatever are incapable of changing this pattern. The only solution is to eat fewer calories and engage in aerobic exercises that burn the most calories using the fat burning metabolic pathways to their fullest extent. Luckily for us, rowing is the perfect answer! Just make sure that you row in your target heart range for aerobic work, so that you're burning the fat and not the glycogen. Next make sure that when you eat you don't pig out and just put back on what you lost. Make sense? Abe

[old] Ged Musto · Post by **[old] Ged Musto** » January 29th, 2005, 3:21 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(amheward @ Jan 29 2005, 01:05 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(Ged Musto @ Jan 29 2005, 12:22 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I feel p[ersonally sorry for you because the crux of your question has not been answered by anyone so far. </td></tr></table> The reason his question was not answered is because there is no way that a particular exercise can remove fat from a particular area of the body. That's simply not how fat storage works, and explains why the answers immediately shifted to dietary considerations. Fat goes onto the body in a genetically programmed way, and it comes off the body in the reverse--so the first place you see it appear (hips on the ladies, love handles on the guys) is unfortunately also the last place you'll see it disappear. Crunches or situps or whatever are incapable of changing this pattern. The only solution is to eat fewer calories and engage in aerobic exercises that burn the most calories using the fat burning metabolic pathways to their fullest extent. Luckily for us, rowing is the perfect answer! Just make sure that you row in your target heart range for aerobic work, so that you're burning the fat and not the glycogen. Next make sure that when you eat you don't pig out and just put back on what you lost. Make sense? Abe </td></tr></table> Yes entirely.....You don't have to preach nutrition and other fitness related matters to me, I can go into nutrition with the very best, its my job but I was stipulating exercises and nothing else... After all I am well known for my stamina and endurance exploits as anyone who used to be part of the forum who knows me would vouch!!!.

[old] pduck · Post by **[old] pduck** » January 29th, 2005, 3:43 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(amheward @ Jan 29 2005, 12:05 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(Ged Musto @ Jan 29 2005, 12:22 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>I feel p[ersonally sorry for you because the crux of your question has not been answered by anyone so far. </td></tr></table> Crunches or situps or whatever are incapable of changing this pattern. The only solution is to eat fewer calories and engage in aerobic exercises that burn the most calories using the fat burning metabolic pathways to their fullest extent. Luckily for us, rowing is the perfect answer! Just make sure that you row in your target heart range for aerobic work, so that you're burning the fat and not the glycogen. Next make sure that when you eat you don't pig out and just put back on what you lost. Make sense? Abe </td></tr></table> Two comments. First, diet and aerobic exercise are not the only two solutions to fat loss. Weight lifting is at least as important as aerobics. If you build muscle through resistance training, you will speed up your metabolism, so you will burn more fat at rest. This can be very significant. Second, I don't believe that rowing at a slow rate and keeping your heart in its target zone is the best way to lose fat. It's true that the percentage of fat calories burned is higher, but the TOTAL number of calories burned will be higher with more intense rowing. Think about it...elite athletes in endurance sports like rowing or running do a lot of intervals and fast training, and obviously they are not fat. On the other hand, I've seen middle of the pack marathoners who don't appear to be very fit. I believe that both long, slow rowing as well as faster, more intense training is the best answer to loosing fat. (see my above post on HIIT)

[old] amheward · Post by **[old] amheward** » January 29th, 2005, 5:23 pm

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(pduck @ Jan 29 2005, 02:43 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>Two comments. First, diet and aerobic exercise are not the only two solutions to fat loss. Weight lifting is at least as important as aerobics. If you build muscle through resistance training, you will speed up your metabolism, so you will burn more fat at rest. This can be very significant. Second, I don't believe that rowing at a slow rate and keeping your heart in its target zone is the best way to lose fat. It's true that the percentage of fat calories burned is higher, but the TOTAL number of calories burned will be higher with more intense rowing. </td></tr></table> Yes. I misspoke earlier. The bottom line is the number of calories you burn, not necessarily how you do it. You're also right about a larger muscle mass requiring higher energy requirements for maintenance, allowing for consumption of more calories while still maintaining (or decreasing) weight. However--and I could be wrong about this (it's been a while since I really studied this stuff)--that doesn't necessarily mean that your body is going to be consequently better at burning fat as a fuel source. Fat burning efficiency, I believe, is improved by taxing that pathway--i.e., training aerobically. No doubt there is a "right" combination of the two. Also, I can't resist pointing out that I've seen many guys at the gym who can bench press 3 times their body weight and yet they've got a belly the size of a barrel--obviously pointing once again to the idea that, as you said, it's the total number of calories burned in a workout that is most important. Abe

[old] Sirrowsalot · Post by **[old] Sirrowsalot** » January 29th, 2005, 5:31 pm

"I was stipulating exercises and nothing else..." Yes, that's the problem--you were incorrect. The "pure and simple" response was not "alternate sit-ups and cross over sit-ups/crunches.) Once again, you can't target fat in specific area.

[old] Ged Musto · Post by **[old] Ged Musto** » January 30th, 2005, 9:23 am

<table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><div class='genmed'>QUOTE(Sirrowsalot @ Jan 29 2005, 04:31 PM)</div></td></tr><tr><td class='quote'>"I was stipulating exercises and nothing else..." Yes, that's the problem--you were incorrect. The "pure and simple" response was not "alternate sit-ups and cross over sit-ups/crunches.) Once again, you can't target fat in specific area. </td></tr></table> WHEN YOU HAVE DONE HALF AS MUCH AS I HAVE ACHIEVED IN MY CAREER TO DATE LET ME KNOW, IN THE MEANTIME I'D KEEP YOUR MOUTH WELL AND TRULY SHUT!!! MAKE SENSE. GED.

Concept2 Forum

"love Handles"

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness

Health and Fitness