Funny Things You Hear at the Gym

Danger_Dave said:
huh??? no understand...
Click to expand...

Look at the series of posts.

I was simply asking how atypical protocol would work to reduce BF in the lower body and not the top......

Wasnt this basically the conversion? (short version), or I am I missing this is a joke (wouldnt be the first time) :)



Ha, ha, ha, on me, LOL :)


Best wishes


Chillen
 
oh... I thought there was some sort of hidden joke in your post or something. nvm then lol.
 
Danger_Dave said:
oh... I thought there was some sort of hidden joke in your post or something. nvm then lol.
Click to expand...

No, my question was serious.

We all know the theory of spot reducing........

So, I was asking for an explaination.

Did you take the series of posts the way I did, or am I missing something here?.........:confused:, LOL.......:11doh:


I have good intentions.....I just havent see anyone on the forum (to date) say........spot reducing (however slight) works.

We have to remember that the larger pool tends to drain slower than the shallow end. And though the "physical composition" (of the deep and shallow ends) can be different between females; spot reducing ISNT POSSIBLE, IMO.

Ever study the biological process when body fat is burned?.......READ! DAVE :)




Best wishes,


Chillen
 
Last edited:
Chillen said:
spot reducing ISNT POSSIBLE, IMO.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I believed. Funnily enough, I asked her whether or not females could in a way "spot reduce" (not true spot reduce of course) directly after I stated somewhere esle that spot reducing simply did not happen and was a ridiculous myth.


Then again, I have not studied anything of the sort so.... I asked.
 
Danger_Dave said:
This is exactly what I believed. Funnily enough, I asked her whether or not females could in a way "spot reduce" (not true spot reduce of course) directly after I stated somewhere esle that spot reducing simply did not happen and was a ridiculous myth.


Then again, I have not studied anything of the sort so.... I asked.
Click to expand...

I know. I just didnt want you to think to the "contrary" so I became concerned.

The way fat is burned from one person to the next "can vary" in distribution (or how its taken from the body and burned), but to specifically design a nutrition and exercise program to burn fat----from----ONE AREA of the body IS NOT POSSIBLE.

Now, a person's body composition (and metabolism efficiency) may be SUCH that it will take more from one place----than another place on the body, but this ISNT spot reducing.........

Best wishes

Chillen
 
Last edited:
yeah, I figured as much. spot reducing was probably a poor term to use on my part. It's not like I think that you can do curls and suddenly there is no fat on your arm.
 
Danger_Dave said:
well normally people with huge asses have huge fat torsos as well, but seriously, her hips must be 3x her waist. not possible?
Click to expand...

There was a maths teacher at my old school that looked like that, not quite as bad but her butt was at least twice as wide as her upper body, it looked so weird, I've never seen anyone like it since
 
Women can't spot reduce any more than men can. However, for women, the first place their fat goes is usually the hips, butt and upper legs, also, the first place for the fat to come on is usually the last place for it to leave. For men it is the stomach (underneath the muscles, causing the famous "beer gut"). So it's not so much spot reducing as just your body having some preferences as to where to take the fat from when it needs it.
 
Chillen said:
Curious:

What would a typical "spot reducing" lowering the body fat (on the lower abs-only, and not reducing fat on the upper body, etc)) for a woman look like, your view?
Click to expand...

Dave was steered correctly :) I said that women typically lose from their upper bodies first, and then the protocols you use afterwards help with lower body fat loss.

These include taking the EC stack to use as alpha 2 receptors antagonists, performing hiit cardio so that localizes blood flow can go to the hips/thighs/butt and lypolysis (fat cell breakdown) can take place, and lastly, lowering carb intake to enhance lypolysis via the lowering of insulin levels.
 
jaim91 said:
Dave was steered correctly :) I said that women typically lose from their upper bodies first, and then the protocols you use afterwards help with lower body fat loss.

These include taking the EC stack to use as alpha 2 receptors antagonists, performing hiit cardio so that localizes blood flow can go to the hips/thighs/butt and lypolysis (fat cell breakdown) can take place, and lastly, lowering carb intake to enhance lypolysis via the lowering of insulin levels.
Click to expand...

Jaim, you are my friend, I love ya! I am not picking on you! Please know this!

Okay? :(

You are not advocating a fat loss "type" pills are you?


Dont even get me started on "over the counter fat-loss pills" , LOL. You know not what you do.......;)


Best wishes


Chillen
 
Last edited:
I <3 you too Chill :) I promise, and I know you're not picking on me.

I'm not 'advocating' the EC stack per se. I'm just saying that as a women, we only have so many natural resrouces that we can exhaust before we do have to turn to useful pharmeceutical grade thermogenic. Even men with a low of abdomical fat have it easier than women with hip/thigh/butt fat.

The way the EC works is more condusive to women because we have FEWER and more responsive alpha 2-receptors (which slow down fat loss).
 
jaim91 said:
I <3 you too Chill :) I promise, and I know you're not picking on me.

I'm not 'advocating' the EC stack per se. I'm just saying that as a women, we only have so many natural resrouces that we can exhaust before we do have to turn to useful pharmeceutical grade thermogenic. Even men with a low of abdomical fat have it easier than women with hip/thigh/butt fat.

The way the EC works is more condusive to women because we have FEWER and more responsive alpha 2-receptors (which slow down fat loss).
Click to expand...

Cool.......;)

All practical diet and fitness activities should attempt to be exhausted before turning "medically" unless it is an obvious medical problem to a health professional.

One thing to mention. I NEVER have taken a thermogenic and have never taken an over-the-counter so-called thermogenic.

8 minute abs + "magic pill" = a rich entrepreneur

Hours in the gym sweating + "Truth" = A broke-ass entrepreneur

I believe one WISE can use calories, aspects of nutrition (macronutrients), and exercise, as the thermogenic. And, some blindly turn to a so-called thermogenic when diet and fitness WILL cure the problem if they just educated themselves. And this assumes a healthy individual with no biological (major) disorders.

ROCK ON GIRL! Stay pretty as always!


Best wishes


Chillen
 
Last edited:
jaim91 said:
I <3 you too Chill :) I promise, and I know you're not picking on me.

I'm not 'advocating' the EC stack per se. I'm just saying that as a women, we only have so many natural resrouces that we can exhaust before we do have to turn to useful pharmeceutical grade thermogenic. Even men with a low of abdomical fat have it easier than women with hip/thigh/butt fat.

The way the EC works is more condusive to women because we have FEWER and more responsive alpha 2-receptors (which slow down fat loss).
Click to expand...

I have some questions:

What do you mean by only so many natural resources? You can diet and exercise to lose weight, that is all you need. (unless, god forbid, you should have some sort of disease that prevents you..)

Also why do men have it easier than women? Is this something you just see from experience, or is there research on this?
 
Karky said:
I have some questions:

What do you mean by only so many natural resources? You can diet and exercise to lose weight, that is all you need. (unless, god forbid, you should have some sort of disease that prevents you..)
Click to expand...

Natural, as Chillen describes, "All practical diet and fitness activities should attempt to be exhausted before turning "medically" unless it is an obvious medical problem to a health professional."

Karky said:
Also why do men have it easier than women? Is this something you just see from experience, or is there research on this?
Click to expand...

Men have it easier than women because men's abdominal fat is never ever as stubborn as women's lwer body fat. Yours is more sensitive to lipolytic stimuli and less sensitive to unline. It responds well enough to normal cardio approaches such that nothing special is usually needed to get rid of it except patience. Women's lower body fat is profoundly sensitive to insulin meaning that carbs will make it damn near impossible to mobilize stubborn fat in the first place. Add to this the female hormonal response to slow, low intensity cardio, the small noradrenaline response can end up having anti-lypolytic effects. Also, there has been a phenomenon whereby as they get more shredded, woman can redistribute fat from the upper body to the lower body :(

So there is research and anecdotal evidence out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top