spot reduction - by michael gundhill
01-07-2004 12:26 AM
yes , i'm going to try it soon as well , as soon as my exams get over in a month .
01-07-2004 12:46 AM
what i dont get, if you consistantly work a muscle and are burning calories, just in truth how could it NOT get bigger? seems weird to think that you could work out and not get better.
01-07-2004 12:51 AM
well , it becomes aerobic work , at that rep range , so u dont get bigger .
01-07-2004 12:52 AM
Really bigger is not the original issue here it is spot reduction of fat. And by the likes of it if you train a muscle over and over again the muscle itself does not always get bigger in truth. But again that is not the issue here it is lose of fat. Not busting on you I just was setting the record straight this has become quite a long thread and is also quite a debate.
01-07-2004 01:04 AM
thats what i meant is leaner, which now im not sure if thats it either just tired and couldnt think of the word, sorry.. haha
01-10-2004 01:08 AM
posted by michael gundill in reply to this question :
"As to the question, you need to add the neural innervation of the adipose tissue. It means that your nervous system can send lipolytic hormones directly to the fat cells if properly asked. I would not be surprised that training abs (for example) could increased the level of those lipolytic hormones in the surrounding fat cells."
also , if anyone is interested in asking him questions directly, this is what he said :
"You can contact me there:
Feel free to post in english."
also , another question on this topic is , whats the volume and frequency with which one would have to train his abs for this effect to take place , his reply :
"I guess, this would depend on your diet. The more you would eat, the more volume you would need.
Ideally, I guess working abs both in the morning and in the evening would be best. One or 2 sets, squeezing them hard for high reps (at least 20) should be enough."
this is a nice way to get things cleared right ? .
01-10-2004 04:26 AM
I think you would have a hard time determining whether
or not it was the increase in aerobic activity which would
give you an increased fat loss overall, as oposed to a spot
reduction in the midsection.
Two extra sets of abs every day would definately burn
new calories so it would probably be a good idea anyway.
01-10-2004 09:08 AM
cmon , how significant would be the slight increase in calories burnt , if there is anything noticable , it will only be due to something diff from a normal calorie deficit causing over all fat loss . I once again point out how much the chemistry is altered in the arms , calves etc due to the frequent use.
01-10-2004 10:56 AM
raybravo. It sounds like you believe that an increase in abdominal
work would actually have an effect on the FAT in the area worked.
To get more blood into the fat deposits it would probably be more
effective to slap it around and give it (the fat deposits) a massage
or something. Doing ab work will get blood to the abdominal muscles
but unlikely have a big effect on the surrounding tissue.
Working your biceps does not have any effect on the subcutaneous
fat in your arms in any direct way. I would imagine that as some of
the bros mentioned earlier, the calves and arms don't have a predisposition
to fat deposits.
It has something to do with an increased number alpha 2 adrenoreceptors that bind catecholamines in the midsection of males or thighs in women that do not allow fat
That is why your fat gut has a clammy cold feeling while the rest of
you is burning up, even in the summer.
01-10-2004 03:15 PM
Not sure if you are being serious, but this actually may be effective also.
Originally Posted by Greyvolk
Boxers, kickboxers, martial arts, etc often train high volume crunches and physical strikes to the abdomen. Many have very developed and lean stomaches. This may be attributed to some of the striking/manipulation work that gets directed towards the stomach.
01-10-2004 04:31 PM
It just sounds like gross overtraining to me. Abs are muscles just the same. You want to see your abs, diet and cardio is the way.
01-10-2004 04:33 PM
Not exactly b/c you are training in a completely different method.
Originally Posted by jminis
01-10-2004 08:09 PM
how so by not using weight? This method has you doing an insane amount of reps using a specific muscle (abdominals). Don't you think they need rest like any other muscle.
Originally Posted by size
01-10-2004 10:09 PM
the fibre type of the muscle matters as well , again , we arent really trying to build it are we ?
01-10-2004 10:12 PM
its what michael gundill believes , which intruiged me , so i posted it for everyone's opinion bro .
Originally Posted by Greyvolk
eithr way , i think gundill believes that there might be some alteration of chemistry site specifically due to working the abs in this particular way .
01-11-2004 12:22 PM
I understand that, but my thinking is the reason for this is to get the six pack right? Well the bigger and more developed your abdominals are the more your gonna see that six pack. I know your abs don't grow like many of the other muscles in your body but they still grow. Anyway that's where I'm coming from.
Originally Posted by raybravo
I think it couldn't hurt to try if you wanted to and it's always nice to read new idea's and theories. Good post Ray.
Similar Forum Threads
By bigrob21 in forum Anabolics
Last Post: 06-03-2010, 07:45 PM
By jbray in forum Supplements
Last Post: 01-05-2010, 03:14 AM
By Newbie40plus in forum Weight Loss
Last Post: 06-25-2008, 05:14 AM
By mattyboy86 in forum Supplement Logs
Last Post: 06-20-2008, 03:10 PM
By growmore in forum Anabolics
Last Post: 08-10-2004, 09:21 PM