I don't understand why studies like this make the news. The "researchers" basically examined the effects of working out vs. not working out. The results should not be surprising. The method of exercise (weight lifting) was not compared to any other method of exercise (eg cardio) so therefore you can't conclude that it is more or less effective than any other method of activity.
I can completely understand where you're coming from, stomicron, but I don't think enough was revealed about the study to suggest that those not lifting weights weren't active.
I work out regularly, and run. I've always been active but in my personal experience, I have noticed that weight lifting did seem to attack belly fat (for me, anyway).
It's worth keeping an eye on this study and my own results.
...but I don't think enough was revealed about the study to suggest that those not lifting weights weren't active...
Well, I believe it's the report's task to clarify this point. As it stands, this does seem to be a case of finding too specific a correlation in the midst of inconclusive evidence. The information only seems to support the typical finding that exercise helps individuals lose weight.
Building muscle mass burns more calories. Shocker!
Women who did the weight-training for two years had only a 7 percent increase in intra-abdominal fat, compared to a 21 percent increase in the group given exercise advice.
This is the most shocking part to me. Without changing their eating habits, the women gained 21% of intra-abdominal body fat in just two years? So are overweight Minnesotan women gaining abdominal fat at an average rate of 10% a year?
They picked women who were already obese, aged 24 to 44. So the answer to your question: sure possibly. What's so shocking about that?
People who are already obese at a young age, minus extreme measures will become more overweight as they get older. I don't understand why that surprises you. (In fact, in general, most of the population gains body fat as they get older. People who are already obese will have more trouble as they get older.)
I have been looking for this article externally all day in the hopes I could seed it so I could rant about it. I think the only reason studies like this get the news coverage that they do is because people out there are still looking for that one "quick fix" that is going to solve everything without them having to make any significant changes to their lifestyle.
When I finally decided to make a commitment to treat myself better I started, perhaps naively, with trying just to get flatter abs. Sure I was losing abdominal fat, but I still couldn't walk up a flight of stairs without shortness of breath or do a push-up. The more I crunched and flexed and grunted and sweated, the more I realized that I couldn't focus on just one part of my body, so I started exercising to benefit my entire body. Then I found that I couldn't exercise properly on a stomach full of all the heavy, greasy, unhealthy foods I used to eat so much of, so I cut them back or cut them out entirely. I still don't have flat abs. But I have way more muscle now, I feel a great deal better than I did before, I can run up three flights of stairs without breaking a sweat and I am in the position where I have to replace a good potion of my wardrobe because its too big.
But the changes I made are permanent and geared towards improving my overall health. Its no longer just about burning belly fat.
Sabrina, good point about there being no quick fixes. I wouldn't fault journalists or studies though for looking a individual factors in isolation. This is how they figure out what works and what doesn't. I do agree with a previous reviewer though that if the point is to show the effectiveness of a particular exercise then they need to compare one exercise against another, not just against no exercise.
Consider the study as a guideline. Our bodies react differently towards the pressurs we put on it. Someone has quick metabolism, another has to work harder to achieve the same result.
And in this case, from what I can gather from the article, the research was done in conjunction with February's American Heart Month and the leading causes towards cardiovascular diseases.
I just believe that the story is told "incompletely" probably because the AP's staff writer probably does not have a fitness or health background and missed a couple of very important details. The first few lines of the article is not fully justified. "By just lifting weights twice a week for an hour, women can battle the buildup of tummy fat that often takes hold with aging, a new study suggests. And they didn't even diet."
That alone is a good tell tale sign that it's written more for media sensationalism.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |