From: Steve Harris <sbharris@ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups: sci.med
Subject: Re: HELP PLEASE: Constant Boated Stomach
Date: 29 Aug 2005 21:20:28 -0700
Message-ID: <1125375628.631463.37330@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

Howard McCollister wrote:
> "Jags" <njagan@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1125341248.191791.28500@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> > Hi Howard,
> >
> >  Thanks for the valuable insights that you have provided.
> >
> >  You mention that "Your only options for getting rid of abdominal
> > subcutaneous fat are weight-loss or liposuction". So, if I understand
> > you correctly, by "weight loss" you mean even though I am 155lb I
> > should probably lose more weight to such a point that my stomach looks
> > flat (even though that would mean I would be under-weight). And then
> > probably once my stomach is flat & trim, then from that point onwards I
> > can work on *increasing* my weight back to 155-160lbs. Did I interpret
> > your suggestion correctly? Please confirm.
> >
>
> There is no way to target one particular area of your body for loss of
> subcutaneous fat, no matter what diets or exercise toys you see on late
> infomercials. Your particular distribution of body fat is as genetically
> determined as your hair color.
>
> Without liposuction, you can get rid of the subcutaneous fat (not any loose
> skin) by losing weight until it's gone, but if you gain weight back, you
> will reaccumulate body fat and it will go preferentially to the same
> abdominal area because those fat cells are still there. The only way you
> will permanently get rid of your "gut" is to get rid of the actual fat
> cells -> liposuction.
>
> HMc



COMMENT:

Pretty much true. And that last stubborn area tends to be in the belly
in males, and thighs and hips in women. It's genetically and hormonally
controlled.

You can do all the sit-ups in the world, and all they do is give you a
natural girdle of muscle. But the fat is still there undernieth, same
as if you were using a nylon girdle.

One of my mentors, Dr. Walford, came out of Biosphere II after two
years on a < 1500 kcal diet. He was pretty emaciated, but still had a
small pot belly. That wasn't the fluid-filled belly of the
malnurished--- his protein status was good and he wasn't actually
malnurished, just undernurished. But to lose that last bit of fat (and
it WAS fat) he *would* have had to go into frank malnutrition.

Male cats, incidentally, have the same sort of thing-- a little ruff
that hangs down at the back of the belly. The curse of testosterone.

SBH