Exercises do target specific areas of the body. It is fat loss that you cannot control. So here's the rub: you can work on your abs to define and flatten your stomach, but unless you lose the fat there you will not only not achieve the look you want, but you may actually appear to have a larger stomach. That is because you will have the added bulk of toned abdominal muscles under the fat.

That is assuming of course that you have extra weight in the stomach area. If you do not, then you should see the results from ab exercises pretty quickly. Just make sure to do the right ones so that you don't actually widen your waistline. Working out your obliques, for example, is notorious for widening the waist.

petite_powerhouse, Thank you soooo much for your fast response. All of the things that you said actually makes sense and I will definately take it into consideration. Again thanks for your response!!!

Read this. I found it very interesting and the work outs very good. Just like the person who sent it to me, I am going to apologize ahead of time for the graphic nature of the website. Lol. (nothing big, just a lil skin.)

http://www.t-nation.com/readArticle.do?id=1305014

Original Post by odie03:

Read this. I found it very interesting and the work outs very good. Just like the person who sent it to me, I am going to apologize ahead of time for the graphic nature of the website. Lol. (nothing big, just a lil skin.)

http://www.t-nation.com/readArticle.do?id=1305014

You're right, the article is very interesting. I, too, was under the illusion that muscle-building excersices would make me thinner. But it all makes sense now. Thanks for the link. :)

fantoom - you missed the part of the article where it talks about many "muscle-building exercises" that WILL make you thinner, and give you the hourglass shape most women want:

"You do, however, want to build up the muscles that aid in the hourglass figure: vastus lateralis, glutes, and deltoids. " (about 10 paragraphs below the pic of Jessica Simpson)

And the other article to read, also from T-Nation: http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=1526539

I think that article, while very interesting and quite informative, undervalues muscle in women. And it pushes cardio that can lead to an abundance of body fat—for an athletic physique, at any rate—like long-distance running.

But, then, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I think Britney is too thin in that first pic, and lacks definition. She's a young girl there, after all. I don't want to look like a young girl my whole life. She looks like I could snap her in half with my bare hands.

She has perhaps gone too far in the next pic (although that's a really unflattering picture)—and the author is absolutely right that if you put on weight after building up your abs, or build them while you have extra fat around your tummy, then you may very well end up with your stomach protruding like hers does in the gladiator pics—but all the same I like a little muscle on a woman's stomach. And if you don't have that extra layer of fat there, well-toned ab muscles can actually hold the stomach in throughout the day. You can also achieve a slimmer waist while working your abs, if you do the right exercises. My waist is 23".

I like muscle on women, period, all over the body. If it isn't overdone, I think it's very attractive. But again, I'm biased: I'm into weight lifting. And I do think the other women in that article have lovely bodies. You can tell they have muscle tone, and they clearly got that from lifting weights. But I think you can be more defined than that and still very attractive—and attractive to the opposite sex.

amethystgirl, nah, I did read the whole article and I wasn't referring to the other muscle-building exercises, just to the mere fact that working on your abs won't necessarily give you a flatter stomach, thus automatically burning all the fat off your stomach making it flat. I'm sorry if I didn't express myself clearly. :]

ok, just making sure - to me, abs are something that develops as a byproduct of other exercise - i care much more about getting my back and legs strong, and if some of those exercises hit the abs, so be it. But I don't worry about targeting such a small muscle :)

i guess i worry that people will read that article and say "no weight training", instead of what i think the real point of the article is: "why all the crunches?"

"Targeting such a small muscle"? Four sets of stomach muscles wrap around the body. They play an important role in the support of your spine and overall back health, and should be exercised routinely.

I'm not going to push having defined abs: when it comes to that, to each their own. But for long-term health it is important to target your stomach muscles when exercising. Your body’s core stability greatly affects your overall strength and balance. And the transverse abdominals, the deepest of the stomach muscles, are considered the most important for a strong core.

That being said, though, it is true that crunches will not get the job done. As I say, there are four sets of stomach muscles. A variety of exercises are therefore required to address all of these.

Once the fat comes off, if you have done the right kinds of exercises you will see the results you wanted. This includes either defined abs or a slender waistline—or both.

Original Post by petite_powerhouse:

"Targeting such a small muscle"? Four sets of stomach muscles wrap around the body And the total volume of those 4 sets of muscles is really small compared to the muscles in your legs, back, chest, shoulders, etc. They play an important role in the support of your spine and overall back health, and should be exercised routinely exercised routinely doesn't mean targeted directly.

I'm not going to push having defined abs: when it comes to that, to each their own. But for long-term health it is important to target your stomach muscles when exercising for long term health your muscles should be developed to all work together in a balanced fashion, targeting specific muscles (isolation exercises) develops muscle imbalances and can lead to injury. Your body’s core stability greatly affects your overall strength and balance. And the transverse abdominals, the deepest of the stomach muscles, are considered the most important for a strong core. Compound exercises (squats, deadlifts, rows, etc) will do more for core strength and stability than all the direct ab work in the world.

Original Post by floggingsully:

Original Post by petite_powerhouse:

"Targeting such a small muscle"? Four sets of stomach muscles wrap around the body And the total volume of those 4 sets of muscles is really small compared to the muscles in your legs, back, chest, shoulders, etc. They play an important role in the support of your spine and overall back health, and should be exercised routinely exercised routinely doesn't mean targeted directly.

I'm not going to push having defined abs: when it comes to that, to each their own. But for long-term health it is important to target your stomach muscles when exercising for long term health your muscles should be developed to all work together in a balanced fashion, targeting specific muscles (isolation exercises) develops muscle imbalances and can lead to injury. Your body’s core stability greatly affects your overall strength and balance. And the transverse abdominals, the deepest of the stomach muscles, are considered the most important for a strong core. Compound exercises (squats, deadlifts, rows, etc) will do more for core strength and stability than all the direct ab work in the world.

Well, I'll give you that. But I am not advocating doing only ab exercises, so muscle imbalance is not an issue. I do all the exercises you mentioned and target the abs as well, and I will keep right on doing so because I like the definition.

I was really responding to the idea that one should not want to concentrate on the stomach muscles. You should. You should want to exercise those, however you choose to do it. And as I said (I think during one of my many edits, I'm afraid), crunches are not the answer. A variety of exercises, including those you mentioned, are required.

I think that article is great! I was a ballet dancer most of my life and a lot of the exercises we did as girls that we thought would give us nice flat tummies really built my ab muscles from a young age. I now have "former dancer's physique" which if any of you did any serious dancing you know what I'm talking about. Once you stop dancing and the muscle gets all loose and a little fat was added with age you end up with larger thighs and very often a rounded out tummy instead of the flat or well defined one you had while dancing. I still have a little ab definition somewhat in my tummy but if I stand sideways it rounds out instead of being flat and it's been that way even when I was at my thinnest. I have a naturally wide waist (between 28 and 30 inches since I was 14 depending on weight gain (yes even when I was at 5'4" and 102 lbs I had a 29 inch waist - darn bone structure) so that didn't help matters any. The girls I danced with who just danced and didn't focus on the extra crunches and ab exercises held onto to their flatter tummies longer (granted with age and kids things happen).

There is definitely a lot that is of real value in that article.

Original Post by petite_powerhouse:

Also, I think that article, while very interesting and quite informative, undervalues muscle in women. And it pushes cardio that can lead to an abundance of body fat—for an athletic physique, at any rate—like long-distance running.

Does long distance running really lead to an abundance of body fat?  if so, why is that?

Original Post by betsyanne26:

Does long distance running really lead to an abundance of body fat? if so, why is that?

Long-distance runners typically have a high body-fat percentage—considering that they are athletes, that is—because running long distances breaks down muscle. Here's a little background on the effects of long-distance running on the body:

"The nature of aerobic activity is catabolic. The main goal is to break down and burn fat. During this, the body will also seek to drop weight. The densest cells in the body are muscles. The body will seek to break down the muscles, not as much for an energy source, but to lighten the load - like a movie where an airplane is desperately trying to fly. The goal of this catabolic process is NOT to use protein as an energy source.

The nature of weight training is anabolic. Anabolic is the opposite of catabolic. Anabolic processes build. The goal is for the liver to release essential amino acids to be delivered via the blood to the muscles. The amino acids are built into peptide chains, which are built into the proteins that comprise muscles."

http://strengthtraining.suite101.com/article. cfm/weight_training_and_cardio

Certainly, if you combine weight training and running, that will help you hold on to muscle. But I always found it to be difficult myself to achieve the toned look I wanted while running a great deal. I do cardio that also builds muscle these days.

And if you aren't doing enough weight training to combat the effect of running on your muscles, then most definitely your body-fat percentage will go up.

The author of the article we're all discussing is not advocating running without weight training, though. As long as people understand that the two must be combined, then for many people it should work.

petite_powerhouse, what would be some examples of exercise that promotes cardio and strength training together? I am not fond of weight training alone but I don't want to solely do cardio that doesn't tone either.

Original Post by dovekie:

petite_powerhouse, what would be some examples of exercise that promotes cardio and strength training together? I am not fond of weight training alone but I don't want to solely do cardio that doesn't tone either.

Off the top of my head, a great exercise is to buy a step about 9" or 12" or so high at a fitness store and step on and off of it while holding hand weights and doing various exercises with those to tone the shoulders, biceps, triceps, etc. I also wear ankle weights when I do this one. It works my heart and muscles excellently. You can start out without any weights and work your way up.

You can also do this on regular steps—using two is ideal: go up and come back down.

You can walk fast or run up hills or up and down bleachers. You can also simply sprint on your local high school's track or wherever. Where long-distance running is catabolic, sprinting is anabolic: it builds muscle. This article discusses the possible advantages of small bursts of exercise:

http://www.aphroditewomenshealth.com/news/20050503003221_hea lth_news.shtml

Swimming is also an excellent full-body exercise that builds muscle while working the heart and lungs.

Great ideas. Thanks!

Original Post by petite_powerhouse:

I think that article, while very interesting and quite informative, undervalues muscle in women. And it pushes cardio that can lead to an abundance of body fat—for an athletic physique, at any rate—like long-distance running.

But, then, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Personally, I think Britney is too thin in that first pic, and lacks definition. She's a young girl there, after all. I don't want to look like a young girl my whole life. She looks like I could snap her in half with my bare hands.

She has perhaps gone too far in the next pic (although that's a really unflattering picture)—and the author is absolutely right that if you put on weight after building up your abs, or build them while you have extra fat around your tummy, then you may very well end up with your stomach protruding like hers does in the gladiator pics—but all the same I like a little muscle on a woman's stomach. And if you don't have that extra layer of fat there, well-toned ab muscles can actually hold the stomach in throughout the day. You can also achieve a slimmer waist while working your abs, if you do the right exercises. My waist is 23".

I like muscle on women, period, all over the body. If it isn't overdone, I think it's very attractive. But again, I'm biased: I'm into weight lifting. And I do think the other women in that article have lovely bodies. You can tell they have muscle tone, and they clearly got that from lifting weights. But I think you can be more defined than that and still very attractive—and attractive to the opposite sex.

Well, the trainer does say some women prefer more muscle, thus should refer to other articles.

No offense to anyone, but I think too much definition in women looks disgusting. I prefer the first picture of Britney, she looks more feminine. But then again, most of my friends think the second one is way better *shrug* while I think it's gross; to me, no muscles should show in the tummy. To each its own, as the author of the article puts it.