| Back to Articles |
In this week's newsletter, I'm going to cover back extension variations as the exercise of the month.
The
research review is about spot reduction (more accurately spot
lipolysis), I imagine this paper will get a lot of press (and incorrect
interpretation) so I wanted to discuss it.
No feedback, c'mon people, disagree with me.
In the Q&A, a question about setpoint and why isn't my diet working.
Lyle
Do
you ever start a diet with the best of intentions only to fall off of
it when things don't go 100% perfectly? A little slip up, a
special event, or a vacation; all of these can derail a diet if you expect
total perfection. What if I told you that it didn't have to be
this way, that being more flexible with your diet could make it work
better. A Guide to Flexible Dieting explains how flexible, rather
than rigid, dieting can increase your odds of success. Learn how
to use free meals, refeeds and even full diet breaks effectively to
make your diet work better.
Research Review
Every
week, I read research, tons and tons of research; it's what I do. I
have my Pubcrawler system set up to pull all of the recent studies on
topics of interest to me (including fat loss, hypertrophy, bodyweight
regulation and some other stuff) and I'll be including interesting new
studies here every week.
Aerobic exercise increases whole-body adipose tissue lipolysis, but is lipolysis higher in subcutaneous adipose tissue (SCAT) adjacent to contracting muscles than in SCAT adjacent to resting muscles? Ten healthy, overnight-fasted males performed one-legged knee extension exercise at 25% of maximal workload (Wmax) for 30 minutes followed by exercise at 55% Wmax for 120 minutes with the other leg and finally exercised at 85% Wmax for 30 minutes with the first leg. Subjects rested for 30 minutes between exercise periods. Femoral SCAT blood flow was estimated from washout of (133)Xe and lipolysis was calculated from femoral SCAT interstitial and arterial glycerol concentrations and blood flow. In general, blood flow as well as lipolysis was higher in femoral SCAT adjacent to contracting than adjacent to resting muscle (time 15-30 min: blood flow: 25% Wmax: 6.6 +/- 1.0 vs. 3.9 +/- 0.8 ml 100 g(-1) min(-1), P < 0.05; 55% Wmax: 7.3 +/- 0.6 vs. 5.0 +/- 0.6, P < 0.05; 85% Wmax: 6.6 +/- 1.3 vs. 5.9 +/- 0.7, P > 0.05; lipolysis: 25% Wmax: 102 +/- 19 vs. 55 +/- 14 nmol 100 g(-1) min(-1), P = 0.06; 55% Wmax: 86 +/- 11 vs. 50 +/- 20, P > 0.05; 85% Wmax: 88 +/- 31 vs. -9 +/- 25, P < 0.05). In conclusion, blood flow and lipolysis are generally higher in SCAT adjacent to contracting than adjacent to resting muscle irrespective of exercise intensity. Thus, specific exercises can induce "spot lipolysis" in adipose tissue. Key words: exercise, spot lipolysis, microdialysis.
My comments: The idea of spot reduction is one that has floated around the fitness body composition world for decades. Well meaning individuals do zillions of crunches or hour long 'buns and ab classes' in an attempt to reduce bodyfat in specific areas. Men want the ever desirable six-pack and can be seen doing abs until the cows come home, women try to slim hips and thighs with endless reps on the inner/outer thigh machine. Etc.
For the most part, the idea of spot reduction has been resoundly denied by folks in the field (with the occasional heretic or book seller suggesting it is still possible). Various studies are cited including those showing no difference in skinfolds in the arms of tennis players (who typically use one arm more than the other). The example I've often used is that "If spot reduction worked, people who ate a lot should have skinny faces." A bit silly but it gets the point across.
But is this idea exactly true? That's what this week's study set out to examine. Using a couple of different methods to measure actual blood flow and lipolysis (which means the breakdown of stored fat for release into the bloodstream), the study had subjects perform lower body exercise (they called it one leg leg extension but this probably means one legged cycling) at various intensities while resting the other leg. That way, blood flow/lipolysis could be measured for the exercise versus the unexercised leg.
Exercise was performed at 25%, 55% and 85% of maximum power output with a 30 minute break and the subjects switched legs from one intensity to the next. Blood flow and lipolysis was compared between the exercised leg and the rested leg.
And, as the abstract indicates, blood flow w was higher (at the two lower intensities) for the exercised vs. non-exercised leg as was local lipolysis.
The reasons for these results are a bit obscure as the researchers point out. Local changes in hormones (or a synergy between changes in hormones and blood flow) are most likely responsible but there is a larger question of why this would occur. Localized increase in temperature, which can also impact on blood flow may have also been involved.
Even with the increase in local lipolysis, the muscle underlying a given fat depot can't use any of the mobilized fatty acids because the blood supply is separate. Fat mobilized from fat cells goes into general circulation, not to the muscle underneath it. Related to this, the researchers point out clearly that there is no indication that these results will actually result in spot reduction as fat stores in the affected areas could simply be replenished after the exercise bout.
From a more important standpoint, we should examine the quantitative impact of this before everybody goes and starts doing 30 minutes of continuous activity for spot reduction. Based on the changes in blood flow and lipolysis, the researchers estimate that, in 30 minutes of exercise, an additional .6-2.1 milligrams (that's one thousandth of a gram extra) per 100 grams of adipose tissue adjacent to contracting muscle.
This amounts to very little difference in the real world and burning even an extra gram of fat (remember that a pound of fat has about 400 grams of stored triglyceride) would take hours and hours of activity. That set of 25 crunches, or even an hour ab class simply isn't going to do much.
At the end of the day, the calories burned during exercise (and note that caloric expenditure is MUCH higher for aerobic type activities than any type of localized activity such as crunches or lunges) and the net daily deficit are going to have a profoundly greater impact on overall fat loss than any miniscule impact on local lipolysis.
So while this paper is interesting, it says very little of practical use in terms of true spot reduction.
The
Ultimate Diet 2.0 is, at once, both very old and very new. Based
on the original Ultimate Diet by Dan Duchaine and Michael Zumpano, I
revised the original system into a friendlier 7 day cycle, and brought
it up to date with current scientific knowledge. You'll learn just why
it's so difficult to diet to extreme leanness without muscle and
performance loss; more importantly, you'll get a solution that has
produced results even beyond my original expectations. Fat losses
of 1.5 pounds per week (on only 4 days of dieting) with no muscle loss
are being reported by some. Some are gaining muscle and strength as they lean out.
Exercise of the Month:
Back Extension
This
month I want to talk about back extensions. I consider the back extension to be a basic 'core'
exercise. While low back certainly gets hit during big movements
like squats and especially deadlifts (and RDL's and good mornings), the
spinal erectors tend to get hit primary isometrically (meaning that they contract without movement). From a
safety standpoint, I think there is benefit to working the spinal
erectors through full flexion and extension since there are times when
the back simply can't be kept flat. Low back strengthening can
also benefit squats and deads simply by ensuring that they aren't a weak point in the movement.
Finally, recent research (mostly
by Stuart McGill) has tied some types of low back pain to muscular
endurance (although not strength per se) in the spinal erectors and back extensions are an excellent way of training that capacity.
Additionally, done properly, back extensions can generate a training
effect for upper back (including midback) and will also hit hamstrings
and glutes to varying degrees.
Fundamentally,
there are a few different ways to do back extensions, depending on what
the goal is (this is not unlike the situation with stiff legged versus
romanian deadlifts). Ignoring what happens in the upper back,
we're focusing mainly on the spinal erectors, hamstrings and
glutes. One of the primary determinants of what gets hit how
(dynamically versus isometrically) is the pad position relative to the
hips. And there are two options: you can set the pad below the
level of hips (which allows the pelvis to rotate) or set it
sufficiently high to lock the pelvis in place. This is shown
below. A low pad position is shown on the left, a high position
on the right.
With
the pad below the level of the hips, there are two options as to what
the low back does: it can round or stay flat. The bottom position of
this is shown below. Round back is on the left, flat back on the
right. The difference between these two is that rounding the back
(along with the pelvis rotating) will hit the spinal erectors, glutes
and hamstrings all dynamically, all will be involved in extending the
body back to the starting position. With a flat back, the low
back will be worked isometrically with the glutes and hamstrings
performing hip extension (this is basically like a machine Romanian
deadlift).
With
the pad high enough to lock the hips, there is only one option and
that's to round the low back. The start and finish position of
this is shown below. This will work the spinal erectors
dynamically and the glutes/hamstrings isometrically.
Since
I generally use the back extension specifically to train the spinal
erectors dynamically, I can't say that I use the flat backed version
very often (if at all). So the issue really becomes one of what I
want the glutes or hamstrings to do (which usually depends on what was
done earlier in the workout). If the glutes/hams have already
been worked hard (with RDL's, or the leg curl/hip extension I'll show
in another newsletter), I'll usually lock the hips and make it almost
pure back movement. If I want some dynamic work for the
hamstrings/glutes, I'll set the pad low and let the hip rotate.
Since
I've probably confused the holy hell out of people at this point, let
me sum up. We have two pad positions and two possibilities with
what the low back does although there are only actually 3
combinations. Those combinations, along with what they do is
below.
Low pad+low back rounds = spinal erectors, glutes, hams all worked dynamically
Low pad + flat back = spinal erectors worked isometrically, hams/glutes worked dynamically
High pad + round back = spinal erectors worked dynamically, glutes/hams isometrically
High pad + flat back = can't be done.
Before
moving on, I want to show a proper versus improper top position.
Despite often being called a 'hyperextension', it's incorrect and
dangerous to actually take the spine into hyperextension. You
should only extend up until the body is in a neutral position.
Normal spinal extension and spinal hyperextension are shown below (normal on
the left, hyperextension on the right). Don't do what's on the
right.
The
next thing to discuss is how to load the movement. Without using
weight, there are 4 progressively more difficult ways to do back
extensions, shown below.
In order from easiest to most difficult these are: hands by sides, hands at chest, hands at temples,
and hands overhead.
For
the most part, I don't typically use hands at head or hands overhead
unless, for some reason, additional weight can't be used. After someone
can do hands at chest easily, I'd rather just start having them add
weight to the movement.
The
next way to load the movement is to hold either a plate or dumbbell at
chest level (some will also load the movement with a bar held behind
the head, this isn't shown). Both are shown below. One problem
with plates is making intermediate jumps. So, for example, once a
25 lb plate becomes too easy, moving to 30 is a pain because you have
to try to hold a 25 and 5 lb plate. I generally prefer dumbbells
for this reason. Another benefit to holding weight is that the upper back can be trained as
well by ensuring that your shoulder blades are pulled back hard while
you hold the weight.
As
a final variant on this movement, a single leg extension can be done by
simply taking one leg out from underneath the pads. This makes
the movement considerably harder and adds a stabilization component
around the pelvis.
Sadly
my gym only has the 45 degree back extension bench although everything
I'm going to discuss also applies to the horizontal style of back
extension (or glute ham raise which is often used to perform similar
movements). A horizontal back extension is shown below (left). The
movement can also be done over a Swiss ball (right) which adds an additional
stability component.
The horizontal back extension is generally much more
difficult with the position of maximum loading occurring at the top,
compared to the 45 degree version which has peak loading when the torso
is parallel with the floor.
I
have also occasionally started beginner clients on the leg curl machine
by having them do a short range back extension over the bend in the
machine. Just pin the weight with something they can't possibly
curl and they can do back extensions.
I
no longer believe in starting with back extensions on the floor, Stuart
McGill has shown that hyperextensions on the floor generate a
tremendous amount of disk pressure.
Although I generally
don't discuss loading parameters in the newsletter, for muscular
endurance, high rep sets (more accurately, long set times, in the 60-120 second range) along with
isometric holds (from 2-10 seconds) at the top are very effective.
When
you want all of the details regarding ketogenic, low-carbohydrate diets
with no hype and no fluff, this is the only book of it's kind. At
325 pages, with over 600 scientific references, covering all aspects of
the ketogenic diet (except epilepsy), this will be your bible for all
types of low-carbohydrate diets.
Questions and Answers
Q:
I would like to tell you how much I enjoy your newsletter. It is
so refreshing to get straightforward answers based research. My
question is in regards to set point. This summer I reached an all
time low body fat of 11%. I would suspect that this is lower than
my natural set point as I was hungry all the time. Currently I am
between 13-14% body fat. Is it possible to reset your set point
to a lower point if you stay at it long enough? If so, will the
constant hunger dissipate?
A: This is a good question that I've been pursuing for a while.
In looking at the research in both humans and animal models (mostly rats), I've seen nothing to suggest that setpoint ever spontaneously resets itself downwards (note: it can go up under certain conditions such as puberty, childbirth/pregnancy and even chronic obesity). So 2-5 years post-diet, metabolic rate is still slightly depressed and it never seems to magically correct itself. In both humans and rats.
I suspect that, if setpoint were to ever adjust itself downwards, it would take years of staying lean. Even there the research just doesn't really support that it does. This is one of those depressing places where it looks like things only move one way and that's the wrong way.
So, you ask, how do people get and stay lean long-term? It's probably behavioral, the habits that got them lean stay in place the longer they remain lean; they stay lean through sheer willpower and good habits. And folks are probably a little bit hungry all the time. That's the price for playing.
One thing you might try is to allow yourself the occasional free meal or short-refeed (5+ hours of high carbs). This helps to bump leptin levels (involved to a great degree in this) but shouldn't negatively impact on your body composition. The use of free meals/refeeds during maintenance diets is discussed in both the Rapid Fat Loss handbook and A Guide to Flexible Dieting.
Q: I bet you are getting tons of e-mails, but I must ask a few questions 'cosI just finished reading your book "The Ultimate Diet 2.0". And btw, your writing style is great and very understandable (not too scientific, but still enough to let the readers know some of the reasoning) even for non-english speakers (I'm Finnish).
You mention that if one has been dieting for a long period, it is recommended to eat at maintenance level for 7-14 days and at least 100 grams of carbs. Is this 100 grams meant for all, men and women? I'm just interested to know that, let's say, I will eat 60-80 grams of carbs a day, will that allow my metabolic rate to to recover and thyroid function speed up? Or is the 100g minimum? What do you you think is suitable amounts of carbs for me? I will explain my situation:
I'm 23 years old, 161cm/61kg female, competing in sports aerobics and fitness. I have a lot of muscle and bodyfat 28, but need to drop it for my first contest. My situation is that I have been trying to diet (take it slowly to prevent metabolic slowdown) for one year..but with very little results. I have always been doing cardio six mornings per week for one hour + aerobics training 3 evenings and gym 4-5 evenings, eating super clean (I have so much willpower that I am able to follow my diet even when I super hungry) with approx. 50 grams of carbs (protein intake also
optimized and healthy fats) but still no results...so I'm thinking I may be in the starvation mode.. This has come to point where I don't know what to do, I'm stuck. I have really strong feeling that I want to get results now. As you mentioned in your book, there indeed are people who are getting frustrated at dieting more than an year Ok, I admit, I'm doing way too must of cardio, but am afraid to cut it 'cos I want to get this diet over with. And cardio should be the best fat burning. I'm already eating 1200kcl with training, but without my morning cortisol that burn 600-1000 kcl, I won't make a any calorie deficit. But then again, as I have been doing like to for more than one year with no progress, so I guess I should change it 'cos it aint working. I hope you got my point! I have really strong feeling that I want results now. As you mentioned in your book, there indeed are people who are getting frustrated at dieting
more than an year!
A: This is a good question that I've been pursuing for a while.
In looking at the research in both humans and animal models (mostly rats), I've seen nothing to suggest that setpoint ever spontaneously resets itself downwards (note: it can go up under certain conditions such as puberty, childbirth/pregnancy and even chronic obesity). So 2-5 years post-diet, metabolic rate is still slightly depressed and it never seems to magically correct itself. In both humans and rats.
I suspect that, if setpoint were to ever adjust itself downwards, it would take years of staying lean. Even there the research just doesn't really support that it does. This is one of those depressing places where it looks like things only move one way and that's the wrong way.
So, you ask, how do people get and stay lean long-term? It's probably behavioral, the habits that got them lean stay in place the longer they remain lean; they stay lean through sheer willpower and good habits. And folks are probably a little bit hungry all the time. That's the price for playing.
One thing you might try is to allow yourself the occasional free meal or short-refeed (5+ hours of high carbs). This helps to bump leptin levels (involved to a great degree in this) but shouldn't negatively impact on your body composition. The use of free meals/refeeds during maintenance diets is discussed in both the Rapid Fat Loss handbook and A Guide to Flexible Dieting.
Q: I bet you are getting tons of e-mails, but I must ask a few questions 'cosI just finished reading your book "The Ultimate Diet 2.0". And btw, your writing style is great and very understandable (not too scientific, but still enough to let the readers know some of the reasoning) even for non-english speakers (I'm Finnish).
You mention that if one has been dieting for a long period, it is recommended to eat at maintenance level for 7-14 days and at least 100 grams of carbs. Is this 100 grams meant for all, men and women? I'm just interested to know that, let's say, I will eat 60-80 grams of carbs a day, will that allow my metabolic rate to to recover and thyroid function speed up? Or is the 100g minimum? What do you you think is suitable amounts of carbs for me? I will explain my situation:
I'm 23 years old, 161cm/61kg female, competing in sports aerobics and fitness. I have a lot of muscle and bodyfat 28, but need to drop it for my first contest. My situation is that I have been trying to diet (take it slowly to prevent metabolic slowdown) for one year..but with very little results. I have always been doing cardio six mornings per week for one hour + aerobics training 3 evenings and gym 4-5 evenings, eating super clean (I have so much willpower that I am able to follow my diet even when I super hungry) with approx. 50 grams of carbs (protein intake also
optimized and healthy fats) but still no results...so I'm thinking I may be in the starvation mode.. This has come to point where I don't know what to do, I'm stuck. I have really strong feeling that I want to get results now. As you mentioned in your book, there indeed are people who are getting frustrated at dieting more than an year Ok, I admit, I'm doing way too must of cardio, but am afraid to cut it 'cos I want to get this diet over with. And cardio should be the best fat burning. I'm already eating 1200kcl with training, but without my morning cortisol that burn 600-1000 kcl, I won't make a any calorie deficit. But then again, as I have been doing like to for more than one year with no progress, so I guess I should change it 'cos it aint working. I hope you got my point! I have really strong feeling that I want results now. As you mentioned in your book, there indeed are people who are getting frustrated at dieting
more than an year!
My trainer's solution to me cut out all the
aerobics cos he thinks I'm overtrained and he plans to make me train
intensive at the gym 5 days per week. .But I want to ask you opinion
can you think I can do TD2? Taking in consideration by last years (the
fact that am been training very very much) and eating quite lite
(low-carbs). The starvation mode again here.. And I do the maintenance
diet before doing UD2 diet, will it be enough to take only say 4 days
break? And should I cut aerobics and increase weights? That's what my
trainer says, but having a hard time
doing what he tells cos I love cardio. And then start is, or do you suggest,
longer maintenance period? So that the thyoid stuff regulates back to
normal and the "Starvation mode" goes off. I'm just cannot wait any
longer. I know that the healthiest way is the long fat loss, but my
head is not taking this year after year dieting..So I wouldn't like to
take a long
maintenance period, as I want to finish this diet soon. Hope you understood my points..
But thanx so much if you had the time to read this a mail and even more, thanx if you answer!
A: Whew. Ok.
Yes, the 100 grams/day is a fixed amount. This is based on the amount of carbs needed to avoid ketosis which relates to how many carbs the brain uses on a daily basis which doesn't vary very much. In fact, 150 g/day might be better. This is necessary to help raise Thyroid levels.
As far as the lack of fat loss, I don't disagree with your trainer that you may be overtrained. With that kind of activity, you need more carbs and more calories, 1200 cal is far too low for that level of activity. Women's bodies often do this weird thing that, when faced with the combination of too much activity and too little food, fat loss can grind to a halt.
2 weeks of maintenance coupled with a more sane training/diet program should get fat loss moving. I don't know if you need to cut out all aerobics but I think what you're doing is too much.
Additionally, consider that your body doesn't respond well to low-carb diets; not everybody's does. A carb-based diet may be a much better approach for you.
Finally, why did you wait a year to look for solutions? Frankly, if fat loss isn't moving in 4-6 weeks, something is wrong with your program and you need to change something.
Good luck.
maintenance period, as I want to finish this diet soon. Hope you understood my points..
But thanx so much if you had the time to read this a mail and even more, thanx if you answer!
A: Whew. Ok.
Yes, the 100 grams/day is a fixed amount. This is based on the amount of carbs needed to avoid ketosis which relates to how many carbs the brain uses on a daily basis which doesn't vary very much. In fact, 150 g/day might be better. This is necessary to help raise Thyroid levels.
As far as the lack of fat loss, I don't disagree with your trainer that you may be overtrained. With that kind of activity, you need more carbs and more calories, 1200 cal is far too low for that level of activity. Women's bodies often do this weird thing that, when faced with the combination of too much activity and too little food, fat loss can grind to a halt.
2 weeks of maintenance coupled with a more sane training/diet program should get fat loss moving. I don't know if you need to cut out all aerobics but I think what you're doing is too much.
Additionally, consider that your body doesn't respond well to low-carb diets; not everybody's does. A carb-based diet may be a much better approach for you.
Finally, why did you wait a year to look for solutions? Frankly, if fat loss isn't moving in 4-6 weeks, something is wrong with your program and you need to change something.
Good luck.
When
you need to drop fat in the fastest way possible, the Rapid Fat Loss
Handbook is the best solution. Four to seven pounds of bodyfat
and 10-20 lbs of bodyweight in 2 weeks are possible. Full
guidelines on how to train, how to set up the diet, how to come off the
diet without gaining everything you lost back, and how to shift back
into moderate dieting.
Feedback
No feedback again. C'mon people. Send me questions, complain at me and disagree.
Got questions you want answered in the Q&A. Send them to me here
Note: due to the volume of email, I can't guarantee responses to all questions.
Did you miss an issue of the newsletter, check the archive.
Don't forget to check out the store.
Like the newsletter, why not tell a friend?
Just send them the following link: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/newsletter.html
Interested in becoming an affiliate? Click here for more information.
Until next week,
Lyle McDonald
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com