Welcome to Omgili,
Omgili ( Oh My God I Love It ;) is a search engine for discussions. With Omgili you can find answers and solutions, debates, discussions, personal experiences, opinions and more... To learn more about Omgili click here.
This is a complete preview of the discussion as it was indexed by Omgili crawlers. Use this preview if the original discussion is unavailable.
Click here to view the original discussion.
 |
|
 |
|
"Soft" fat compared to "hard" fat - John Stone Fitness Forums
I thought of this after reading Hammerman's post.
I heard a few years ago that softer and flabbier fat is easier to lose than harder fat.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
I was told softer is easier to lose, because that means your fat deposits are releasing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've heard it, but is it hearsay?
A gram of fat has 9 calories in it regardless of whether it's part of a flabby or hard fat belly, right?
So why would it really make a difference?
The body can't hold onto energy more simply because the belly is hard fat (?).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree ... I've never seen one shred of evidence to support there being the soft/hard and I suspect to a large extent it's a lot psychological as well.
I've seen a lot of "it feels like the soft fat releases easier ...
Etc" but really, any fat that is subcutaneous (underneath the skin) should be soft.
If you have large arms, for example, but they are fat and not "soft" then more than likely the fat is fat marbled within the muscle rather than subcutaneous (beneath the skin).
Exercise appears to impact the subcutaneous fat more, while nutrition appears to impact the visceral and internal fat more, according to various studies.
Since I see a lot of people who are really not dialed in on their nutritoin ("I eat pretty clean" and "I can't wait until free day") it's possible the perception is that this fat is harder because they're focused more on the exercise end than the proper nutrition end.
Other than "I heard" "I feel" "I felt" or "It seems" I haven't found any evidence that there is a soft fat or a hard fat and that one would be harder or easier to lose.
I will say this ...
And I'm not saying it's you, Dingodoo, this is a general statement ...
But a lot of people just don't have what it takes.
They don't want it bad enough to focus on the nutrition, exercise, and other components, but instead of taking responsibility for this, they want to find an excuse to justify it.
That's why you hear a lot of "my metabolism is slow" and "it must be genetics" and "I'm old" or "I'm a woman so I can't lose it as easily" or "I've had 3 kids" etc, all excuses that help deflect the responsibility for getting it done ...
And most of the time I've heard the soft fat/hard fat it's fallen in that category ("mine's harder to lose because it's that hard fat")
Quote: : I've heard it, but is it hearsay?
A gram of fat has 9 calories in it regardless of whether it's part of a flabby or hard fat belly, right?
So why would it really make a difference?
The body can't hold onto energy more simply because the belly is hard fat (?).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm.. My whole body is soft and flabby so I should be good to go!
Heavy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just Curious, but I have noticed that my midsection has gone from this massive "hard" fat, to this "soft" fat.
Is the same happening to you HeavyGuy?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just going to throw this out there--but could it possibly be because you're losing fat, in general as well as from that region, and there is simply less fat packed in there to grab ahold of?
I've contented myself with this explanation through two cuts...both times, what started as a solidly fat belly shrunk and softened as my BF% lowered, before finally disappearing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I always thought all fat was soft.
I've never felt any "hard" fat...muscle is hard, fat is soft.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In a fitness class I took in college, the instructor and course materials claimed that "hard" belly fat is an indicator of risk for heart disease.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I've heard this too.
Hard fat is an indication that there is fat surrounding internal organs as well as the heart.
Soft fat doesn't appear to have the same effect.
I think it was in Men's Health Mag.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: : I always thought all fat was soft.
I've never felt any "hard" fat...muscle is hard, fat is soft.
I would say it´s the skin that can make a difference.
If you lose some of the fat you get a combo with lose skin and some remaining fat.
And that feels soft...
It´s like a baloon with water in it..If it´s half full it will be soft.
If you pump it full with as much water as it can hold it will feel hard.
And also when it starts to feel soft there is not much fat left...at least not compare to when the individual started the fatloss.
And perhaps that can make some believe it´s easy to get rid of..Because there is less when you start if it feels soft...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ouch...this thread is getting me scared .
I'm 15 and most of the fat on my body is hard fat, which is why I look like I weigh 170ish instead of what I actually weigh - 200.
=/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have noticed that as I cut (as per right now) that the fat goes from firm, to softer, then shrinks.
This is my theory: Some of this will have to do with the reduced caloric intake.
The muscle will reduce in size due to less glucose content, and with that water.
This will increase the volume of space between the fat and the skin, which was sized to fit the previous volume of water and fat.
I believe that it is the release of glucose and water from the cells that lower the apparent density of fat, making it feel looser and flabbier.
Fat is fat. Your job is to lose it by healthy eating and active lifestyle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: : Just Curious, but I have noticed that my midsection has gone from this massive "hard" fat, to this "soft" fat.
Is the same happening to you HeavyGuy?
I don't know to be honest.
It appears that the MyoTape makes bigger gouges in my love handles when I use it, but like Jeremy says, no way to really tell.
I do feel pretty soft though.
Cheers,
Heavy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: : Ouch...this thread is getting me scared .
I'm 15 and most of the fat on my body is hard fat, which is why I look like I weigh 170ish instead of what I actually weigh - 200.
=/ So lose the weight and no worries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks guys, im at 247 right now from 280 in august, 2 years ago i was 300, so im thinking the loose skin might be what im feeling along with fat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At that weight, what you're probably feeling is just fat under the skin.
It's more likely not loose skin.
There's an easy way to test.
Grab a pinch or handful of the skin.
Now, is it thin like you're stretching the skin of a deflated ballon?
In other words, are you pulling the skin out but it's only a few millimeters thick?
That's loose skin.
Or, can you get this big fold of skin, but it has thickness to it?
So you can pull the skin far away, but if you were to measure the thickness, it would be inches rather than millimeters?
In that case, it's fat underneath the skin, not loose skin.
It appears loose but it has to be to hold the fat.
Continue to lose the fat, and most of that skin will shrink.
Don't get me wrong, loose skin can be an issue, but I've worked with people who have lost over 300 pounds.
They didn't start at 300 pounds, they LOST 300 pounds, and even with them, loose skin was not a major issue and while they had it, it was so thin that you could still see the muscle definition underneath.
I'd keep losing!
No worries.
Jeremy
Quote: : thanks guys, im at 247 right now from 280 in august, 2 years ago i was 300, so im thinking the loose skin might be what im feeling along with fat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: : At that weight, what you're probably feeling is just fat under the skin.
It's more likely not loose skin.
There's an easy way to test.
Grab a pinch or handful of the skin.
Now, is it thin like you're stretching the skin of a deflated ballon?
In other words, are you pulling the skin out but it's only a few millimeters thick?
That's loose skin.
Or, can you get this big fold of skin, but it has thickness to it?
So you can pull the skin far away, but if you were to measure the thickness, it would be inches rather than millimeters?
In that case, it's fat underneath the skin, not loose skin.
It appears loose but it has to be to hold the fat.
Continue to lose the fat, and most of that skin will shrink.
Don't get me wrong, loose skin can be an issue, but I've worked with people who have lost over 300 pounds.
They didn't start at 300 pounds, they LOST 300 pounds, and even with them, loose skin was not a major issue and while they had it, it was so thin that you could still see the muscle definition underneath.
I'd keep losing!
No worries.
Jeremy
Wow, it's so good to hear a pro talk about this!!
Everytime someone asks me about loose skin, this is exactly what I tell them, that most of what you think is loose skin is actually fat, and that while some loose skin (a very minimal amount as you mentioned) might be so, the gobs of loose skin you see is actually fat!!
Just had to say that I agree....wholeheartedly.
I have lost 110 pounds, and whereas some people might say I have loose skin (which they can't even see with my clothes on), I know that I just still have fat to lose (about 10 pounds).
I guess this is why I get so frustrated with people who tell me to quit losing weight.
I know that I still have fat to lose, and I'm not going to quit until my c-sec tummy is gone!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Could basic "skin elasticity" have something to do wtih it?
When I was 19 I could pinch the cheek on my face and pull it away from my face about 6 inches.
Now I can only get it to go about 3.
Some of my friends had almost no skin elasticity at 19.
I was always very rubbery and elastic.
My fat (when a little overweight) tended to be loose, jiggly,and concentrated in belly and chest.
Others I know seem to have a single-thickness layer of fat all over them and indeed it looks "harder " tham mine did.
Maybe it depends alot on how your alpha-receptor cells are distributed.
Certain skin types look harder than others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Skin elasticity certainly can.
Most people eat too many of the wrong fats and then go on diets and don't eat enough of the good ones.
It requires a steady influx of omega-3 fatty acids for the skin to be elastic ...
Clinical trials have shown that skin can improve elasticity by as much as 4 - 5 times through the proper intake of vitamin E and essential fatty acids.
I've had enczema and the only way I keep it from appearing is by consistently taking healthy fats and using the paraben-free skin care regimen I use.
I know the people who lose a lot of weight and consistenly don't have major issues with stretched or loose exfoliate often and embrace healthy fats and topical creams.
Jeremy
Quote: : Could basic "skin elasticity" have something to do wtih it?
When I was 19 I could pinch the cheek on my face and pull it away from my face about 6 inches.
Now I can only get it to go about 3.
Some of my friends had almost no skin elasticity at 19.
I was always very rubbery and elastic.
My fat (when a little overweight) tended to be loose, jiggly,and concentrated in belly and chest.
Others I know seem to have a single-thickness layer of fat all over them and indeed it looks "harder " tham mine did.
Maybe it depends alot on how your alpha-receptor cells are distributed.
Certain skin types look harder than others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|