Visceral Fat Build-Up Is the High Cost of Inactivity _Duke Univ.Medical Study

http://www.dukemednews.org/news/article.php?id=9238
Full Article Link Above

First Randomized Clinical Trial Exercise Amount and Intensity
4 Lbs Per Year Gain "Normal" W/O Exercise
Modest Exercise Prevents Visceral Fat Buildup
More Exercise Removes Visceral Fat Buildup

EXTRACTS BELOW-----------------

Visceral Fat Build-Up Is the High Cost of Inactivity _Duke Univ. Medical
Study

DURHAM, N.C. – Inactivity leads to significant increases in visceral
fat, and a moderate exercise regimen can keep this potentially dangerous
form of fat at bay, according to the results of the first randomized
clinical trial evaluating the effects of exercise amount and intensity
in sedentary overweight men and women.

Additionally, the Duke University Medical Center researchers found that
increasing amounts of exercise can reduce visceral fat. In terms of
overall weight gain, the patients who did not exercise would gain
approximately four pounds per year, the researchers said.

Visceral fat, the form which accumulates around the organs inside the
belly, particularly concerns physicians because increased levels have
been associated with insulin resistance, cardiovascular disease and
other metabolic syndromes. Visceral fat is located deeper in the body
than subcutaneous fat, which lies just under the skin.

---
"Until we are able to prevent the weight many dieters regain following
short-term dieting success, we should place a greater national emphasis
toward prevention," Slentz said. "It will be a challenge to change the
message from 'exercise now to lose weight' to 'exercise now so in five
years you won't be 20 pounds heavier.'"

------
The exercise was carried out on treadmills, elliptical trainers or cycle
ergometers in a supervised setting. The researchers used computed
tomography (CT) both before the exercise program began and eight months
later to determine the extent and distribution of fat change.


----
"On the other hand, participants who exercised at a level equivalent to
17 miles of jogging each week saw significant declines in visceral fat,
subcutaneous abdominal fat and total abdominal fat," Slentz continued.
"While this may seem like a lot of exercise, our previously sedentary
and overweight subjects were quite capable of doing this amount."

Specifically, those participants exercising at the highest level saw a
6.9 percent decrease in visceral fat and a 7 percent decrease in
subcutaneous fat.

------

The Duke team was led by cardiologist William Kraus, M.D., who received
a $4.3 million grant from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute
in 1998 to investigate the effects of exercise on sedentary overweight
adults at risk for developing heart disease and/or diabetes. The results
of that five-year trial, known as STRRIDE (Studies of Targeted Risk
Reduction Interventions through Defined Exercise), and other analyses of
the data collected, began to be published in 2002.




--
1) Eat Till SATISFIED, Not STUFFED... Atkins repeated 9 times in the book
2) Exercise: It's Non-Negotiable..... Chapter 22 title, Atkins book
3) Don't Diet Without Supplimental Nutrients... Chapter 23 title, Atkins
book
4) A sensible eating plan, and follow it. (Atkins, Self Made or Other)

jbuch wrote:
:: http://www.dukemednews.org/news/article.php?id=9238
:: Full Article Link Above

Good post, jimbo!

jbuch wrote:
http://www.dukemednews.org/news/article.php?id=9238
Full Article Link Above

First Randomized Clinical Trial Exercise Amount and Intensity
4 Lbs Per Year Gain "Normal" W/O Exercise
Modest Exercise Prevents Visceral Fat Buildup
More Exercise Removes Visceral Fat Buildup

The exercise was carried out on treadmills, elliptical trainers or cycle
"On the other hand, participants who exercised at a level equivalent to
17 miles of jogging each week saw significant declines in visceral fat,
subcutaneous abdominal fat and total abdominal fat," Slentz continued.
"While this may seem like a lot of exercise, our previously sedentary
and overweight subjects were quite capable of doing this amount."

Specifically, those participants exercising at the highest level saw a
6.9 percent decrease in visceral fat and a 7 percent decrease in
subcutaneous fat.

Is there a link to the actual report, rather than the summary? Or where
it will be published. I'm curious as to what 17 Miles equivalent is, so
I can actually operationalize this without powdering the balls of my
feet and misaligning my knees.

Would also be interesting to know how they came up with 17 miles vs. 11
miles and if 17 is the real cutoff. Not looking for shortcuts, but if
15 is the efficient frontier, 17 is 2 miles of diminished returns. Or
what future research they suggest.

-Hollywood

Max Hollywood Harris wrote:
:: jbuch wrote:
::: http://www.dukemednews.org/news/article.php?id=9238
::: Full Article Link Above
:::
::: First Randomized Clinical Trial Exercise Amount and Intensity
::: 4 Lbs Per Year Gain "Normal" W/O Exercise
::: Modest Exercise Prevents Visceral Fat Buildup
::: More Exercise Removes Visceral Fat Buildup
::
::: The exercise was carried out on treadmills, elliptical trainers or
::: cycle "On the other hand, participants who exercised at a level
::: equivalent to 17 miles of jogging each week saw significant
::: declines in visceral fat, subcutaneous abdominal fat and total
::: abdominal fat," Slentz continued. "While this may seem like a lot
::: of exercise, our previously sedentary and overweight subjects were
::: quite capable of doing this amount."
:::
::: Specifically, those participants exercising at the highest level
::: saw a
::: 6.9 percent decrease in visceral fat and a 7 percent decrease in
::: subcutaneous fat.
::
:: Is there a link to the actual report, rather than the summary? Or
:: where it will be published. I'm curious as to what 17 Miles
:: equivalent is, so I can actually operationalize this without
:: powdering the balls of my feet and misaligning my knees.

that part is probaby based on something weak like calories burned or 17
miles running on a treadmill per week or some regular walking progam. I
would not put too much stock in that....

::
:: Would also be interesting to know how they came up with 17 miles vs.
:: 11 miles and if 17 is the real cutoff. Not looking for shortcuts,
:: but if 15 is the efficient frontier, 17 is 2 miles of diminished
:: returns. Or what future research they suggest.

Hollywood...don't use it as a gospel truth...just get to moving more
(assuming you're not). Do as much as you can and work up. Improvement come
over time....

The take-home message is what's important here, not the raw numbers or some
magic amount. If you have significant visceral fat, exercise more to aid in
being rid of it.

"jbuch" wrote in message
...
http://www.dukemednews.org/news/article.php?id=9238
Full Article Link Above

First Randomized Clinical Trial Exercise Amount and Intensity
4 Lbs Per Year Gain "Normal" W/O Exercise
Modest Exercise Prevents Visceral Fat Buildup
More Exercise Removes Visceral Fat Buildup

Not my experience : ( Diabetes - and therefore presumably metabolic
syndrome - makes it all too easy to gain visceral fat, and damnably
difficult to get rid of it. I had considerably more than modest amounts of
exercise in my regime before a diagnosis of diabetes, and still gained lots
and lots of visceral fat. 18 months of low-carbing (and taking thyroxine)
later, I am now reasonably skinny everywhere - except round my waist. And
I've exercised for 1 1/2 hours per day for all of those days.

Nicky.

--
A1c 10.5/5.6/6 T2 DX 05/2004
1g Metformin, 100ug Thyroxine
95/74/72Kg

Nicky wrote:
:: "jbuch" wrote in message
:: ...
::: http://www.dukemednews.org/news/article.php?id=9238
::: Full Article Link Above
:::
::: First Randomized Clinical Trial Exercise Amount and Intensity
::: 4 Lbs Per Year Gain "Normal" W/O Exercise
::: Modest Exercise Prevents Visceral Fat Buildup
::: More Exercise Removes Visceral Fat Buildup
::
:: Not my experience : ( Diabetes - and therefore presumably metabolic
:: syndrome - makes it all too easy to gain visceral fat, and damnably
:: difficult to get rid of it. I had considerably more than modest
:: amounts of exercise in my regime before a diagnosis of diabetes, and
:: still gained lots and lots of visceral fat. 18 months of low-carbing
:: (and taking thyroxine) later, I am now reasonably skinny everywhere
:: - except round my waist. And I've exercised for 1 1/2 hours per day
:: for all of those days.

But I'm a type 2 diabetic and have been for over 23 years. The data they
report works well for me. I've never gained weight while exercising and
eating well (even on low fat).

Note also that they claim that more exercise removes viserval fat buildup.
So, if the fat isn't disappearing, you need to do yet more exercise to be in
keeping with their claim. Of course, the difference could be in the type of
exercise and also in whether you are a man or a woman. I think weight
lifting makes a big difference in losing bodyfat when combined with good
diet.

I don't mean to disagree with you though, but I must say that I always find
it incredibly difficult to accept when people say they're doing (or did) all
this exercise and yet gaining weight - assuming they aren't eating ****loads
of food every day. Exercise can be nullified (in terms of weight control)
very, very quickly by eating. It might take an hour of hard exercise to
burn 600 kcals but one can eat that many calories inside a minute (speaking
from personal experience!). I guess it's true that people are not all the
same, but with no first-hand experience it's still hard to accept.

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Roger Zoul wrote:

;Nicky wrote:
;:: "jbuch" wrote in message
;::: Modest Exercise Prevents Visceral Fat Buildup
;::: More Exercise Removes Visceral Fat Buildup
;::
;:: Not my experience : ( Diabetes - and therefore presumably metabolic
;:: syndrome - makes it all too easy to gain visceral fat, and damnably
;:: difficult to get rid of it. I had considerably more than modest
;:: amounts of exercise in my regime before a diagnosis of diabetes, and
;:: still gained lots and lots of visceral fat. 18 months of low-carbing
;:: (and taking thyroxine) later, I am now reasonably skinny everywhere
;:: - except round my waist. And I've exercised for 1 1/2 hours per day
;:: for all of those days.
;
;But I'm a type 2 diabetic and have been for over 23 years. The data they
;report works well for me. I've never gained weight while exercising and
;eating well (even on low fat).
;
;Note also that they claim that more exercise removes viserval fat buildup.
;So, if the fat isn't disappearing, you need to do yet more exercise to be in
;keeping with their claim. Of course, the difference could be in the type of
;exercise and also in whether you are a man or a woman. I think weight
;lifting makes a big difference in losing bodyfat when combined with good
;diet.
;
;I don't mean to disagree with you though, but I must say that I always find
;it incredibly difficult to accept when people say they're doing (or did) all
;this exercise and yet gaining weight - assuming they aren't eating ****loads
;of food every day. Exercise can be nullified (in terms of weight control)
;very, very quickly by eating. It might take an hour of hard exercise to
;burn 600 kcals but one can eat that many calories inside a minute (speaking
;from personal experience!). I guess it's true that people are not all the
;same, but with no first-hand experience it's still hard to accept.
;

I can't give you first hand experience, because exercise works really well
for me, but do you remember a while ago there were some articles to the
effect that some people are actually "exercise resistant." The study on
which the articles were based found that for some people, even when they
absolutely, legitimately, verifiably were exercising enough that they
should be gaining health benefits from it, they weren't. I remember Jenny
the Bean identified herself as one who didn't benefit from exercise.

It flies in the face of my experience, but just as low fat works really
well for some people and is a disaster for me, I have to accept (until a
new study comes out that says it's all wrong) that some people don't reap
the benefits of exercise.

And, as you say, there's the problem that calorie expenditure has to be
matched up with output. It's *really* easy to think that since you walked
for an hour that you can have the 40 oz smoothie as a reward. Net calorie
gain there.

I am pleased to report that not only is my strength training going really
well, but I've actually gotten off the elliptical and started running for
real. It's surprising how much harder the body actually works when you're
running and your body has to do all the stabilization as opposed to
working on the elliptical. I don't have any problem doing the elliptical
for an hour at an average of 6mph, but so far 20 minutes of running is
about it, for now. Onward and upward, though!

Martha, feeling pretty good about the exercise thing.



--

Martha S. Gallagher wrote:
:: On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Roger Zoul wrote:
::
:: ;Nicky wrote:
:: ;:: "jbuch" wrote in message
:: ;::: Modest Exercise Prevents Visceral Fat Buildup
:: ;::: More Exercise Removes Visceral Fat Buildup
:: ;::
:: ;:: Not my experience : ( Diabetes - and therefore presumably
:: metabolic ;:: syndrome - makes it all too easy to gain visceral fat,
:: and damnably ;:: difficult to get rid of it. I had considerably more
:: than modest ;:: amounts of exercise in my regime before a diagnosis
:: of diabetes, and ;:: still gained lots and lots of visceral fat. 18
:: months of low-carbing ;:: (and taking thyroxine) later, I am now
:: reasonably skinny everywhere ;:: - except round my waist. And I've
:: exercised for 1 1/2 hours per day ;:: for all of those days.
:: ;
:: ;But I'm a type 2 diabetic and have been for over 23 years. The data
:: they ;report works well for me. I've never gained weight while
:: exercising and ;eating well (even on low fat).
:: ;
:: ;Note also that they claim that more exercise removes viserval fat
:: buildup. ;So, if the fat isn't disappearing, you need to do yet more
:: exercise to be in ;keeping with their claim. Of course, the
:: difference could be in the type of ;exercise and also in whether you
:: are a man or a woman. I think weight ;lifting makes a big
:: difference in losing bodyfat when combined with good ;diet.
:: ;
:: ;I don't mean to disagree with you though, but I must say that I
:: always find ;it incredibly difficult to accept when people say
:: they're doing (or did) all ;this exercise and yet gaining weight -
:: assuming they aren't eating ****loads ;of food every day. Exercise
:: can be nullified (in terms of weight control) ;very, very quickly by
:: eating. It might take an hour of hard exercise to ;burn 600 kcals
:: but one can eat that many calories inside a minute (speaking ;from
:: personal experience!). I guess it's true that people are not all
:: the ;same, but with no first-hand experience it's still hard to
:: accept. ;
::
:: I can't give you first hand experience, because exercise works
:: really well for me, but do you remember a while ago there were some
:: articles to the effect that some people are actually "exercise
:: resistant."

Yes, now that you mention it - I do remember. I also remember thinking how
strange that is and if they did a study that's worth a damn. I don't
remember any of the details, though, and I'm too busy (and not interested
enough at the moment) to google.

The study on which the articles were based found that
:: for some people, even when they absolutely, legitimately, verifiably
:: were exercising enough that they
:: should be gaining health benefits from it, they weren't. I remember
:: Jenny the Bean identified herself as one who didn't benefit from
:: exercise.

Yes, yes....I remember.


::
:: It flies in the face of my experience, but just as low fat works
:: really
:: well for some people and is a disaster for me, I have to accept
:: (until a
:: new study comes out that says it's all wrong) that some people don't
:: reap the benefits of exercise.

Am I the only life-time (well, planning to be) LCer here who can say that
low fat worked well as has low carb? I mean, it was a long time ago that I
did low fat and while I was doing it with lots of exercise - I had good
results - all while being diabetic, too. Once I quit doing low fat, I
regained the weight because I was eating a heck of a lot of food and not
exercise (all brought on my injury). I admit, though, that for me now low
carb works better in that I have better control. With LC I think I can
maintain weight without exercise, if I had to.

::
:: And, as you say, there's the problem that calorie expenditure has to
:: be matched up with output. It's *really* easy to think that since
:: you walked for an hour that you can have the 40 oz smoothie as a
:: reward. Net calorie gain there.

Sadly, I still can't get it through my thick skull that this is not the real
problem that the "I-gain-weight-in-spite-of-everything" folks have.

::
:: I am pleased to report that not only is my strength training going
:: really well, but I've actually gotten off the elliptical and started
:: running for real. It's surprising how much harder the body actually
:: works when you're running and your body has to do all the
:: stabilization as opposed to
:: working on the elliptical. I don't have any problem doing the
:: elliptical
:: for an hour at an average of 6mph, but so far 20 minutes of running
:: is
:: about it, for now. Onward and upward, though!

Well, that elliptical is low impact. I don't think running is (I know it's
not). Hence, you need to be careful. I don't wish to discourage you, since
things really do seem to be be going really great for you. But just keep in
mind that a major deal buster can be getting an injury. So please take it
slow and easy.

::
:: Martha, feeling pretty good about the exercise thing.
::

That's really nice to hear!

On Wed, 14 Sep 2005, Roger Zoul wrote:

Martha S. Gallagher wrote:

:: I can't give you first hand experience, because exercise works
:: really well for me, but do you remember a while ago there were some
:: articles to the effect that some people are actually "exercise
:: resistant."

Yes, now that you mention it - I do remember. I also remember thinking how
strange that is and if they did a study that's worth a damn. I don't
remember any of the details, though, and I'm too busy (and not interested
enough at the moment) to google.

I know the feeling. If it were relevant to me, I'd probably keep a
laminated copy in my wallet - "no, really, exercise won't help me!" - but
as it is it's just an interesting factoid.


:: It flies in the face of my experience, but just as low fat works
:: really
:: well for some people and is a disaster for me, I have to accept
:: (until a
:: new study comes out that says it's all wrong) that some people don't
:: reap the benefits of exercise.

Am I the only life-time (well, planning to be) LCer here who can say that
low fat worked well as has low carb? I mean, it was a long time ago that I
did low fat and while I was doing it with lots of exercise - I had good
results - all while being diabetic, too. Once I quit doing low fat, I
regained the weight because I was eating a heck of a lot of food and not
exercise (all brought on my injury). I admit, though, that for me now low
carb works better in that I have better control. With LC I think I can
maintain weight without exercise, if I had to.


Well, in fairness, it worked for me in the sense that I could get the
weight off, but I was constantly hungry and thinking of food, didn't have
good energy and there wasn't a frozen chance in hell I could stay on it
long term. Also, my experience with most low fat diets (or at least the
way most people do low fat) is that it isn't an adequate protein diet. So,
I lost way too much LBM while I was doing it.

::
:: And, as you say, there's the problem that calorie expenditure has to
:: be matched up with output. It's *really* easy to think that since
:: you walked for an hour that you can have the 40 oz smoothie as a
:: reward. Net calorie gain there.

Sadly, I still can't get it through my thick skull that this is not the real
problem that the "I-gain-weight-in-spite-of-everything" folks have.


Well, extrapolating from myself, I think it frequently is. When I spent a
summer working out and working in a barn, I gained weight (a good bit of
it fat). I didn't see how that could be, but I was upping my calories so
much because I thought I would burn them off. And, I know too many people
who say they can't understand how they could not be losing weight when
they're running after kids all day. When all the sums are totaled, if
you're (generic you, obviously not you personally) gaining weight, you're
not expending as many calories as you think you are (or you've got a
toomah!).

::
:: I am pleased to report that not only is my strength training going
:: really well, but I've actually gotten off the elliptical and started
:: running for real. It's surprising how much harder the body actually
:: works when you're running and your body has to do all the
:: stabilization as opposed to
:: working on the elliptical. I don't have any problem doing the
:: elliptical
:: for an hour at an average of 6mph, but so far 20 minutes of running
:: is
:: about it, for now. Onward and upward, though!

Well, that elliptical is low impact. I don't think running is (I know it's
not). Hence, you need to be careful. I don't wish to discourage you, since
things really do seem to be be going really great for you. But just keep in
mind that a major deal buster can be getting an injury. So please take it
slow and easy.

Oh, I am. I went to a proper running store to get shoes appropriate to my
feet (the nice salesman said I had a remarkably efficient gait given that
my feet are almost perfectly flat g) and I'm building up slowly. It's
fun though - even a really short sprint can really show you where your
glutes are. And, as a result I'm finally getting serious about stretching
which has always been sort of the final frontier for me.

It's amazing to think that I got here as a result of trying low carb to
prove that it didn't really work (after the hype of the Taubes article).

Martha

--

This
is
just
to
get
around
this
newsreader's
requirement
that
you
have
more
lines
of
new
text
than
quoted
material.

Roger Zoul wrote:
Am I the only life-time (well, planning to be) LCer here who can say that
low fat worked well as has low carb? I mean, it was a long time ago that I
did low fat and while I was doing it with lots of exercise - I had good
results - all while being diabetic, too. Once I quit doing low fat, I
regained the weight because I was eating a heck of a lot of food and not
exercise (all brought on my injury). I admit, though, that for me now low
carb works better in that I have better control. With LC I think I can
maintain weight without exercise, if I had to.

I did low-fat three years before coming to LC. I had success, without
exercise, but I only had 20 to lose then. The end of my job then (I
rode a bike for about three miles a day, and had lunch, and frequently
dinner paid for) ended the effectiveness of the diet. My next job was
miserable, out of TV production, and in an office, opening & sorting
mail for the first three hours of my day. Also, my commute went from a
three block walk to a 7 mile drive down Wilshire Blvd in LA, through
what is reported to be the worst traffic intersection in the US (my
Competitive Industry Analysis professor pointed this out years later).
The misery of that job was soothed with a daily pilgrimage to
Starbucks, for big Frap and sugary pastry. Low Fat was doomed, even
with an exercise club and ECA stack.

Hollywood