How to get rid of the fat pad ?

[saamwhs Junior Member Find all posts View Profile Close saamwhs]

My BPEL is 6.5 inches
NBPEL is 5.5 inches
One inch of fat pad it's too much no ?
How can i get rid of the fat pad ?
If I can get rid of it can my BPEL be equal to the NBPEL ?

Please guys i need some opinions

Thank you

[MrB8 Senior Member Member of the Month Nov 2013 Find all posts View Profile Close MrB8]

There is no to target weight loss to a specific area, you want to loose weight by exercising and following a healthy diet.

Squats, push ups and leg lifts are good for burning fat, also try to suck up your gut whenever you can.

[chajadan Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close chajadan]

Agreed -- general weight loss is the best way, getting your body fat percentage down. I personally find that running burns way more calories and fat than weight training when you have a lot to lose. Also, calorie restriction does ~not~ need to be high to see some good results. I've been losing well over a pound a week but reducing my calories to 1800 and then I even eat an extra 100 for each mile I run (which negates the run calorically but keeps my body from being in a big deficit).

[PurpleOnes Senior Member Member of the Month June 2014PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close PurpleOnes]

Agreed -- general weight loss is the best way, getting your body fat percentage down. I personally find that running burns way more calories and fat than weight training when you have a lot to lose. Also, calorie restriction does ~not~ need to be high to see some good results. I've been losing well over a pound a week but reducing my calories to 1800 and then I even eat an extra 100 for each mile I run (which negates the run calorically but keeps my body from being in a big deficit).

That is actually incorrect since running elavates only your metabolism for really limited time while you have risk of loosing muscle at the same time.

WIth weight training your metabolism is elavated over 24+hours.

[kickinthemebs Senior Member Member of the Month Feb 2014 Find all posts View Profile Close kickinthemebs]

Sprints and high intensity routines are the best fat burners.

[chajadan Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close chajadan]

That is actually incorrect since running elavates only your metabolism for really limited time while you have risk of loosing muscle at the same time. WIth weight training your metabolism is elavated over 24+hours.

I personally completely disagree. I speak here from my personal experience of losing lots of weight (30+lbs) to get to where my profile pic is. EPOC after weight training doesn't add up to much, and your muscles in and of themselves will burn more calories at rest, but barely. This is my belief, and here are some sources to show there is support for these ideas:

Metabolism Myths: Part 1 - AskMen
Why HIIT Is NOT Better For Fat Loss | StrongLifts

When I ran for weight loss I worked myself up to really nice 6 mile runs, and when I would end a run, I wasn't even out of breath. I did such runs three to five times a week all based on listening to my body really well. You are simply ~not~ ~never~ and ~no way~ gonna burn as many calories or as much fat through a weight routine. An hour of running at 6mph burns about 600 calories while an hour of weight lifting runs closer to 200. The long term perks due to muscles from weights are ~slow~ to show up when you are starting from scratch. The are better suited as a buffer to keep you in good shape, then as a weight loss strategy by themselves.

You're not gonna get many people suggesting anyone try to lose weight through a weight-lifting only routine. I don't claim to have all the facts here, I can only offer you my total choice for myself, and I know how important it can be to us to get off weight.

[chajadan Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close chajadan]

Sprints and high intensity routines are the best fat burners.

I also disagree here. Sprints and high intensity routines, due to their nature, all end up being way too short to burn significant calories compared to other methods. Yes, some forms of exercise burn a higher percentage of fat as their fuel source, but that matters for nothing if the activity is of short duration. Sprints and high intensity and perfect for some purposes, but they aren't the one thing you would rely on for fat burning, as I see it.

[PurpleOnes Senior Member Member of the Month June 2014PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close PurpleOnes]

I personally completely disagree. I speak here from my personal experience of losing lots of weight (30+lbs) to get to where my profile pic is. EPOC after weight training doesn't add up to much, and your muscles in and of themselves will burn more calories at rest, but barely. This is my belief, and here are some sources to show there is support for these ideas:

Metabolism Myths: Part 1 - AskMen
Why HIIT Is NOT Better For Fat Loss | StrongLifts

When I ran for weight loss I worked myself up to really nice 6 mile runs, and when I would end a run, I wasn't even out of breath. I did such runs three to five times a week all based on listening to my body really well. You are simply ~not~ ~never~ and ~no way~ gonna burn as many calories or as much fat through a weight routine. An hour of running at 6mph burns about 600 calories while an hour of weight lifting runs closer to 200. The long term perks due to muscles from weights are ~slow~ to show up when you are starting from scratch. The are better suited as a buffer to keep you in good shape, then as a weight loss strategy by themselves.

You're not gonna get many people suggesting anyone try to lose weight through a weight-lifting only routine. I don't claim to have all the facts here, I can only offer you my total choice for myself, and I know how important it can be to us to get off weight.

I'm talking about decreasing your bodyfat % while preserving your muscle mass.

Training with weights is much superior than doing cardio alone in that sense.

Yes your going to loose weight with just running but it's combination of two muscle mass and bodyfat to certain extent.

There are much more ways to keep progressing if we are talking about lifting weights than doing cardio alone.

[chajadan Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close chajadan]

I see your point. But generally speaking it's only body builders who need to worry much about "maintaining muscle mass" and it's for vanity. Or old people who don't want to break a hip. But adding cardio to your life shouldn't waste you away. I'm am for ~sure~ not suggesting to stay away from weights, but I'm saying the go to for fat loss, as I see it, is cardio. However, I'll also add that it depends on how much you have to lose. The less needed to lose, the more I'd be willing to lean towards weights. But if I had 30lbs to lose, I'd rather put my time all in cardio. Plus, there are big hormonal advantages to doing weights from a lean state, and so in some senses it's better to get lean then start weights.

[rbi99 Retired Moderator Member of the Month Nov 2017PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close rbi99]

I am 6'5" and 210 lbs. My legs are thin, my upper body very firm from lifting. The only area where I have any extra fat is my gut area, and even though it is not terrible, I cannot lose it to save my life. A friend and I were talking about it the other day. He was overweight but lost it all through exercise - except his gut area. That being said, I probably gain only 1/2" or less when I go to BPEL. There is a new procedure out there where they freeze the shit over several visits. Unfortunately it cost several thousand dollars.

[chajadan Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close chajadan]

Rbi, do you know your body fat %? If it's only in a decent place, that means there's room for a body recomposition focus still. But if you've got a 10% body fat percentage and still have a trouble area, that starts to point to other things where surgical could become one of the few potential ways.

[Pegasus AdministratorPE Gym EditorPEGym Hero ☺ Admin of the Month Mar 2015 Find all posts View Profile Close Pegasus]

There doesn't seem to be any really accurate way to measure body fat % . Even reasonably accurate methods are costly.
This is unfortunate ,as people can look thin and still have high body fat and visa versa. In cases like this it would give a guide to if body fat reduction is the way to go..

[chajadan Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close chajadan]

I don't personally run into issues with body fat measurement accuracy. I have a scale with electrical impedance, and no doubt it's not tuned like an atomic clock, but it doesn't seem to confuse 10 and 17 percent. Plus, what it might lack in accuracy it can obviously (per use) do much better at tracking changes over time.

Sometimes gyms will calculate your body fat percentage I believe. Even a bad measurement gives you a basis. I guess here's another basis - got a six pack? If not, there's likely a meaningful amount fat that could be loss, which might result in the final areas going with it.

[Pegasus AdministratorPE Gym EditorPEGym Hero ☺ Admin of the Month Mar 2015 Find all posts View Profile Close Pegasus]

My experience (and others) with electrical impedance is that it is not only inaccurate but inconsistant and thus worse than useless.
Yes it can mistake 10% for 17% and inconsistancy means it is useless for tracking.

[chajadan Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close chajadan]

Interesting. Perhaps I have a decent model. All I know is that my results, even if off in absolute accuracy, give me very consistent results over time. And as I've lost and gained a fair amount of weight a couple times, I've been able to see it rise and fall in a an expected way. To that end, as a long distance runner, I could tell I when my body fat was getting down into the range of long distance runners, and the scale would begin to reflect that. So my experience has definitely not been so sketchy.

Maybe those bad machines would be more able to compare two people against each other? Or perhaps they're just shot, is how it sounds.