I think I'm currently at a good weight for my height, but I wish my tummy were smaller. I'm glad that my waist-to-hip ratio does manage to slip into the healthy range now, but I'm still a bit thick in the middle. But I don't want to lose any more of my B cup (which is really on the small side for B cups) so I don't want to just lose more weight.

So, have any other maintainers managed this... kept at goal weight but improved their waist-to-hip ratio (without losing much up top)? I'd love to hear any success stories and know how you accomplished it.

I've lost inches from my hips, and dropped an entire pants size through doing kettlebell and barre workouts. I never thought that barre workouts would be effective, but they have really shrunk my hips and saddlebags, and shrunk and reshaped my booty.

As well as having a cosmetic effect, barre work also strengthens the smaller muscles around the hip, which are important for hip health.

Barre workouts are derived from ballet; some are quite dancey, but I prefer a more athletic style of workout. These ones have been very effective for me (check out the clips):

* Core Fusion Thighs and Glutes

* Squeeze

* Squeeze Lower Body Challenge

Thanks for the recommendations! I'm sure these are great and if I were trying to become all-round fit and strong they would give me a good routine.

But I guess I didn't ask clearly enough. I'm hoping someone has had some success specifically with reducing visceral fat. Unless someone is an MRI junkie, the only way to tell is indirectly, through waist measurement (and waist-to-hip ratio).

So, I'm looking not really to lose inches over all, but to lose inches disproportionately from my waist.

BTW, this article just popped up in the news. It indicates that folks who drink two or more sugary sodas (or other sugary drinks) a day tend to have increasing waist lines even if their weight stays the same. I do drink an occasional diet soda, but none with sugar. Very little sugar in my diet (generally limited to 2 squares of dark choc a day). Since I've started eating low carb, my waist-to-hip ratio has improved. So, maybe I should just hang in there. But I'd like to hear from anyone else who has successfully improved their waist-to-hip ratio during maintenance. I'd love to speed it up!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/ar....html?ITO=1490

If you're doing your abs exercises regularly, then I don't think there is much you can do beyond that. Some people just have thick waists. I am one of them. I don't think in my case it's all visceral fat--it's mostly subcutaneous fat right on the front of me. It's what goes up first when I gain, and goes down last when I lose. Even with a lot of exercise, it's what I've got.

Maybe some other folks have had some success?

Jay

You've been on 3FC for a while, Yo. You know the drill: There's no way to spot reduce.

Thanks for your input, Jay. I agree that we are all predisposed to having different shape. When I was young (after I first lost weight), I had a very thin waist, so I don't think it's a genetic predisposition in my case.

Hi, Maria. Yes, I know that you can't target one area of subcutaneous fat preferentially to another. So, this would be a non-starter if I were trying to preferentially reduce the subcutaneous fat on my hips or the fat on my thighs or even the subcutaneous fat in my abdomen area.

But visceral fat is metabolically different than subcutaneous fat. It responds differently to food, exercise, stress, etc. So, in fact, it is possible to take measures to reduce your visceral fat disproportionately to your subcutaneous fat (which results in a smaller waist measurement and a lower waist-to-hip ratio). I've had some modest success at this already -- eating low carb and walking on my treadmill desk (not sure which has had a bigger impact) has resulted in a healthy waist-to-hip ratio for me at my current weight. The last time I was at this weight, my waist-to-hip ratio was unhealthy (my waist was larger and my hips were the same).

As the article I referenced shows, there is some evidence that sugary drinks increase waist size independent from weight gain. I'm hoping to move in the opposite direction.

So, here are the kinds of changes that *might* preferentially reduce visceral fat over subcutaneous fat.

Eating low carb (check, already there and it seems to work, albeit slowly, hoping to see more progress over time on that front).

Reducing stress (would love to hear about anyone who has tried this. I am considering taking yoga classes, or some sort of meditation or other stress reduction techniques. Again, I'd love to hear about experiences, particularly if it actually affected your waistline).

Taking cortisol-controlling supplements (e.g. magnolia bark) (this sort of skips the stress control and goes to the chemical level) Any takers here?

HIIT (which some studies seemed to claim was the best sort of exercise for reducing visceral fat, but other studies have been unclear). Has anyone specifically improved their waist-to-hip ratio this way?

Elimination of a sedentary lifestyle (the opposite of HIIT in the exercise spectrum, just a matter of not sitting for several hours a day but rather doing low intensity exercise -- this is the treadmill desk approach). This may be helping me already, but I suppose I could do more.

Random odd things (like I recently read that there's some evidence that those vibration plates that are popping up at gyms might actually help reduce visceral fat -- don't yell if you think this is kooky, it's just an example of an oddball thing I saw in the news).

I'm very happy that I've been able to impact my waist-to-hip ratio and I'd like to take it further. I'm looking for guidance on further changes I should target to have the biggest impact.

Here's a new bit of news (to me)...

Despite the furor over HFCS, I've been assuming that sucrose was nearly as bad, since sucrose is immediately metabolized into 50% glucose and 50% fructose. HFCS, despite the name, is just a little over 50% fructose (and a little under 50% glucose). So, I figured they were probably about equally bad, despite the horrible press that HFCS gets.

But, here's some empirical evidence that HFCS is actually significantly worse than sucrose in terms of putting on visceral fat (at least in rats). Since most sugary drinks are actually sweetened with HFCS, it may help explain the results in the other study (well, not really explain, since the reason for the dramatic difference between HFCS and sucrose is unclear).

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/a.../S26/91/22K07/

I thought that the dangers of visceral fat applied only to overweight/obese people. At your height and current weight, I doubt that you have visceral fat. Perhaps you should ask your doctor about this?

Jay

I did discuss my WHR with my doctor when it was in the unhealthy range (but I was well within the normal BMI range). He wasn't happy about it, but he didn't offer any constructive suggestions for changing it.

I've seen lots of references to WHR being a health concern independent of weight. In general, a woman with *either* an absolute waist measurement of > 35 inches or a high WHR (defined as > .85 or .8, depending on the agency) is considered at higher risk for a host of health problems. You can be thin and still have a high WHR.

I just googled up an example of a high WHR being a better indicator of potential heart problems than BMI (this is a specific example, but I've seen others over time bc I've paid a lot of attention to this topic).


http://www.aarp.org/health/condition...n_bmi_for.html

Here's the most relevant sentence ("central obesity" means a high WHR, not an obese person):

"The study found that central obesity is associated with higher mortality even in individuals with normal BMI scores. That finding could prompt changes in how doctors care for heart disease patients."


ETA: and here's a similar study:

http://heartdisease.about.com/od/die...waisttohip.htm

"For one thing, it means that people who are not particularly overweight are still at increased risk if their waist size is increased. On the other hand, it means that some overweight people (the pear-shaped ones) may not have greatly increased risk, as long as their other risk factors are under control, and their extra weight is distributed so as to pad their thighs and butts."

My waist to hip ratio has been getting worse. Recently I've lost 2" from my hips and nada from my waist. So I went from WHR of 0.76 to 0.8. It's certainly not because I've all of a suddent adopted poor habits either! I figure a big part of it is the changes in my body after having a kid (because before my waist certainly was smaller).

FWIW, I don't drink sugary drinks... ever. Sometimes I'll make a smoothies (but just with fresh fruit, yogurt, and milk, no sweetener) and I'll drink the occasional diet coke. As is, I eat almost entirely whole foods from scratch, relatively low-carbish (although I do eat a decent amount of fruit), and exercise regularly (heavy lifting+swimming). I really can't think of anything else that I can do.

Then again, I am in the process of still losing more weight but my weight really doesn't seem to want to come off of my mid-section. If you figure something out let me know!!!!!! I know there was a post awhile back where they had some success using a new drug that help cut back abdominal fat in rats but I have a feeling it'll be a LONG time before that hits the market.

Hi, Running...

Sorry to hear that the fat is coming off your hips rather than your waist. It doesn't seem like that would increase visceral fat, so even though your WHR is increasing, I don't know if that's a danger sign. But, there are lots of things that I don't understand that seem to be true nonetheless (the diff in health effects of sucrose and HFCS just being the latest in a long series).

In the past couple years, I've managed to reduce my waistline from 30" to 28" with the same bust and hip measurements (I had some up and down in weight, but at this weight, the bust and hips were previously the same with a 30" waist).

My focus to date has been on eating lower carb (with a special focus on almost eliminating grain) and on changing my sedentary lifestyle. I have a desk job, and I used to spend a lot of time sitting. I started reading studies a while ago that sitting for several hours a day was really unhealthy, even if you do vigorous workouts. So, I propped my computer up at work and I jury-rigged a treadmill desk at home. But, in the same period, I also dropped my Curves membership, where I used to do a double workout several times a week. I dropped the workouts to save time (bc I have the treadmill to replace the workouts and I save the time driving to/from Curves). So maybe with more time, my life is also less stressful? The net result is a nice reduction in my waistline, but I don't know the specific reason.

It sounds like you've got a great workout routine, but maybe you spend much of the day sitting at your desk and/or commuting (driving time counts too)? Just a thought. Even if that's the case, there may not be much you can do about it.

BTW, alcohol consumption is also known to increase visceral fat (alcohol is metabolized in the liver in a similar way to fructose). I forgot to mention it in my previous post bc it's not relevant to me (I've only had 2 drinks that I can recall in the past year -- not a hardship, I simply don't like alcohol).

More on my quest... part of the reason I decided to focus on WHR is to set a new goal for myself. In the past, I haven't done a good job of maintenance. I stop tracking, stop weighing, things slide... So, I picked WHR as something new to focus on instead of weight now that I'm at goal, especially since I've had an unhealthy WHR in the past (even at my current weight) and since I'm peri-menopausal now, I could tip back into the unhealthy range as a result of normal hormonal changes (aging is another risk factor for WHR, but I'm not planning on "fixing" that!).

Oh, it's definitely not visceral fat! No, I can grab fistfuls of it, it's very loose. I guess, my point was that the waist to hip ratio is a bit odd since I've lost weight, I'm doing everything right but mine is currently getting worse (although hopefully my mid-section decides to catch up soon!).

I have heard that about stress, though, so it's possible. I imagine that it's also possible that your waist line caught up a bit. I know I've heard that as you loose weight your fat cells fill up with water and they eventually release it (hence, the whoosh effect). Plus, it can take 1-2 years after weight loss for your skin to catch up. Possible you had some sort of combination between those two and that's why your waist decided to shrink a bit? Just a theory..

I could see something similar happening with my own because it's just so loose, I'm *hoping* at least that it will eventually tighten up more between more weight loss and time. If you have a 28" waist, and you're still staying active (because I know exercise is supposed to help with visceral fat) then it's probably pretty unlikely that it's an health issue. I know that in the studies where they looked at waist size alone (not the waist to hip ratio) they normally compared subject with a 28" waist or smaller to ones with 35" waists or larger so it seems like you'd already be in the OK region. I'll try to find that link..

I understand what you're saying about maintenance. I'm not there yet but I'm already thinking ahead to what type of new goals I'd like to do once my weight loss is done. The problem with a WHR is that it's unpredictable. It depends a lot on genetics and there's only so much you can do. Are there any other goals that you could focus on that are easier for you to do on your own i.e. not dependent on your body? For instance, running a race locally or lifting a certain amount? Just as another example, at the moment I'm trying to work up to doing a pull-up...

Ok, my bad. It looks like the report says a 30" waist and under is the ideal range for females: http://health.usnews.com/health-news...st-your-weight

The article cited just above is a summary of research, and the research only provides statistics. Nowhere does it say that if you keep your waist size ideal, you are automatically protected from heart disease, insulin resistance, etc. This is just playing the odds.

I really would like to caution folks against becoming slaves to statistics like these. Correlation does not mean causation. Plus, the values are always changing. In the article above, the study indicated women's "ideal" waist measurement is below 30", while the American Heart Association says it should be below 35". Which do you choose to believe? Do you assume that lower is better? Why?

When you get close to the end, you see this quotation from the lead researcher: "'The take-home message is that it's important to watch your waist, not just your weight,' he says, 'and to start eating better and exercising more if you see your waist size starting to increase.'" Gosh, did we need a scientific study to figure this out?? This seems to me to be one of those "scare me and then give me a simple-minded solution" articles...

So, Yoyoma, going back to your concern, you mention waist-hip ratio (WHR) but you don't say what yours is. What is it? Is it over 0.8? Are your hips smaller than 35"?

Jay

Good morning all!

Don't forget strength training of your upper body/trunk/core. That is a very productive way to reshape with life long benefits.