Is a bit of flab in the lower abdomen normal?

Post Reply New Topic

Even with a "normal" BMI (according to the CDC website), and doing ab crunches on a regular basis, is it normal to have a bit of flab in the lower abdominal area?

When you do crunches the abdominal muscles actually push the fat outward, doing crunches won't get rid of that fat, you can't decide what area gets lean your chooses that. Now with that said it normal to have a little flab nothing wrong with that, but when that little flab turns into a lot of flab then their is a problem. Also remember you got fat in front of your muscles and fat behind your muscles, it is more dangerous for their to be a lot of fat behind them than in front of them.

It's one of the tougher places to lose. Also, there's a lot of range in the "normal" BMI, and in that whole range you do have some body fat.
So yeah, it's pretty normal.
Also, there are different body types, and no matter how much we might wish, most of us will not look like magazine models no matter what we do.

Thanks for the advice!

Very common.

Like philosopherBoi said, 'spot reduction' is a myth. There is no localized fat loss - only systemic. i.e. working your abs does not 'target' abdominal fat. Fat gain and loss depends on your genetic predisposition to store fat in different areas of the body (although there is a largely untested theory that hormonal imbalances may also influence where you gain fat).

BMI is not accurate for everybody. Percent body fat tests - such as the Navy Circumference Test - provide a more accurate assessment of how lean you are.

I've never been below 15% body fat, but I understand that the abdominal fat really drops off around 10% - which is still very difficult for most people to reach.

So... don't worry about it too much.

Also, you could save a lot of money by picking up a weight set (you can get a standard barbell and weights to take it up to 300lbs) for about $100-200 and learning how to deadlift, clean, and do other exercises from the floor. This route would be more technically demanding and may require some work with a qualified trainer to get the proper form, but IMO its worth it and even with training it should cost you less than a Bowflex.

JMO, YMMV, etc etc. I don't have any experience with Bowflex I can't comment on its efficacy.

I have a Bowflex and I like it. If you're used to free weights, you might not care for it, it feels very different. Also, the standard version tops out at 250lbs resistance, so men who are into heavy benching... not a good match. But for just a good overall workout, I like it.
They are fairly expensive though, and take up a lot of space.

I have been interested in getting a Bowflex.

My brother's pretty into body building, and what he did is he went to the gym, got some advice about a good program to suit him personally from the person there, and then got to it. He just would do it at home in the mornings before school (he's in y12 this year). I think that's the best way to go. Speak to someone and devise a program that suits you. He also put his intellectual side to use and learned a bit about the schematics of body building, and he devised a program for me (I think he really wanted us to body build together) but I never ended up following it. I've always preferred running as my form of exercise, I like the freedom of it and the feel of getting into your stride. I generally run about 3km's.

i agree, you can hit most, if not all, muscles with a set of dumbells and barbells and a bench/squat rack. for legs you can do squat/clean (quads) + deadlift (lower back and hamstrings), bench for chest, bench pulls for back, etc. etc. etc.
i really like free weights because it works all the stabilizing muscles, whereas machines tend to work a specific muscle and don't really give you useful strength for sports and such.

as for the original question, yes it's normal to have a bit of flab in your midsection even with a normal BMI. i'm a rather wide guy, i'm pretty muscular too, so even when i'm really thin i've got a high BMI. i almost had a sixpack and i was still "overweight" (i only had to lose 6lbs to have a decent sixpack, another 5 and i would have been pretty ripped) according to BMI. the problem with BMI is that it doesn't take into account anything like bone mass, muscle mass, etc. so someone with less muscle than me can have more fat and still have a "normal" BMI.