Lean_Is_Law
Iron
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2023
- Posts
- 104
- Reputation
- 119
I've seen this idea touted by a few people on this forum and other sources around the internet, but it doesn't make sense to me at all.
First of all, let's take an empirical, common-sense approach to this - was there ever an Auschwitz prisoner with excess buccal fat? I wouldn't believe it until I saw it, and I certainly haven't yet.
Secondly: I, with my current knowledge of the physiology around fat loss, would be inclined to believe that fat loss is relatively even in its distribution; that is, fat is lost somewhat equally from all areas in the body where fat is stored ('stubborn fat deposits' excluded). This should surely include buccal fat, no? Or is there something unique about that particular fat deposit? Now I know there is a distinction between visceral and subcutaneous (under-the-skin) fat, and I would assume that subcutaneous fat goes completely before visceral fat is lost - so is it the case that buccal fat falls under the category of 'visceral', causing it to remain despite general fat loss? This is the only explanation I could think of while playing devil's advocate in my head, but if you know anything more of the science regarding this, please enlighten me.
First of all, let's take an empirical, common-sense approach to this - was there ever an Auschwitz prisoner with excess buccal fat? I wouldn't believe it until I saw it, and I certainly haven't yet.
Secondly: I, with my current knowledge of the physiology around fat loss, would be inclined to believe that fat loss is relatively even in its distribution; that is, fat is lost somewhat equally from all areas in the body where fat is stored ('stubborn fat deposits' excluded). This should surely include buccal fat, no? Or is there something unique about that particular fat deposit? Now I know there is a distinction between visceral and subcutaneous (under-the-skin) fat, and I would assume that subcutaneous fat goes completely before visceral fat is lost - so is it the case that buccal fat falls under the category of 'visceral', causing it to remain despite general fat loss? This is the only explanation I could think of while playing devil's advocate in my head, but if you know anything more of the science regarding this, please enlighten me.
