Not that I'm complaining, but I was wondering if this happened to anyone else.

When I was younger and I "dieted" and lost weight, I'd always lose it in my arms or in my upper torso region.. not my tummy below my belly button or anything.

This time around, I'm losing it in areas that I could never lose it before, like my tummy, still my stomach, but also in my legs. I still weigh a lot more than I did when I was younger, but my legs are starting to look better than they did when I was 180. Which it's all really awesome and I'm not complaining at all. But I was just wondering if this could be an age factor. Now that I'm older I lose in different places.

It's weird. My tummy no longer rolls at the bottom and looks like it is flattening out for the first time... ever.. In my entire life. Regardless of how much I've ever weighed. So cool!

The hormone setup is different as you get older. Also, my husband and I think that since you are actually burning fat and not muscle, it targets the "depositories" better than other eating plans.
No matter what causes it, isn't it great?

Fat often redistributes itself as you get older, and that's not always bad. When I was young, my butt was pretty flat. But now it's got a decent shape to it. Also, the one time I tried to lose weight before, it came off my bottom half right away. This time my torso slimmed down first. I think the general rule is last on, first off.

Let me rephrase that. "When I was younger ..." At 32, I'm not quite ready for the old folks' home yet.

I think age, hormones and diet composition are all factors. When I was a teenager, I was definitely a pear. By the time I was in my late 20s, right before I started LCing, I was an apple. Insulin resistance, anyone?

Well, what I was saying was the shape of my body hasn't really changed. The last on first off then isn't really applying much here, except for what I'm losing in my stomach which was starting to get more cushy. My legs have always been big and I've never been able to lose off them until now. But just now I'm losing the first place I really gained. Which is really cool, but strange and unexpected.

I know what you mean. I'm 55 (yep, I'll admit it!) and I've never never never been able to lose weight in my thighs - until LC, that is. Would it have happened anyway just due to advanced age? I don't think so. I do believe that consistent exercise is an essential component but I also believe that LC has had a different result than low fat or calorie restriction did.

I definitely notice more kooshiness in my fat when I'm losing. I think it's a good sign. Problem is, it doesn't look SMALLER. *sigh*

But I'm gonna stick it out and wait until my thighs decide they're ready to get smaller too. Maybe then I'll regain some decent proportions! LOL

That is cool. It does make you wonder if LCing has an effect on how we take off the fluff.

Well, I did LC once before and I didn't lose any in my thighs then. Just this time I am. Though it's making it weird fitting into pants because it's not leaving my hips, so I have to wear the same size, but in the leg areas it's getting kinda big.

I agree, I can wear the same sizes now when I weighed when I was 10 years younger and 10lbs lighter than I am now....I think its because this WOE targets fat!!! Yayay!!

Mitz

William Banting, writer of "Letter on Corpulence" noticed that lc weight loss is different, remarking that it "attacks the superfluous stores of fat." For me, the most astonishing thing was losing my fat, saggy man-breasts. I look like a man now!