August 24, 2025, 3:15 pm | Read time: 5 minutes
Many people wish to lose fat specifically in areas like the arms, stomach, hips, or legs. Scientifically, the body burns fat evenly across all areas. However, a small study suggests there may be differences depending on the type of training. The expert’s recommendation for effective fat-burning training, however, differs from this.
The Basics: Fat Distribution in Women vs. Men
Fat distribution is an extremely complex interplay of biology, hormones, genetics, and behavior. Where body fat accumulates depends on genetics, hormones, gender, age, lifestyle, stress, sleep, and even early developmental conditions. Here’s a brief look at gender-specific differences in fat distribution and metabolism: While women generally store more fat than men—having a higher body fat percentage—and tend to accumulate it in the hips, thighs, and buttocks, men store fat more in the abdominal area. There is also much evidence that women derive more energy from fat during exercise than men.1 These patterns change with age and hormonal status. Broadly speaking, as we age, our basal metabolic rate decreases, which favors the storage of visceral fat (internal belly fat).
The question to be addressed here is: Can fat be specifically reduced in certain body regions?
Fat Loss is Systemic
Fitness expert Prof. Dr. Stephan Geisler explains what is generally agreed upon in science: “Basically, fat burning is something that works systemically.” By “systemically,” it means that fat loss occurs throughout the body simultaneously under the same rules. Hormonal signals activate or inhibit fat loss; when fat is mobilized, it is broken down into free fatty acids and glycerol. These molecules enter the bloodstream and are used by muscles, the liver, or the heart for energy. This means that the body does not differentiate when it comes to fat loss.
Why You “Lose” Weight in the Face First
Nevertheless, people who are losing weight often hear first that their face looks “slimmer.” If fat loss is systemic, why does it seem to be most noticeable in the face first? “You generally have less fat in the face than, for example, on the stomach or buttocks. So, if you were to lose weight evenly everywhere, it would be more noticeable in the face first,” Geisler explains.
Heat Belts Don’t Melt Belly Fat
Research often suggests that direct heat application to certain body areas, such as with heat belts, should promote fat burning at that specific spot through increased local blood flow. Nonsense, says the expert: “If it were that simple, you could just sit in a sauna for a week and have a dream body afterward. But logically, that’s not going to happen.”
Targeted Weight Loss? Study with 16 Untrained Women Suggests Local Fat Loss
Looking at a study from the University of Rome, fitness professor Geisler does not entirely rule out local and targeted fat loss—or at least a tendency toward it. In 2017, scientists investigated whether different training combinations could potentially influence “regional” fat burning.2
Sixteen untrained, overweight women in their early 30s trained three times a week for two months. Half of the group did upper body strength training (five exercises for three sets of ten repetitions each) and lower body endurance training (30 minutes of light cycling), while the rest did the opposite, with upper body endurance and lower body strength training. The endurance training in group 2 was done with an arm ergometer, and the lower body strength training also consisted of five exercises for three sets of ten repetitions each.
More Fat Loss in Arms Through Upper Body Strength Training
The regional body composition was measured using skinfold measurements. Result: Group 1 (upper body strength training) had a more significant fat loss in the arms compared to the legs. In group 2 (lower body strength training), fat loss was more pronounced in the legs than in the arms.
Expert: Results Not Conclusive
Stephan Geisler discusses the Rome study in detail in this YouTube video. Overall, he considers the results with only 16 participants to be “not conclusive.” It is also critical that dietary monitoring was only covered through a diary—after all, diet is an important factor in weight loss. Additionally, Geisler suggests that muscle mass distribution could have had a significant impact on the results, which was not considered. “On a bicycle ergometer, you can generally perform much more physical work than on an arm ergometer. This is because we have significantly more muscle mass in the legs. Therefore, both strength and endurance training will fundamentally make a difference in terms of total calorie expenditure,” Stephan Geisler describes the possible cause for deviations in local fat loss.
Is exercising on an elliptical trainer really effective for weight loss?
Rebecca Barthel: “Women Should Focus on Regular Strength Training During Menopause”
Targeted Weight Loss—Probably Not
Despite the possible tendency for local fat loss through different training, Geisler maintains his statement that targeted fat reduction through specific training is probably not possible. Fat deposits are not more strongly reduced where the muscles are currently being trained. The body takes its reserves evenly from everywhere when losing weight. Targeted weight loss is more myth than reality—this conclusion was also reached by a meta-analysis of 13 studies with over 1,000 participants.3
Train Maximally Effective for Fat Burning—Expert Advice
Let’s set aside the desire for targeted weight loss and focus instead on what we can actually influence well: increasing overall fat burning. For those who want to train particularly effectively for fat burning, Geisler recommends a combination of strength and endurance training. Endurance training burns a lot of energy and strengthens the cardiovascular system. In addition, strength exercises can build muscle mass and further boost fat burning. With regular strength training, you increase your daily basal energy expenditure: You burn more fat even when you’re not exercising.