That’s the stereotype and it seems justified to me. Not that everyone with potbelly is a middle-aged/older man, or that all such men have them, but it’s clearly highly correlated. And you virtually never see kids (of either gender) with potbellies. ISTM that there are two possibilities.
Either the pattern of fat storage/distribution changes for men as they age. Or - and here’s my theory, FWIW - men who have potbellies are people who always theoretically had that pattern, but were never fat as kids.
Meaning, IOW, you could falsify this theory by showing that people who were all-round chubby as kids develop the potbelly figure as adults. But as I think about it - and this is what got me to this theory - all the people I know who have potbellies are people who were always slim as kids and young men, and when they began putting on weight as they aged it was in the potbelly form. And the people who were fat as kids just stayed fat as adults (or got even fatter, in most cases) but didn’t develop potbellies.
The underlying theory would be - somewhat loosely - that there are people whose bodies are prone to being overweight and people who are not. The ones who are tend to store fat all over. The ones who aren’t don’t tend to become fat to begin with. But if, as a result of an increasingly sedentary life in middle-age they begin forcing their bodies to put on fat, then the body puts it in their abdominal area (at least in the case of men).
Of course, this is all based on nothing more than my personal observations and some idle speculation.
I’ve seen it; a hell of a lot of guys my dad’s age (60s) look like they might as well be pregnant. I blame poor diet; these people grew up in the age where they were fed the finest (junk) food science could create. So poor (carb heavy) diets over long term leads to a build-up of visceral (abdominal) fat.
I’ve managed to avoid going in that direction; I’ve put on a few pounds over the last year but it hasn’t been on my gut.
You had it when you talked about fat storage. If a man is storing excess fat, it is more likely to be stored around his abdomen. If a woman is storing excess fat, it is more likely to be stored in her hips and thighs. Note the phrase “more likely” - this is a tendency rather than an iron-clad rule
This is one reason why women have a longer life expectancy than men - storing fat around the abdomen is a lot harder on the internal organs, including the heart, than is storing it in the hips and thighs.
Older people do tend to put on weight compared to their younger selves, which is why this tendency happens more with middle-aged and older men, rather than younger men. There are a lot of reasons for this, mostly to do with reduced metabolic rates and lack of exercise. So it’s not that the pattern of fat storage changes over time, it’s that fat storage tends to increase over time.
There has been a lot of research on the subject of fat distribution. Hormones create a pretty predictable distribution pattern between men and women. Even with guys who have pot bellies, there’s a type with fat on top of the abdominal wall and the type with fat under the abdominal wall (around the organs). The second type is worse.
I don’t have any cites handy, but what I’ve ready mostly suggests that diet and exercise may control the total amount of fat, but the location of that fat is mostly out of your control.
Mrs. Cardigan was playfully giving me grief recently for my middle aged paunch and bet that I couldn’t fit into my old service trousers anymore. I showed her I still could…by buttoning the pants real low and letting my gut hang over the waistband. I guess I showed her!
yeah, I think I’m just predisposed to storing fat around my abdomen.
I see a lot of guys who develop potbellies because of heavy drinking (AKA “beer belly”). In fact, a lot of them are otherwise tall and skinny, except it looks like they stuffed a basketball under their shirt.
Sometimes the guys aren’t even that old (late 20s or 30s). I call this “frat guy bod”. Like they were athletes in high school, but then they got fat sitting around their fraternity house all day drinking.
Age and hormones affect where fat is deposited. As men atrophy and as testosterone drops, the belly becomes the primary storage center, and combined with a abdominal wall that is weakening with inactivity/age, the whole thing starts to pop out.
It’s why even modest weight loss (5 to 10%) achieved and maintained by healthy nutrition and exercise has dramatic health benefits: the most harmful fat is lost first.
Yes changing hormone levels has an impact on fat distribution and fat distribution impacts hormone levels too. IOW lower testosterone, which is a normal part of male aging, predisposes to visceral fat accumulation and obesity, and obesity lowers testosterone levels. OTOH exercise raises testosterone levels.
Diet alone will not do as much for the paunch. Aerobic exercise is key.
Metabolic syndrome. Deposition of fat in the abdomen is a symptom of a disturbed hormonal state caused by poor health due to lifestyle factors (diet and exercise). Cardiovascular disease and diabetes are the next step.
Right, but this is in agreement with an underlying issue: Older people get less active.
In theory, older men can do more, but in reality, they won’t.
So, forget what can stop what… older men get inactive, suffer from muscle atrophy, change of hormones and fat distribution, and a minority might be active, fit, aggressive and motivated to do anything about it, although the very change in their chemical makeup makes it exponentially more unlikely.
I’ve seen that even very thin old men can have a pot belly of a sort, as if the abs just stretch and/or weaken over time. I’ve looked for pictures before trying to see if this was common, it seems to be except for very athletic men, but most of the people on earth eat an enriched diet full of carbs, so pictures of people who live in more primitive conditions still show a lot of pot bellies. I think it must be natural for men to sag in their bellies as they get older, but as mentioned already, just having sagging abs is not the same as having a buildup of visceral fat.
I look like I have a pot-belly myself, but in my case it’s just large bulging abdominal muscles gained from the exertion in maintaining a sitting position for extended periods.
Mostly correct except that I do not think forgetting what can stop what is a great idea.
No question as we males age the cards are stacked in favor of a paunch, muscle mass loss/atrophy, overall weight gain, and decreasing testosterone. And yes some “older” men can be “skinny fat” with low BMI, little muscle, and what mass there is being too much visceral abdominal fat, pooched out in a toddler-style slouch.
It does however bear emphasis that such fates are not something that we need resign ourselves to. Stay … or become … active, and you can “avert the severe decree.”
More and more “older” men in reality do. Relatively moderate exercise investment has a fairly high rate of return in minimally stalling the decline. And more in the bank before late middle age hits, of both cardiorespiratory fitness and muscle mass, is like having more in the 401K: it will last lots longer living better.
Aging is unavoidable, providing one lives long enough, but we do make a choice about being the 57 year old with a paunch who tires easily or the one biking to work.
Yeah… but I don’t think it as much a choice as you do. It’s not GQ, so not gonna ask for data about your claim that more and more ‘older’ men do (get active’ stay active, etc).
I think a very small % of men can be rigorous enough to manage.
But I think the overall theme has been established about hormones, activity, fat distribution, atrophy, etc.
First goes back to 2005. 27% of those 50 to 64 engaged vigorous activities at least 20 minutes three to seven days a week and 20% of those 65 and older. More men than women claimed but not broken out by age group. No surprise high correlation between health and exercise status but of course that causation can and likely does go both ways.
Second is 2012. 50 to 51% of those polled report exercising at least half an hour at least three days a week from 40-44 year old to the 70 to 74 year old cohorts. From there it drops levelling at 44 to 46% for those eighty and over. (Healthy eating goes up for those still alive when older.)
A more recent survey has Boomers (1945 - 1965, so 52 to 67 year olds) at 36.8% active to “high calorie burning levels.” There is also a modest drop of inactivity in the elderly.
Hard to directly compare the polls as the first is using “vigorous”, the second just “exercise”, the 3rd a calorie burning level metric, but on the face of it it seems to be an increase and in any case at least half of those up to 74 do at least some exercise at least 3 days per week. And more than a third of Boomers are still exercising hard, not as much as younger generations do but not so shabby.
[QUOTE=DSeid;19470311
Diet alone will not do as much for the paunch. Aerobic exercise is key.[/QUOTE]
My anecdote: I’m in my mid 60s – lifelong non-exerciser other than walking. A few years ago I started riding a bike for 30 to 40 minutes three to five times a week (no training program, no hard effort, no cycle-specific clothing, just leisurely rides – a total Unracer). Lost three inches off my waist while my weight remained the same.
And yet… OP notices enough older-man pot bellies to post about it!
Because many factors are simply age-related and despite efforts, lots o’ pot bellies out there.
I’m not overweight according to my BMI, but I do have a bit of a paunch. It’s developed in the last 10 years: in 2007, I almost didn’t weigh enough to qualify as a horse jockey. My three-year-old sometimes pats my belly and says, “You have a BABY in there!” It’s very flattering.
If I could return back to the OP, does anyone know of people who were all-round chubby as kids and then changed to pot-bellied form in middle age? Or do people who start off chubby just tend to get even more fat all over?
Some 20+ years ago I read an article in Popular Science or some such periodical. The lead-off for the article was the story of a guy who had had severe burns on his shoulder blades when he’d been in his 20s and they’d grafted tissue from his abdomen to patch the gaping holes. Punch line: when he hit 40, he developed a middle-aged guy bellypaunch all right… but also the grafted tissue from his abdomen bloated out along with it, right on schedule.
In other words (said the article), it isn’t that guys that age start eating too much, or continuing to eat after their metabolism slows down, or don’t get the exercise they used to get… it’s that their bodies are wired with a timer and when they hit middle age, they’re gonna get a middle age belly.
