Ageless if you Dare - Loulou's Facial Exercises
EDS Skin Care Forums Forum Index » Skincare Tools & Do-It-Yourself Skincare

free skin care · Sun Jul 18, 2010 12:22 pm

You know I know someone from another program who says all the time that we're all starting from different places, and whilst I have to confess I used to roll my eyes at that comment, I've come to realise there is some truth to this.

Just to give background I started facial exercises when I hit my 52 birthday and lost a lot of weight so had kind of excess skin situation to deal with and its taken me many years to get to the place I'm at at th emoment where I'm truly happy with my face. I jumped onto Ageless when it first came out - I mean who wouldn't with all the reviews and the time factor was also major for me, but I'm one of those ones who the lower face seemed to be uneffected by Ageless. I had been doing the 2nd edition FlexEffect before and my lower face had really become toned and good, but it was a time consuming program. Not so with the 3rd edition. I did Ageless for quite a few months, with good results, it gave me my big chipmunk cheeks for sure, but also incorporated Tanaka and had fantastic results. Then my ego got the better of me and I tried some bone stuff which I should never have done. Worst thing ever. Ended up with ruptured ligament and my doc said a possibily torn nerve. All healed up nicely now though.

I still do some Ageless but dont follow the routine as laid out in the book, as I think thats kind of for younger girls than me and if I was say in my 30's it probably be fine, but I'm 60 this year and so need all the help I can get! Plus Lou's disappeared, and the mods are not around to really give help/guidance like I think they should be. However what I'm loving is FlexEffects most recent edition. The dvd is what I really needed to get my butt in motion. With the 2nd edition I struggled with the descriptions, but I've always been visual - so can't help it. I gues its about finding the right mix for your own face, but like most tings I think its a good starting point (Ageless).

Kiley wrote:

sorry, one last question when I suspect as I type it you have already indirectly answered, but I just want to be sure.

My impression from reading Ageless if that one way this program is supposed to help lower face sagging if because by building the cheeks, it causes some of that extra skin or tissue in the lower face to be pulled back up where it came from. Smile

(amateur interpretion here)

But some of you are saying this in fact did not happen for you? And for any of you with saggy necks (raising hand high here), her long graceful neck movement didn't do much for you?

kiley

Sun Jul 18, 2010 9:55 pm

wow,

This is so great, I love face exercising. It can always make my face so relaxed and conditioned.

free skin care · Mon Jul 19, 2010 1:25 am

A couple of months ago before starting with SkinBio's Skin Signals I took several close-up shots of myself from all different angles of my face. After 2 months of SS, getting ready to start with Super CP serum and Ageless, I took more pics yesterday. I hadn't yet uploaded from my camera the first set of pics so I was flipping through both sets on the camera checking for any differences when I noticed one thing that I think makes me look so bad after losing weight last year. I had just attributed it to the "fat" skin not yet having conformed to the fatless muscle underneath, thus making NL and marionette lines from sagging. The angles that the camera was showing me are some that I cannot see in the mirror, and I was MORTIFIED that I actually look like that. I can only compare what I saw to Edvard Munch's "The Scream"...look:
http://romanjaster.com/edvard-munch/gallery/other_artists/scream_ascii.htm

I had read a tiny bit about subcutaneous fat, but hadn't really run across anything about what it is and that we lose it as we age...it's all about collagen loss, it seems. So I dug out a school portrait of me as a teenager and really scrutinized it for the first time and saw that I had a nicely padded face...not chipmunk cheeks, but not really well-defined, high cheekbones either, just padded and smooth without looking overweight. Nice lips, too. I was no Angelina Jolie, but fairly smooth and full with a slight upward slant at the corners.
Sooooo....what I need to know is, what, if any, of the Ageless exercises will build up not only the cheekbone area, but a bit below it as well? I've always wanted high, defined cheekbones, but HOLY CAMOLEY!! Not THIS damned defined! Confused

Is it the Zygomaticus major? Minor? The explanation for the buccinator is confusing to me...it sounds like the first thing training it will do is pull everything in close to the skull giving definition, and with continued training it will BUILD and give fullness, but the details are sketchy. Defined is fine, what I've always liked, but not if it's just going to look skeletal before I've had a chance to build any muscle to replace any subcutaneous fat.

Also, Ageless doesn't touch too much on lip exercises, and I've got some pesky smoker's lines which she doesn't seem to address, that I can find anyway. Can anyone help me there?

Thanks!

free skin care · Mon Jul 19, 2010 3:38 am

I can't help you with the sub. cut. fat part, as thats beyond my scope, but I know Ageless has exercises for both zygo major and minor. From what I've read about the bucc and got to paraphrase here, the buccinator responds differently for different people. It doesn't pull in for everyone, in fact for many it won't do that at all. Not sure if the lip exercise will address lines, or whether it might be the massage that does that.

Re looking skeletal, I've always been told guantness is diet related. Not sure I agree completely with that, but when I do make a more conscious effort to eat healthy and proteins etc, it does help my face for sure.

Theresa

free skin care · Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:39 am

Hi bluugrass!

Yes, there are many reasons why a person's lower face may be gaunt, including diet & hydration, genetics, bodyfat percentage, muscle weakness, loss of bone, etc.

As TheresaMary says, giving you specific advice is beyond our expertise. But if you have the face shape in link, I suspect that bone and/or muscle atrophy of the lower jaw, as well as the buccinator area, might be a significant contributing problem.

I'd recommend consulting with Loulou or another facial exercise expert.

Hope you figure it out! Smile

free skin care · Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:39 am

LOL...well, I don't mean I look EXACTLY like that; I had never made the connection with that pic until I saw the photos I took from an angle that I don't normally see. Looking straight on into the mirror, I see marionettes and NLs and flat cheeks where once sat plump ones....looking at a photo from a different angle I see sunken cheeks. Now, I've never been gaunt in my life, and most of my adult life I've been slightly overweight with a padded face. January of last year I was diagnosed with A.D.D. and started on Adderall, a side-effect of which is loss of appetite. I had never really noticed the mouth lines until after losing about 30 lbs, so I attribute the slackness to one of two things, possibly both: either I had lost my subcutaneous facial fat within the last 15 years (which was the last time I was at a normal weight and my face looked fine then) but didn't know it because of the excess weight, or muscle loss from improper nutrition when the Adderall took away my appetite. I'm going to be supplimenting with some protein shakes with my workouts to regain muscle mass.
Oh...it's also maybe important to note that I'm 50.
And as far as Loulou, I thought that no one had heard from her in quite awhile...is she reachable?
Thanks!

free skin care · Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:38 am

Sorry, bluugrass! I knew that you meant that you didn't look exactly like that, but rather that you meant you saw some similarities, is that right?

As for what to do, it seems that with the lower face, from observing on the FlexEffect forum, it seems more challenging to figure out what a person should do for their lower face and what might be the underlying issues than for many other areas of the face. IF you are able to post pictures (and are comfortable doing so), a few of us with more experience but who are still not experts *might* be able to point you roughly in the right direction. BUT otherwise, we'd just be guessing based on your description about what may or may not be one of the underlying causes for you personally...and I wouldn't want to mislead you or lead anyone astray based on well-meaning but incorrect advice Smile

So for this area of the face, I would definitely recommend talking to an expert. As for Loulou's whereabouts, I don't know what the situation is and whether people have just tried to contact her indirectly through the forum or also directly through her website. Since you have the Ageless program (am I recalling that correctly??), it probably makes sense to give that a go and commit to it fully for 6 months and see if you are happy with that, either with or without extra guidance from Loulou or others knowledgeable in the Ageless program. That should give you a solid feel for whether you like and want to continue with the Ageless program. If you do, great; if not, there are also other facial exercise programs out there, and others are happy to chime in with their experiences with various programs Smile

And if you don't have any particular facial program yet, you could try posting pictures on the FlexEffect forum (flexeffect.proboards19.com), since that forum is staffed with trainers, who are quite generous in giving free advice Smile

Carole Maggio also gives advice and has a facial exercise program, but I believe her rates are around $250 a hour.

I hope this helps! Smile

free skin care · Mon Jul 19, 2010 12:45 pm

Hi bluugrass!

Yep I think your right Lou does seem to have disappeared and no one has heard from her for a while. The mods on Ageless don't seem to know anything about her either. Bit of a mystery I just pray she is ok.

CMs pretty good with the technical stuff though (and I think I read she is a FlexEffect trainer in training or something? CM is that correct?) and has a lot of knowledge so if you wanted to get advice I think she's great on all accounts.

I was in my 50's when I started, and wish I had the programs that I do now as I am sure I could have avoided a lot of problems. I did Ageless for a while, and it has to be said I did jump ship but only because the 2nd edition of FlexEffect didn't (a) have a dvd demoing everything and (b) used to take so long to do - it was a good half hour and then some. Thank Goodness the newer 3rd edition is either 12 minutes or 20 minutes. Plus the dvd demo's everything. Sounds a silly thing to complain about but I have always been a visual learner and struggle with books, so for me its quite a major thing.

It has to be said Carole Maggio does answer emails (I've sent her quite a few and always get a response) which she doesn't charge for, its only if you want a one on one session with her, but the FlexEffect trainers are also good and Claudia (Deb's daughter) is on here and does always answer questions well beyond the call of duty. I kind of feel sorry for FlexEffect as they have got dumped with helping ageless students, but they do know their stuff.

Theresa

free skin care · Mon Jul 19, 2010 1:43 pm

TheresaMary wrote:

Hi bluugrass!

Yep I think your right Lou does seem to have disappeared and no one has heard from her for a while. The mods on Ageless don't seem to know anything about her either. Bit of a mystery I just pray she is ok.

CMs pretty good with the technical stuff though (and I think I read she is a FlexEffect trainer in training or something? CM is that correct?) and has a lot of knowledge so if you wanted to get advice I think she's great on all accounts.

I was in my 50's when I started, and wish I had the programs that I do now as I am sure I could have avoided a lot of problems. I did Ageless for a while, and it has to be said I did jump ship but only because the 2nd edition of FlexEffect didn't (a) have a dvd demoing everything and (b) used to take so long to do - it was a good half hour and then some. Thank Goodness the newer 3rd edition is either 12 minutes or 20 minutes. Plus the dvd demo's everything. Sounds a silly thing to complain about but I have always been a visual learner and struggle with books, so for me its quite a major thing.

It has to be said Carole Maggio does answer emails (I've sent her quite a few and always get a response) which she doesn't charge for, its only if you want a one on one session with her, but the FlexEffect trainers are also good and Claudia (Deb's daughter) is on here and does always answer questions well beyond the call of duty. I kind of feel sorry for FlexEffect as they have got dumped with helping ageless students, but they do know their stuff.

Theresa

Thanks, TheresaMary, that's very nice of you to say! But I'm not a trainer or trainer in training....just super-zealous about facial exercises and very grateful since they stopped my face from imploding, figurately speaking of course Very Happy

Yes, the FlexEffect trainers are great and very thorough Smile

free skin care · Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:56 am

Yikes... sorry CM. Thought I had read somewhere you were. I think you'd be a great trainer though and your not the only one super-zealous with the exercises!

cm5597 wrote:

Thanks, TheresaMary, that's very nice of you to say! But I'm not a trainer or trainer in training....just super-zealous about facial exercises and very grateful since they stopped my face from imploding, figurately speaking of course Very Happy

Yes, the FlexEffect trainers are great and very thorough Smile

free skin care · Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:48 am

Yes, you're correct, what I saw in my angles photos did resemble Munch's famous painting, especially my reaction...eyes and mouth as big as three dinner plates

. (Just for giggles I held my hands to my cheeks too...got a good laugh out of that one! Laughing

)

Even if I could find the cable for uploading from the camera to computer, I'd be uncomfortable posting, unless I could crop to make them unrecognizable while still depicting what needs to be shown. I realize the theme of this forum and there would be no ridicule, but I have this fear that someone I know might see them and get a good chuckle, irrational though that may sound. I'll consider it tho..

I went to Google Images to find pics of women with nice cheek sculpture, and comparing them to the muscle diagrams I see, it looks like the Zygos are the ones I should concentrate on...stretching from the mouth corners to the temple, they appear to be the ones that cross that vast wasteland that once was my cheeks. See model...
http://img18.imageshack.us/i/d99acfd1bfc8a76bannasel.jpg/

Loulou had explained in a post once that each muscle perform only one function...this one pulls the mouth this way, that one raises the eyelid, so on and so forth, and that each program would essentially have the same result, the difference being methods and theory (I'm paraphrasing here). Going by that logic, I can't understand why Ageless is effective with only 5 minutes a day....20 reps per muscle every 2 or 3 days?? Take a break for a month? Don't misunderstand me, I like most of what she says and I like her spin on stuff, and I've not been into it long enough to have a valid opinion yet, it just seems kind of mild, as well as a bit incomplete, like the smoker's lip not having been covered.

For instance, a young man on the Ageless forum posted his concern about his results..cheeks built one day, hollow days later, took a break, back to pre-Ageless face, started again, 2nd verse, same as the first. No one could help him...no Lou and no mods (if I remember correctly). Someone suggested that he take his concern to the FE board (Theresa?) and he came back all better. They assessed him and suggested possibly a protein deficiency, which he corrected and got his cheeks back. I would not have immediately guessed that since I'm no expert, but now that I look at the situation, it seems so basic...muscle build = need for adequate protein. That's the kind of thing that should be covered.

The program was very inexpensive and it fit my budget as I'm not working right now finishing up school...it's informative enough to get me started in the right direction, and she's posted two short vids on the forum demonstrating the exercises for reference. I have nothing to complain about, really...I'm merely
discussing Smile

. Yes, I'll stay with Ageless, but I'm going to tweak it possibly to the point that it won't be Ageless anymore, but if I get results, who gives a diddly? And I'll have Lou to thank, if I knew where she is... Wink

Concerning Carole Maggio...I had her book a few years ago, but it was hard to take her seriously because I was put off by the B and A photos and the lighting tricks. Overhead lighting will show sags on a face simply because any ridge, bump or fold will cast a shadow upon the skin immediately beneath it, whereas bringing the light more in front of the face will eliminate the shadows. All of the Before pics had a shadow on the neck of the subject where the head eclipses the light from being cast there, and none of the after pics had that shadow. I felt that if her program was indeed an effective one that camera trickery shouldn't be needed, and tossed the book...I've been turned off by her ever since.

And thumbs up about the FE board. I'm actually on that board, have been for a number of years, just not lately...I'll be returning, though. I love Sean and Claudia and totally agree that they're very helpful...how they keep up with contributing to multiple boards and still earn a living I'll never know; they must not sleep, I guess Laughing

.

Oh, speaking of Maggio...look at this and tell me if she gets her cute little mouth-corner upturn from exercising, or if she's "done sumthin'"... Shhh

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zga_eQc3uxc

...then tell me what you think of the anchorman. Whoot!

Thanks, both of you!

free skin care · Tue Jul 20, 2010 7:18 am

You know I remember I think Cathy or Deb saying muscles can only pull but cannot push, which is why they often get you to lock on in certain places (but don't quote me I probably got it the wrong way round). Know exactly what you mean re the camera. I leave all that to my son. Even the forum, I had to get him in to fill out the basics. Once I've seen him do it, I'm fine. I only got an email beginning of last year, and was terrified of it, but have started to get over it. Its like facial exercises I suppose in the beginning your unsure then as time goes by you get more confident etc.

I kind of think with Ageless she's gone after the muscles that have the most dramatic effect, and is not wanting anyone to deal with overbuilding etc so doing it only a couple of minutes a day avoids that. I got to say though that squeezing the skin I'm not convinced about yet. I do like Ageless and still do some bits, but the eyes just didn't work for me like FlexEffect did. Nor the lower face, I kind of noticed a sort of looseness I had going on in the lower jaw area and mid cheeks that’s difficult to describe.

Also I find some things just odd. Like why she doesn't mention FlexEffect at all. I mean I know her stuff is very different, but she doesn't give it any credit and she was there for years and years, probably even before I got there (which is saying something!). Also she said she was doing her own thing but never goes into detail about what she was exactly doing, which I find a little unsettling.

Yep that was Nene. My heart went out to him as he had been doing all the stuff, and then seemed to get deserted when he was in need. Got quite a telling off from several on there I can tell you for directing him there, but then the way I look at it, several people directed me to Ageless from the FlexEffect forum, so what goes around comes around. Like you said, if people get results, then who really cares what they are using as long as they are happy.

Theresa

free skin care · Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:56 am

OH, you gotta be JOKIN' me! For what reason was anyone caring if he went to the FE board for help that he wasn't otherwise getting? It's not like it's the enemy camp! Wow, some people are good at creating a rivalry in their own heads, y'know...

Pull vs. push? I'd never thought about it, but pull sounds about right. Yeah. Bending your elbow is flexing a muscle in the upper arm that's attached to a bone in the forearm, thus pulling it closer...there's no other place for a push muscle to be, so yeah. Anyway, could you elaborate a bit more on that point about locking on in certain places? I don't know what you mean.
By "pinching the skin" are you referring to the grabbing of the chuck of flesh for resistance or the tug massage? I do the massage and actually enjoy it. I remember seeing that mentioned on the FE board years ago. As for the resistance pinch, my first time trying it I made a couple of red marks from grabbing tighter because the grasp kept slipping, but now find that using a napkin eliminates the slip and allows for a lighter grasp.

free skin care · Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:12 pm

I wish I was joking. I'm thinking it was something like a muscle can only pull, it can't push or something so when you smile, to make the smile expression the muscles pull to lift the lip corners etc.

Sorry re locking on, its just where you place the resistance. So for example on corner mouth pull you place your thumb in the mouth, and then the fingers lock on over it. The locking on is just where you place hte resistance I thought (but again I might have got that wrong).

Theresa

free skin care · Wed Jul 21, 2010 10:21 am

bluugrass wrote:

Even if I could find the cable for uploading from the camera to computer, I'd be uncomfortable posting, unless I could crop to make them unrecognizable while still depicting what needs to be shown. I realize the theme of this forum and there would be no ridicule, but I have this fear that someone I know might see them and get a good chuckle, irrational though that may sound. I'll consider it tho..

Cropping them is definitely a option...Also, the FlexEffect trainers do allow you to PM them photos, so that you don't have to post them privately, so that's another option.

bluugrass wrote:

I went to Google Images to find pics of women with nice cheek sculpture, and comparing them to the muscle diagrams I see, it looks like the Zygos are the ones I should concentrate on...stretching from the mouth corners to the temple, they appear to be the ones that cross that vast wasteland that once was my cheeks. See model...
http://img18.imageshack.us/i/d99acfd1bfc8a76bannasel.jpg/

Yes, this model does have strong zygomaticus minor and major muscles. Even though building up the zygomaticus muscle usually helps most people with flat cheeks, I just also want to add in a caution against spot training or even focusing in on a particular set of muscles, as usually people who spot train run into problems later with facial symmetry, etc.

bluugrass wrote:

Loulou had explained in a post once that each muscle perform only one function...this one pulls the mouth this way, that one raises the eyelid, so on and so forth, and that each program would essentially have the same result, the difference being methods and theory (I'm paraphrasing here).

Yes, each muscle does have one function/one pulling motion, but I don't think that implies that each program would essentially have the same result (if I understand what you're saying here). But I do agree that that seems to be Loulou's philosophy, as she says that the exact hand-positioning of what chunk of flesh you grab doesn't matter much, but as a someone who is very athletic and used to be very into bodybuilding, I totally disagree with her philosophy. There have also been a few things that she has said and done that for me suggest that she does not have much general exercise experience or know as much about exercise physiology.

Take, for example, the biceps and only the bicep curl technique (ignoring things like training reps, sets, frequency, etc.). If you do a standard bicep curl with weights, you will build your bicep muscle. If now at the top of your bicep curl, do a slight twist of the wrist, you will build the "belly" (that peak) of the bicep muscle even more than a standard curl. Now take a second variation: if you do the same exercise, but convert it into a isometric one, where you don't move the weight, but just hold your bicep in the curled position, you build more the bicep muscle towards the ends of the bicep. And we haven't even brought in things like the sets, reps, training frequently, relative load, etc. So I would strongly disagree with Loulou here. That's why different exercise programs give different results--take the extremes of yoga versus bodybuilding. I think *all* aspects of the training program affect one's results.

bluugrass wrote:

Going by that logic, I can't understand why Ageless is effective with only 5 minutes a day....20 reps per muscle every 2 or 3 days?? Take a break for a month? Don't misunderstand me, I like most of what she says and I like her spin on stuff, and I've not been into it long enough to have a valid opinion yet, it just seems kind of mild, as well as a bit incomplete, like the smoker's lip not having been covered.

My 2 cents is...Loulou only *regularly* has one train 10 of the 26 or so voluntary muscles of the face, and for each of the other muscles, she has you ignore them or exercise them only once a fortnight. Her main two theories seems to me to be, one, that aging of the face is due to/can largely be corrected by getting the elevator or lifting muscles of the face back in shape, so that facial tissue does not sag down the face (and fullness in the cheeks is key part of that theory, as "the cheeks lift everything"), and two, that wrinkles are largely caused by muscles not springing back to their normal position and hence wrinkles form at certain junctions. (I don't know enough about the merits of the latter claim.)

But we know that there are multiple factors that cause the face to look older, including a loss of fullness in the face, wrinkles and lines, skin texture, etc. In fact, just recently, I read that a prominent dermatologist said that the most common reason for premature facial aging in younger people was loss of facial fullness, not sag or wrinkles. So the reality is that the factors that age one person's face the most will not be the same from person to person. So imo, this suggests that Loulou has a philosophical bias that the main culprit in aging is sag and muscles not springing back. While is likely a contributing factor for most people, it may or may not be main factor or even a significant factor for all people. And indeed, when I look at Loulou's before and after photos, I notice that indeed her main problem in the before photos was facial sag and she didn't appear to have much problems with facial fullness and in her before photos, she was quite young (age 38, I believe). Hence, I'd wager the differences in her unique facial program are really a reflection of her specific philosophy and unique needs.

*IF* my conjecture is correct here, then it suggests that Loulou's program is tailored to her philosophy in a way that builds the cheeks and maintains the contours particularly of her face. If I recall correctly, Loulou did FlexEffect for 2 years, before completely changing course to develop her own program. She had the most amazing before and after photos I'd ever seen (wow!!) from doing the FlexEffect program, albeit haphazardly. Now here's the kicker in my opinion and in my opinion only. As most people into serious exercise know, maintenance of body contours is 100 times easier than achieving those results in the first place. That is, since muscle atrophies slowly, it is quite easy to *maintain* one's results by exercising every once in a while, than to improve one's body contours. But there is a big difference in my opinion between exercising for optimal health and exercising simply for the goal of maintaining body contours; for the former, you would exercise every day, for the later, you might be able to exercise a couple times a week, but in the long-term, your results will not be as good. The analogy here is that it *seems* to me that Loulou's program can be broken down into three parts:

* A full optimal health routine for 5 of the 6 muscles of the cheeks, the caninus muscle (under the NLs), two muscles of the eyes, and the largest muscle in the neck.

* A very lazy maintenance program (quote: "These exercises need to be done rarely, probably no more often than once every four weeks.") for an additional 7 muscles in the face, which probably will not be enough for many/most people.

* No exercise for the remaining 9 or so voluntary muscles of the face. The implicit assumption here is that if the muscles don't lift the face, there is no need to exercise them here or keep them firm...this ignores the fact that exercising will increase oxygenation and circulation and hence improve the overlying skin . This also ignores the importance of facial symmetry and how the relative build in muscles can make someone look younger or older.

This isn't to say that it's not something to try, but merely to point out where Ageless's strengths and weaknesses are, and to try to provide some rationale for why the program might have been designed the way it was.

bluugrass wrote:

The program was very inexpensive and it fit my budget as I'm not working right now finishing up school...it's informative enough to get me started in the right direction, and she's posted two short vids on the forum demonstrating the exercises for reference. I have nothing to complain about, really...I'm merely
discussing Smile

. Yes, I'll stay with Ageless, but I'm going to tweak it possibly to the point that it won't be Ageless anymore, but if I get results, who gives a diddly? And I'll have Lou to thank, if I knew where she is... Wink

I say if you have it, go for it! Smile

If, for some reason, it turns out not to be the right fit for you, by that time, you'll start to have a better knowledge of your face and a better sense of what to try next Smile

bluugrass wrote:

And thumbs up about the FE board. I'm actually on that board, have been for a number of years, just not lately...I'll be returning, though. I love Sean and Claudia and totally agree that they're very helpful...how they keep up with contributing to multiple boards and still earn a living I'll never know; they must not sleep, I guess Laughing

.

Me, too! I've been wondering the exact same thing! Especially with Sean, since he is super, super-generous with his time, but it sounds like he is very successful and has a lot of clients, so I'm glad that what comes around goes around and that he gets a lot back in return Smile

bluugrass wrote:

Oh, speaking of Maggio...look at this and tell me if she gets her cute little mouth-corner upturn from exercising, or if she's "done sumthin'"... Shhh

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zga_eQc3uxc

You know, I used to think she definitely had something done to her lips, but then I went back and rigorously looked at and compared photos, and now I'm sure she has cheek and jaw implants (or something similar), but am uncertain about her lips, as she does have a similar unique arch to her lips in her earlier years of doing facercise, even if less pronounced earlier.

Just my 2 cents Smile

Wed Jul 21, 2010 10:48 am

I've paid through paypal for the download almost 2 weeks ago but didn't get any response. I've tried to call the number listed on the website and sent 3 e-mails. Does anybody know what's going on.
Irina.

free skin care · Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:21 pm

cm5597 wrote:

bluugrass wrote:

I went to Google Images to find pics of women with nice cheek sculpture, and comparing them to the muscle diagrams I see, it looks like the Zygos are the ones I should concentrate on...stretching from the mouth corners to the temple, they appear to be the ones that cross that vast wasteland that once was my cheeks. See model...
http://img18.imageshack.us/i/d99acfd1bfc8a76bannasel.jpg/

Yes, this model does have strong zygomaticus minor and major muscles. Even though building up the zygomaticus muscle usually helps most people with flat cheeks, I just also want to add in a caution against spot training or even focusing in on a particular set of muscles, as usually people who spot train run into problems later with facial symmetry, etc.

CM do you think its possible through exercises to build up that kind of look? I'd love to look like that, and am thinking maybe I just need to do more to get that look. What do you think. Have you achieved that through your exercises? How did you go about working out what worked for you and how to get the results you were after?

free skin care · Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:33 pm

cm5597 wrote:

Yes, each muscle does have one function/one pulling motion, but I don't think that implies that each program would essentially have the same result (if I understand what you're saying here). But I do agree that that seems to be Loulou's philosophy, as she says that the exact hand-positioning of what chunk of flesh you grab doesn't matter much, but as a someone who is very athletic and used to be very into bodybuilding, I totally disagree with her philosophy. There have also been a few things that she has said and done that for me suggest that she does not have much general exercise experience or know as much about exercise physiology.

Take, for example, the biceps and only the bicep curl technique (ignoring things like training reps, sets, frequency, etc.). If you do a standard bicep curl with weights, you will build your bicep muscle. If now at the top of your bicep curl, do a slight twist of the wrist, you will build the "belly" (that peak) of the bicep muscle even more than a standard curl. Now take a second variation: if you do the same exercise, but convert it into a isometric one, where you don't move the weight, but just hold your bicep in the curled position, you build more the bicep muscle towards the ends of the bicep. And we haven't even brought in things like the sets, reps, training frequently, relative load, etc. So I would strongly disagree with Loulou here. That's why different exercise programs give different results--take the extremes of yoga versus bodybuilding. I think *all* aspects of the training program affect one's results.

I agree whole heartedly with this, but its something that has been explained to me and I didn’t understand at first, but I think CM you have summarized it perfectly here. I suppose from Lou’s viewpoint, its about challenging the muscle in any means, whereas as you rightly say, it will impact. That’s why they are always emphasizing technique at FlexEffect, because it does have an impact. With the 2nd edition, I one time got a bit slack but was doing the exercises but using resistance in the wrong place and got monkey mouth, and it was horrid. At first I was convinced it was the exercises, but then Cathy (she’s a sweetie) pointed out to me to firstly rest, and I did, and it went, but then to do the exercises, and same result came up and she asked me questions, which I kind of was a bit annoyed about, but when she worked out it was where I was holding and explained it to me – it made so much sense.

cm5597 wrote:

My 2 cents is...Loulou only *regularly* has one train 10 of the 26 or so voluntary muscles of the face, and for each of the other muscles, she has you ignore them or exercise them only once a fortnight. Her main two theories seems to me to be, one, that aging of the face is due to/can largely be corrected by getting the elevator or lifting muscles of the face back in shape, so that facial tissue does not sag down the face (and fullness in the cheeks is key part of that theory, as "the cheeks lift everything"), and two, that wrinkles are largely caused by muscles not springing back to their normal position and hence wrinkles form at certain junctions. (I don't know enough about the merits of the latter claim.)

I get what you mean here, but do you think that the latter claim is correct or incorrect? I don’t quite understand it myself. I mean lines that I have, aren’t from muscles but are kind of embedded in the skin itself, so I’m not sure I believe that either.

cm5597 wrote:

But we know that there are multiple factors that cause the face to look older, including a loss of fullness in the face, wrinkles and lines, skin texture, etc. In fact, just recently, I read that a prominent dermatologist said that the most common reason for premature facial aging in younger people was loss of facial fullness, not sag or wrinkles. So the reality is that the factors that age one person's face the most will not be the same from person to person. So imo, this suggests that Loulou has a philosophical bias that the main culprit in aging is sag and muscles not springing back.

That’s really interesting what your highlighting here, as in the past I did think the trainers were going overboard on things like diet, sleep, etc, but I guess these are the factors that can cause the face to look older. I think the before photo though is a badly positioned photo. How anyone at that angle would look good is beyond me. Also both her demour and dress I find questionable. Not only that but in the after photo she is smiling. To me that is always something I have wondered about, as when most people smile, their faces look better than when they’re not smiling.

cm5597 wrote:

*IF* my conjecture is correct here, then it suggests that Loulou's program is tailored to her philosophy in a way that builds the cheeks and maintains the contours particularly of her face. If I recall correctly, Loulou did FlexEffect for 2 years, before completely changing course to develop her own program. She had the most amazing before and after photos I'd ever seen (wow!!) from doing the FlexEffect program, albeit haphazardly. Now here's the kicker in my opinion and in my opinion only. As most people into serious exercise know, maintenance of body contours is 100 times easier than achieving those results in the first place. That is, since muscle atrophies slowly, it is quite easy to *maintain* one's results by exercising every once in a while, than to improve one's body contours. But there is a big difference in my opinion between exercising for optimal health and exercising simply for the goal of maintaining body contours; for the former, you would exercise every day, for the later, you might be able to exercise a couple times a week, but in the long-term, your results will not be as good.

You see this is part of the problem. We never know what she did during the time she Flexed. I’m sure that it was longer than two years, as she was there when Olympia was there, and that’s a good 4/5 years ago isn’t it. I was around then, but didn’t participate much in the forum but used to read with interest. If we knew what she did exactly, it would help a great deal I believe. Also why she doesn’t credit FlexEffect is a bit strange considering she was a trainer all that time too.

CM on a side note, also have you changed your routine? Do you find that you don’t have to exercise your face as often. One thing that never felt quite right to me was that she said she rarely exercised her face nowadays. I find that odd, especially when you got people like Carole Maggio, Deb Crowley and Eva Fraser who are pros still do their exercises.

Theresa

free skin care · Wed Jul 21, 2010 12:34 pm

Sadly not. I think on the forum it was mentioned people went through paypal to get refunds (and had gotten them).

imartin wrote:

I've paid through paypal for the download almost 2 weeks ago but didn't get any response. I've tried to call the number listed on the website and sent 3 e-mails. Does anybody know what's going on.
Irina.

free skin care · Wed Jul 21, 2010 1:36 pm

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

bluugrass wrote:

I went to Google Images to find pics of women with nice cheek sculpture, and comparing them to the muscle diagrams I see, it looks like the Zygos are the ones I should concentrate on...stretching from the mouth corners to the temple, they appear to be the ones that cross that vast wasteland that once was my cheeks. See model...
http://img18.imageshack.us/i/d99acfd1bfc8a76bannasel.jpg/

Yes, this model does have strong zygomaticus minor and major muscles. Even though building up the zygomaticus muscle usually helps most people with flat cheeks, I just also want to add in a caution against spot training or even focusing in on a particular set of muscles, as usually people who spot train run into problems later with facial symmetry, etc.

CM do you think its possible through exercises to build up that kind of look? I'd love to look like that, and am thinking maybe I just need to do more to get that look. What do you think. Have you achieved that through your exercises? How did you go about working out what worked for you and how to get the results you were after?

From my very limited experience Smile

, I would guess that everyone will limited to a degree by their genetics pre-deposition, bone structure, previous lifestyle habits, bodyfat percentage, etc., so *exactly* that look will not be achievable for many people. But I would think that something along those lines is achievable for everyone, meaning, everyone should be able to build up and emphasize their zygomatic muscles and get a more sculpted look. This is just my guess...the facial exercise experts would know better than me Smile

free skin care · Wed Jul 21, 2010 2:08 pm

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

Yes, each muscle does have one function/one pulling motion, but I don't think that implies that each program would essentially have the same result (if I understand what you're saying here). But I do agree that that seems to be Loulou's philosophy, as she says that the exact hand-positioning of what chunk of flesh you grab doesn't matter much, but as a someone who is very athletic and used to be very into bodybuilding, I totally disagree with her philosophy. There have also been a few things that she has said and done that for me suggest that she does not have much general exercise experience or know as much about exercise physiology.

Take, for example, the biceps and only the bicep curl technique (ignoring things like training reps, sets, frequency, etc.). If you do a standard bicep curl with weights, you will build your bicep muscle. If now at the top of your bicep curl, do a slight twist of the wrist, you will build the "belly" (that peak) of the bicep muscle even more than a standard curl. Now take a second variation: if you do the same exercise, but convert it into a isometric one, where you don't move the weight, but just hold your bicep in the curled position, you build more the bicep muscle towards the ends of the bicep. And we haven't even brought in things like the sets, reps, training frequently, relative load, etc. So I would strongly disagree with Loulou here. That's why different exercise programs give different results--take the extremes of yoga versus bodybuilding. I think *all* aspects of the training program affect one's results.

I agree whole heartedly with this, but its something that has been explained to me and I didn’t understand at first, but I think CM you have summarized it perfectly here. I suppose from Lou’s viewpoint, its about challenging the muscle in any means, whereas as you rightly say, it will impact. That’s why they are always emphasizing technique at FlexEffect, because it does have an impact. With the 2nd edition, I one time got a bit slack but was doing the exercises but using resistance in the wrong place and got monkey mouth, and it was horrid. At first I was convinced it was the exercises, but then Cathy (she’s a sweetie) pointed out to me to firstly rest, and I did, and it went, but then to do the exercises, and same result came up and she asked me questions, which I kind of was a bit annoyed about, but when she worked out it was where I was holding and explained it to me – it made so much sense.

Yes, exactly. For someone just beginning exercise or in the early intermediate stages, the answer is: "As you are engaging the muscle, it will have an impact." which is true...but not the whole picture. The real answer is "Engaging the muscle will always have an impact, but how your engage the muscle and your training routine do significantly matter".

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

My 2 cents is...Loulou only *regularly* has one train 10 of the 26 or so voluntary muscles of the face, and for each of the other muscles, she has you ignore them or exercise them only once a fortnight. Her main two theories seems to me to be, one, that aging of the face is due to/can largely be corrected by getting the elevator or lifting muscles of the face back in shape, so that facial tissue does not sag down the face (and fullness in the cheeks is key part of that theory, as "the cheeks lift everything"), and two, that wrinkles are largely caused by muscles not springing back to their normal position and hence wrinkles form at certain junctions. (I don't know enough about the merits of the latter claim.)

I get what you mean here, but do you think that the latter claim is correct or incorrect? I don’t quite understand it myself. I mean lines that I have, aren’t from muscles but are kind of embedded in the skin itself, so I’m not sure I believe that either.

Well, part of it makes sense to me and part of it does not. The part that makes sense to me is that often deep wrinkles will form in junctions between to muscles. But I'm not sure that muscles actually sag and need to snap back into place...certainly skin can sag... I mean, for example, I've never seen a sagging calf muscle, but I have seen sagging skin over a calf muscle and atrophied (very small and aged) calf muscles. I've also never heard anyone who is truly a professional in the field say that muscle sags...thinking about it, sagging muscle would mean that the muscle would have to stretch over time significantly away from the bone....Then again, I am no expert here Smile

Also, that's not the only possible cause of deep wrinkles, as you mention. Lack of hydration, lack of fullness, skin damage, etc., are all factors.

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

But we know that there are multiple factors that cause the face to look older, including a loss of fullness in the face, wrinkles and lines, skin texture, etc. In fact, just recently, I read that a prominent dermatologist said that the most common reason for premature facial aging in younger people was loss of facial fullness, not sag or wrinkles. So the reality is that the factors that age one person's face the most will not be the same from person to person. So imo, this suggests that Loulou has a philosophical bias that the main culprit in aging is sag and muscles not springing back.

That’s really interesting what your highlighting here, as in the past I did think the trainers were going overboard on things like diet, sleep, etc, but I guess these are the factors that can cause the face to look older. I think the before photo though is a badly positioned photo. How anyone at that angle would look good is beyond me. Also both her demour and dress I find questionable. Not only that but in the after photo she is smiling. To me that is always something I have wondered about, as when most people smile, their faces look better than when they’re not smiling.

Yeah, so I go either way on these. I know for a fact that diet, sleep, etc. matter a lot in training, but I do sometimes feel that they are over-emphasized relative to both technique and training schedule. My philosophical bias, from training in the gym, is that virtually anyone should be able to put on muscle, even with poor diet and more sleep. I'm not claiming optimum results here, but rather that they should be making some progress. I mean, I see people in the gym, who even at 50, eat a terrible diet, mostly of pizza, etc., but still are able to build a significant amount of muscle. But let me add: the urban legend in bodybuilding is that nutrition, sleep, etc. tend to affects one's training results more and more as one grows older, so that younger people can get great build with a poor diet, while older people need a good diet to get great build. I don't have first hand experience with this, but it is often passed along as dogma. Soooo....I think in the particular case of people who fail to see *any* muscle build, it is more likely to be a technique or training problem, than a healthy habits problem, since the number of people with diet, sleep, and other habits that are bad enough to impede any progress is small (an example would be Nene, who even when smiling too much, ran into problems with his face looking tired). BUT in terms of overall progress of the face, I think diet, sleep, massage, etc., are EQUALLY important to the OVERALL look and health of the face, as are exercise. So to sum up, I think FlexEffect is right to emphasize ALL aspects of health and they should be just as vocal as they are about it, BUT sometimes in past, I felt that they are quick to imply the that the problem might be nutritional, rather than first fully checking whether there are any problems with technique or the training regimen. For example, I can think of two very dedicated people, who quite regularly post on the FE forum, who after 1.5+ years of doing FE, learned that that their technique was just wrong and that it had been negatively impacting their progress, so I can only imagine that they are not the only ones struggling to get good results for some muscles because of inadequate technique...and certainly, I've had my own struggles with technique for a couple muscles...so I feel quite strongly about the important of both technique and the training schedule. Anyhow, I did register this small critique to Sean a while ago, among others, when he openly asked for all kinds of general feedback on the forum and a potential revamping of it. Anyhow, I hope this distinction is clear enough--that I do agree that they are equally important, but yes, every once in a while, I do feel that technique and training deserve more attention Smile

. Overall, I do feel like the FE trainers do a fantastic job, especially since they are given limited information about a person and have to piece together what is going on.

TheresaMary wrote:

cm5597 wrote:

*IF* my conjecture is correct here, then it suggests that Loulou's program is tailored to her philosophy in a way that builds the cheeks and maintains the contours particularly of her face. If I recall correctly, Loulou did FlexEffect for 2 years, before completely changing course to develop her own program. She had the most amazing before and after photos I'd ever seen (wow!!) from doing the FlexEffect program, albeit haphazardly. Now here's the kicker in my opinion and in my opinion only. As most people into serious exercise know, maintenance of body contours is 100 times easier than achieving those results in the first place. That is, since muscle atrophies slowly, it is quite easy to *maintain* one's results by exercising every once in a while, than to improve one's body contours. But there is a big difference in my opinion between exercising for optimal health and exercising simply for the goal of maintaining body contours; for the former, you would exercise every day, for the later, you might be able to exercise a couple times a week, but in the long-term, your results will not be as good.

You see this is part of the problem. We never know what she did during the time she Flexed. I’m sure that it was longer than two years, as she was there when Olympia was there, and that’s a good 4/5 years ago isn’t it. I was around then, but didn’t participate much in the forum but used to read with interest. If we knew what she did exactly, it would help a great deal I believe. Also why she doesn’t credit FlexEffect is a bit strange considering she was a trainer all that time too.

CM on a side note, also have you changed your routine? Do you find that you don’t have to exercise your face as often. One thing that never felt quite right to me was that she said she rarely exercised her face nowadays. I find that odd, especially when you got people like Carole Maggio, Deb Crowley and Eva Fraser who are pros still do their exercises.

Theresa

I tend to tweak my routine about every 1-2 months now--nothing dramatic, but rather to reflect my progress. I am still training for about as long as I did in the beginning, a bit less for some muscles that are closer to maintenance and more for other muscles that can now handle a heavier training load and that I want to fill out more. But please realize, that I am genetically a beanpole and store proportionally less fat in my face, so I have longer to go in terms of achieving the facial fullness that I want than most people. Smile

Just my honest opinions. HTH Smile

Wed Jul 21, 2010 2:11 pm

TheresaMary wrote:

Sadly not. I think on the forum it was mentioned people went through paypal to get refunds (and had gotten them).

imartin wrote:

I've paid through paypal for the download almost 2 weeks ago but didn't get any response. I've tried to call the number listed on the website and sent 3 e-mails. Does anybody know what's going on.
Irina.

I'm starting to think I got lucky. I ordered the hard copy of the book and DVD just a few weeks ago and got them fairly quickly.

kiley

free skin care · Wed Jul 21, 2010 4:18 pm

@imartin...

I got the download too, a few months ago, and it's supposed to be automatic as soon as the payment is made. Are you sure you don't have a file on your computer? Sometimes I've had automatic download files appear on my desktop without any fanfare bells announcing its arrival and later found it sitting on my crowded desktop where it's not easy to see. I believe a download file will have an .exe extension. Have a look.

free skin care · Wed Jul 21, 2010 5:01 pm

There again, it may be just a .pdf file. I can't find an .exe on mine and it was too long ago to remember.

Wed Jul 21, 2010 5:11 pm

TheresaMary wrote:

Sadly not. I think on the forum it was mentioned people went through paypal to get refunds (and had gotten them).

imartin wrote:

I've paid through paypal for the download almost 2 weeks ago but didn't get any response. I've tried to call the number listed on the website and sent 3 e-mails. Does anybody know what's going on.
Irina.

I didn't think I had gotten my download either, but I did. I found it under Start/My Documents/Downloads. Try looking there.

Automatic Message

If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.

Click Here to join our community.

If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site.