Myfitnesspal

Message Boards Debate: Health and Fitness
You are currently viewing the message boards in:

So. What's the worst weight loss myth?

13468928

Replies

  • peaceout_alypeaceout_aly Member Posts: 2,018 Member Member Posts: 2,018 Member
    Weight lifting makes you bulky or manly (and the idea that as soon as you start lifting you're gonna get a veiny, striated muscle body)

    I wish it were that easy, right???

    YES! Do you know how many times I've said this?! Girls at my office will be like, "Well I would lift but I don't want to look like a bodybuilder." And then I have to proceed to explain that bodybuilders eat a TON of food in order to achieve that look and if it were simple, everyone would be a bodybuilder. Here I am struggling to gain muscle and eating a ton and I still can't achieve that look LOL
  • lkpduckylkpducky Member Posts: 13,512 Member Member Posts: 13,512 Member
    zamphir66 wrote: »
    Muscle weighs more than fat. Yes- a pound of feathers takes up more space than a pound of lead, but a pound is a pound is a pound.

    I don't think that's a myth so much as people not communicating well; I can't imagine anyone really thinks a pound somehow does not equal a pound.

    Do people get angry at that "Muscle weighs more than fat" statement because:
    1) The person who gained weight and thought it was muscle couldn't have gained muscle under his or her conditions?
    or
    2) They think that the scale is all that matters? Some folks are afraid to lift weights for fear the scale will go up.
    I don't know why someone would get so angry at an error in phrasing alone.
    edited January 2017
  • duchessnicduchessnic Member Posts: 3 Member Member Posts: 3 Member
    Garcinia cambogia is bull. Don't buy it. Diet and exercise, People. Diet and exercise.
  • lemurcat12lemurcat12 Member Posts: 30,886 Member Member Posts: 30,886 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    It's also (as you note) correct and (IMO) helpful to say scale weight doesn't matter, look at how you look -- you could be smaller at a heavier weight if you change the composition of fat to muscle.

    Ack, that should say "change body composition, or the ratio of fat to muscle." I don't want to suggest that I buy into the dieting myth that one can turn fat into muscle!
  • tides57tides57 Member, Premium Posts: 27 Member Member, Premium Posts: 27 Member
    FeraFilia wrote: »

    And "turning fat into muscle."

    Oh yeah!!! I'd forgotten that one!

  • tides57tides57 Member, Premium Posts: 27 Member Member, Premium Posts: 27 Member
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    Muscle weighs more than fat. Yes- a pound of feathers takes up more space than a pound of lead, but a pound is a pound is a pound.
    Muscle does weigh more than fat. When comparing materials for density, you weigh the same amount of volume. So a liter of muscle would weigh more than a liter of fat. It makes NO sense to weigh a pound of some versus a pound of something to check it's weight.


    Okay, physics was never a strong point for me but does the communication/ comprehension problem stem from the word "weigh"? Volume is important, and I understand "density," but I haven't seen the word "mass" used in this debate. Does muscle have more mass than fat? (This is a genuine don't-know-the-answer question. I'm not debating. Can't. Don't know physics well enough.)

  • lkpduckylkpducky Member Posts: 13,512 Member Member Posts: 13,512 Member
    tides57 wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    Muscle weighs more than fat. Yes- a pound of feathers takes up more space than a pound of lead, but a pound is a pound is a pound.
    Muscle does weigh more than fat. When comparing materials for density, you weigh the same amount of volume. So a liter of muscle would weigh more than a liter of fat. It makes NO sense to weigh a pound of some versus a pound of something to check it's weight.


    Okay, physics was never a strong point for me but does the communication/ comprehension problem stem from the word "weigh"? Volume is important, and I understand "density," but I haven't seen the word "mass" used in this debate. Does muscle have more mass than fat? (This is a genuine don't-know-the-answer question. I'm not debating. Can't. Don't know physics well enough.)

    It's that the question becomes How much muscle (in what units) weighs more than how much fat (in units)? People see the word "weigh" and assume that means the "how much" is in pounds.
    The missing piece is volume.
    For example, a cubic foot of muscle and a cubic foot of fat look the same in size, but that piece of muscle will weigh more. Some folks might not necessarily automatically think of it that way when they hear only "muscle weighs more than fat."
  • tides57tides57 Member, Premium Posts: 27 Member Member, Premium Posts: 27 Member
    lkpducky wrote: »
    tides57 wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    Muscle weighs more than fat. Yes- a pound of feathers takes up more space than a pound of lead, but a pound is a pound is a pound.
    Muscle does weigh more than fat. When comparing materials for density, you weigh the same amount of volume. So a liter of muscle would weigh more than a liter of fat. It makes NO sense to weigh a pound of some versus a pound of something to check it's weight.


    Okay, physics was never a strong point for me but does the communication/ comprehension problem stem from the word "weigh"? Volume is important, and I understand "density," but I haven't seen the word "mass" used in this debate. Does muscle have more mass than fat? (This is a genuine don't-know-the-answer question. I'm not debating. Can't. Don't know physics well enough.)

    It's that the question becomes How much muscle (in what units) weighs more than how much fat (in units)? People see the word "weigh" and assume that means the "how much" is in pounds.
    The missing piece is volume.
    For example, a cubic foot of muscle and a cubic foot of fat look the same in size, but that piece of muscle will weigh more. Some folks might not necessarily automatically think of it that way when they hear only "muscle weighs more than fat."

    So when I tell someone that, pound for pound, muscle is going to take up less space in their jeans (ie they will be slimmer), I'm not leading them astray?
  • lkpduckylkpducky Member Posts: 13,512 Member Member Posts: 13,512 Member
    tides57 wrote: »
    So when I tell someone that, pound for pound, muscle is going to take up less space in their jeans (ie they will be slimmer), I'm not leading them astray?

    You'd be correct :)
  • zyxstzyxst Member Posts: 9,132 Member Member Posts: 9,132 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Another gem: You can't eat after <x hour at night> because then your body won't go into it's intermittent fasting mode overnight and that's not good for you. :rolleyes:

    Lol, I just read that thread.
  • amandapleighse2amandapleighse2 Member Posts: 30 Member Member Posts: 30 Member
    the idea that fruit and all carbs are bad.
  • MrsT1610MrsT1610 Member Posts: 24 Member Member Posts: 24 Member
    Actually got asked today about "starvation mode".

    If starvation mode caused you to gain weight then anorexia would have the opposite effect and we wouldn't need so many charity workers risking their own lives and health to deliver food aid to war torn countries.

    Just be glad you have the luxury of being able to decide for yourself how much you eat today!
This discussion has been closed.