1 lb = 1 lb = 1 lb

1princesswarrior

Ok, I'm a geek so this drives me absolutely bonkers.

Muscle does not weigh more than fat.

Now, let me support my argument with a little chemistry lesson.

Mass is a physical property that typically reflects the quantity of matter within an object.

Volume is the quantity of 3-dimensional space occupied by a solid, liquid, or gas.

Muscle is more dense than fat, so the same mass of muscle takes up less volume than the same mass of fat. So, the only way that muscle weighs more than fat is when you are comparing the same volume of muscle to the same volume of fat (for example, 1 liter fat to 1 liter muscle), not by comparing the same mass of muscle to the same mass of fat.

See the thread below for a picture:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/279938-5-lbs-of-muscle-vs-5-lbs-of-fat-picture

Thank you for your patience with this geek.

diodelcibo

In other news.

judyde

I hear ya, it reminds me of that old riddle "what weighs more, a pound of feathers or a pound of lead" The same, they are both a pound!

But I think when people say this, they mean that muscle weighs for a given amount of volume, i.e., it weights more per square inch. If you replaced all your fat with muscle you would be SMALLER. I am definitely trying to get smaller!

Holly_Roman_Empire

I had a conversation about weight with my husband yesterday that went something like this:

Me: Yeah, 260 on an NFL linebacker is not the same as 260 on the average joe walking the street.
Husband: That's the way it goes when you have muscles.
Me: Yep, muscle is MORE DENSE than fat. Venus Williams weighs the same as me, but obviously I don't have her build or strength.
Husband: Plus, muscle weighs more than fat.
Me: [Facepalm]

ETA: I agree with the above poster. I think it's all semantics. If they said muscle weighs more than fat per cubic inch, then yeah, they would be right.

Superhero_Leah

This has been mentioned many times....many many times, and you're correct, lol muscle just makes you look so much better.

crackur

now this site has gone too far

its' like someone telling me the sky is not falling......I damn well know it is closer today than it was yesterday.

erickirb

Ok, I'm a geek so this drives me absolutely bonkers.

Muscle does not weigh more than fat.

Now, let me support my argument with a little chemistry lesson.

Mass is a physical property that typically reflects the quantity of matter within an object.

Volume is the quantity of 3-dimensional space occupied by a solid, liquid, or gas.

Muscle is more dense than fat, so the same mass of muscle takes up less volume than the same mass of fat. So, the only way that muscle weighs more than fat is when you are comparing the same volume of muscle to the same volume of fat (for example, 1 liter fat to 1 liter muscle), not by comparing the same mass of muscle to the same mass of fat.

See the thread below for a picture:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/279938-5-lbs-of-muscle-vs-5-lbs-of-fat-picture

Thank you for your patience with this geek.

But, when you are comparing 2 variable you should keep all else constant, that way you can determine what it is you are testing for. So if you take equal volumes of fat and muscle, muscle will weigh more. So when people say muscle weighs more than fat, they mean by volume, since volume is implied it does not have to be stated.

ETA: No one ever says 1 lb of muscle weighs more than 1 lb of fat, if they did, then you would be right

Taking your argument then I weigh as much as you because 1 lb of you weighs the same as 1 lb of me.
Or butter and carrots have the same caloric content, because 1 cal of carrots = 1 cal of butter, pretty poor logic to me.

elisa123gal

yeah... i know what people mean when they say.."muscle weighs more than fat." Just like a I know what they mean when they say "starvation mode" I don't take it all so literal.. but the points need to be well taken.

raige123

It's not that it weighs more ... it's always said wrong. 1 lb of fat takes up a lot more space then 1 lb of muscle, so having more fat lbs is very bad is the point I think ... but yes ... just always said wrong.

SailorKnightWing

So, the only way that muscle weighs more than fat is when you are comparing the same volume of muscle to the same volume of fat (for example, 1 liter fat to 1 liter muscle)

That's exactly what a lot of people who say it mean.

JenAndSome

I don't usually take it so hard when I hear someone say it because I know what they are meaning to say. It's the same thing as the loose/lose, your/you're, and to/too/two. You can let it get to you, or you can just interpret the meaning and move on with your life.

Beastmode454

now this site has gone too far

its' like someone telling me the sky is not falling......I damn well know it is closer today than it was yesterday.

Lmao.. this made almost spit out my water

InForBacon

But, when you are comparing 2 variable you should keep all else constant, that way you can determine what it is you are testing for. So if you take equal volumes of fat and muscle, muscle will weigh more. So when people say muscle weighs more than fat, they mean by volume, since volume is implied it does not have to be stated.

ETA: No one ever says 1 lb of muscle weighs more than 1 lb of fat, if they did, then you would be right

Taking your argument then I weigh as much as you because 1 lb of you weighs the same as 1 lb of me.
Or butter and carrots have the same caloric content, because 1 cal of carrots = 1 cal of butter, pretty poor logic to me.

What is this Science you speak of?

bigphatcat

Did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night?

UsedToBeHusky

Muscle is denser by volume. Therefore, 1 lb of muscle is smaller than 1 lb of fat. That is what is meant by muscle weighs more than fat. Muscle, in an equivalent-sized mass, is heavier than fat.

SerenaFisher

When someone says "i drank so much water it is coming out of my ears" or some impossible exageration do you also get anal with them? FYI do not take anal seriously.

ldrosophila

tell that to the moon

spade117

I had a conversation about weight with my husband yesterday that went something like this:

Me: Yeah, 260 on an NFL linebacker is not the same as 260 on the average joe walking the street.
Husband: That's the way it goes when you have muscles.
Me: Yep, muscle is MORE DENSE than fat. Venus Williams weighs the same as me, but obviously I don't have her build or strength.
Husband: Plus, muscle weighs more than fat.
Me: [Facepalm]

Divorce him.

bcattoes

Oh, this again. Everything in the world weighs 1 lb. Nothing weighs more than anything else. I'm a geek cuz I knows this. :yawn:

ryry_

I'll take things taken out of context for 200 Alex.

InForBacon

I'll take things taken out of context for 200 Alex.

I think she's calling me fat.

LauraMacNCheese

I'll take things taken out of context for 200 Alex.

Trechechus

1) There is a thing called the search button. This thread gets posted about once a week.

2) The phrase "muscle weighs more than fat" is referring to density, not mass. It's NOT saying "one pound of muscle is more than a pound of fat," which is obviously incorrect and we don't need you to tell us this. It IS saying, "the amount of muscle you can fit into a square inch is denser and therefore weighs more than the amount of fat you can fit into the same space."

3)

diannethegeek

I'm a geek too. But I learned the hard way that my friends don't like me anymore when I'm being overly pedantic.

ryry_

I'll take things taken out of context for 200 Alex.

cwolfman13

But, when you are comparing 2 variable you should keep all else constant, that way you can determine what it is you are testing for. So if you take equal volumes of fat and muscle, muscle will weigh more. So when people say muscle weighs more than fat, they mean by volume, since volume is implied it does not have to be stated.

I always thought that was basically implied...I don't know of anyone who actually thinks a Lb of one thing weighs more than a Lb of something else...that would be rather stupid.

ryry_

So when people call me "bro"...Are they my immediate blood siblings or not?

PikaKnight

But, when you are comparing 2 variable you should keep all else constant, that way you can determine what it is you are testing for. So if you take equal volumes of fat and muscle, muscle will weigh more. So when people say muscle weighs more than fat, they mean by volume, since volume is implied it does not have to be stated.

I always thought that was basically implied...I don't know of anyone who actually thinks a Lb of one thing weighs more than a Lb of something else...that would be rather stupid.

You'd be surprised...and it has been stated at least once on the MFP forum. Not kidding.

pastryari

But, when you are comparing 2 variable you should keep all else constant, that way you can determine what it is you are testing for. So if you take equal volumes of fat and muscle, muscle will weigh more. So when people say muscle weighs more than fat, they mean by volume, since volume is implied it does not have to be stated.

I always thought that was basically implied...I don't know of anyone who actually thinks a Lb of one thing weighs more than a Lb of something else...that would be rather stupid.

Lol c'mon, you've been posting on the MFP forums long enough to know better...

Contrarian

Wait...so, a pound of something that weighs a pound, weighs the same as a pound of something else that also weighs a pound?

What is this witchcraft?

PikaKnight

Wait...so, a pound of something that weighs a pound, weighs the same as a pound of something else that also weighs a pound?

What is this witchcraft?