Does muscle really "weigh more than fat"?

bjshields
bjshields Posts: 677 Member
edited September 27 in Fitness and Exercise
Okay, so I went to my doctor's office today (allergies, YUCK) and allowed them to weigh me. Yes, I regularly refuse to get weighed at the doctor's office. I figure I will just need depression medicine in addition to what I'm already being seen for, so what's the point?

At any rate, I weighed 10 lbs. less than the last time I let them weigh me, which I believe was around 2009. I told the nurse that I am doing ChaLEAN Extreme, and I am in the Push month, which is where you lift really heavy (for me) weights. She said, "Well, remember, muscle weighs more than fat, so it may not show up on the scale as much as you'd like it to with weight loss."

My question is -- is this total bulls*#% that we've all been telling ourselves? A pound is a pound, no? My goal weight is 135 (something I would only tell you people, because I figure we're all in the same boat); but now I'm wondering, is this realistic? Should I just go by purely size? I know I need to buy a tape measurer (because I can't find mine) and take some measurements. But really? Is this the truth?

Replies

  • baisleac
    baisleac Posts: 2,019 Member
    Yes a pound is a pound is a pound.

    However, muscle is more dense than fat. Cubic inch vs. cubic inch, muscle weighs more. Also, it burns more calories than fat does... so the more LBM you have, the more you can eat. :drinker:
  • epj78
    epj78 Posts: 643 Member
    Yes, a pound is a pound, but the mass of muscle is different then fat. So the amount of space a pound of muscle takes up is less than the space a pound of fat takes up......

    So what she is really saying is that your body fat is probably going down by more than the scale says as you gain muscle (which is what you want!).
  • ronda_gettinghealthy
    ronda_gettinghealthy Posts: 777 Member
    by volume muscle weighs more than fat- just like lead weighs more than a feather, a pound of lead is a small ball and a pound of feathers is a large sack. Same concept. If you have 150 pounds of muscle you are going to be smaller in size than if you are 150 pounds of fat. does that help???
  • spammyanna
    spammyanna Posts: 871 Member
    Muscle is DENSER than fat. You are right, a pound is a pound.
  • ethompso0105
    ethompso0105 Posts: 418 Member
    A pound is a pound, but muscle takes up less space than fat. Sooo...when you lose fat and gain muscle, you may way the same, but you'll be smaller. :) I regularly take my measurements since my scale doesn't seem to want to budge. I'm thrilled to see smaller inches, even though the pounds aren't dropping. I recommend trying the same! :)
  • jeffrodgers1
    jeffrodgers1 Posts: 991 Member
    One pound of fat weighs the same as one pound of muscle.

    A pound is a pound is a unit of weight.

    Fat has a higher volume per pound than muscle. It occupies more space per pound than muscle.

    Your nurse is misguided, but meant well.
  • epj78
    epj78 Posts: 643 Member
    Yes a pound is a pound is a pound.

    However, muscle is more dense than fat. Cubic inch vs. cubic inch, muscle weighs more. Also, it burns more calories than fat does... so the more LBM you have, the more you can eat. :drinker:

    True, for each pound of more of muscle mass you have, you burn 50 more calories a day!
  • Muscle is more dense than fat. Also, 135 is not unrealistic. As long as you set your mind to it, you will acheive it! Also you should take measurements, it's a great way to keep track of your progress because a scale doesn't take into account inches lost (:
  • NoAdditives
    NoAdditives Posts: 4,251 Member
    Yes, a pound is a pound. Muscle is denser and has less mass than fat, but that is not reflected in weight.

    Also, if you're eating at a calorie deficit you are NOT gaining new muscle tissue!!
  • Terry5902
    Terry5902 Posts: 7
    Yes I have been told that muscle weights more than fat from the nurse that gives me my allergy shots eery two weeks.
  • spicegeek
    spicegeek Posts: 325 Member
    1lb of fat weights the same as 1lb of muscle - but 1lb of muscle takes up less space

    However - it is INCREDIBLY hard to gain muscle - ask any professional drug free bodybuilder - if they gain .5 - 1ln of muscle in a month they are thrilled and they eat specifically to support that goal and lift every day.

    In addition the body on a diet trys to maintain it`s fat stores so will try and break down muscle for fuel and save the fat so if you are doing cardio and dieting and you can keep your muscle mass constant you are doing very well -

    In short - bull **** - they only reason that you may not see the result on the scale inititally is water retention or you simply are not losing weight
  • ChristieisReady
    ChristieisReady Posts: 708 Member
    My goal weight is 135 (something I would only tell you people, because I figure we're all in the same boat); but now I'm wondering, is this realistic? Should I just go by purely size?

    From looking at your picture, it looksl ike 135 would be achievable for you, but how tall are you? Have you been 135 before?

    Also, why are we all so caught up in weight? I don't know about you, but I stay off scales around other people. I have a goal weight on here, purely because that's how it's tracked, but if I hit a size 10, I'm done. 10 pounds under or 20 pounds over, that's my goal. Seems like that sohuld be the standard for vanity loss ,and some sort of achievement-related goal for fitness. (Sorry I hijacked your post :flowerforyou: )
  • EDesq
    EDesq Posts: 1,527 Member
    Yes a pound is a pound is a pound.

    However, muscle is more dense than fat. Cubic inch vs. cubic inch, muscle weighs more. Also, it burns more calories than fat does... so the more LBM you have, the more you can eat. :drinker:

    I "think" I agree...but I would put it like this. A pound IS a pound; fat has more volume than muscle, thus taking up more cubic capacity than muscle. Muscle is more dense, thus a cubic inch of fat is larger in space than muscle. Basically, fat looks and takes up more space than the same weight of muscle. Example: If you know something about football - Refrigerator Perry who played for Chicago some years ago weighed about 300 lbs and 6'2" vs. Arnold Schwarzenegger who was about 6'2" and 300 when he won Mr. Olympia. Lets just say "Fridge" got his name for a reason, his 300 was mostly fat.

    Man, I must be bored, LOL!
  • bjshields
    bjshields Posts: 677 Member
    Thanks, all I am 5'5" and I was 138 when I was a size 7/8. Size 7/8 is really my *true* goal. It would not matter to me if I weighed what I weigh now, as long as I can fit into size 7/8's. I was probably 15 lbs. lighter than what I am now in the picture I posted on MFP.

    Now I'm curious to find out visually what a pound of muscle versus a pound of fat looks like. If I can find it online, I'll post it back here. Thanks!:smile:
  • bjshields
    bjshields Posts: 677 Member
    Yay, I found it! Here's the link for anybody who wants to see what 5 lbs. of fat looks like next to 5 lbs. of muscle. And it's pretty dramatic. Link: http://www.briansfatburningblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/fat-vs-muscle.jpg
This discussion has been closed.