Muscle does not weigh more than fat

bjohs

I'm really not a nitpicky person, but I felt compelled to write something about this subject. I'd be a very rich women if I had a dollar for every time I've read "muscle weighs more than fat" on this board. I would just like to share some information with everyone so they are better informed when offering support to someone who is truly looking for answers as to why they may not be losing weight.

One (1) pound of muscle equals one (1) pound of fat. No more. No Less.

However, one pound of muscle is a lot denser (more compact) than fat, where fat takes up much more volume than muscle to equal the same weight. What this means is that if someone has built enough muscle to replace the same weight in fat, they should have dropped a pant size or more. They would noticeably see and feel the results!

Alternatively, if someone has built enough muscle to replace the volume of fat (if they have stayed the same pant size), it would mean they would weigh much more than when they started. This is nearly impossible for anyone (especially women) unless you are pumping iron every single day of the week or taking some serious steroids.

I liked someone's comparison made in a thread I read earlier (sorry, I can't remember which one). Imagine muscle as a brick, then imagine the same amount of weight in cotton balls. Which one takes up more space?

If you are not losing weight, but are exercising and eating right, look in to possible reasons as to why you have plateaued at that weight. It may mean that you need to adjust your workout. Have you been doing the same workout for months? Maybe it's time to challenge your body again. It may mean you need to adjust your calories. Are you eating too few calories, or too much? Experiment with your meals until something brings results. It may mean that you are getting too much sodium and retaining water. Whatever the reason, I can almost guarantee that it isn't because you have replaced fat with muscle. It is just very unlikely.

I hope this doesn't come off as a rant. People who seek answers from others on this board should be given informed answers to really help them over the hump. I hope this bit of information helps.

kalelwifey

I neverrr thought of it this way and this would be the logical way to think of it.....so why do they say this on biggest loser tho?

Lleldiranne

Right ... so 1 cc of muscle (or 1 cubic inch, or whatever) does weigh more than 1 cc of fat. When comparing volume, muscle does weigh more because it is more dense (density is a function of mass per unit volume). That's where the quote originated.

But a lot of people do see to misunderstand it!

NikkisNewStart

I neverrr thought of it this way and this would be the logical way to think of it.....so why do they say this on biggest loser tho?

Because it makes good tv... ratings... sponsor $... never believe anything you hear on tv as they have other alternatives & it isn't your health!

bethvandenberg

Thank you! It drives me insane as well. It's like what weighs more a 1lb of feathers or 1lb of metal? Reallly????? LOL Thanks

LeanerBeef

Well said - thank you! :happy:

bjohs

Right ... so 1 cc of muscle (or 1 cubic inch, or whatever) does weigh more than 1 cc of fat. When comparing volume, muscle does weigh more because it is more dense (density is a function of mass per unit volume). That's where the quote originated.

But a lot of people do see to misunderstand it!

Exactly! I'm sure they mean well too and I don't want to discredit their concern or support for others. But they are not using it in the right context when commenting in these threads.

xHelloQuincyx

Thank you! It drives me insane as well. It's like what weighs more a 1lb of feathers or 1lb of metal? Reallly????? LOL Thanks

exactly what i thought when i read the title :]

arhzon

When people say, "muscle weighs more than fat", that is what they mean. A baseball-sized piece of muscle weighs more than a baseball-sized piece of fat. There is nothing wrong with the statement. If people read it as 1lb of muscle weighing more than 1lb of fat... sorry, that's an issue beyond not understanding the human body. There shouldn't be any need for the clarification.

CynthiaS

very nicely put

c2sky

Thank you. I always tactfully include this when I respond to a post that has that phrase.

Another myth is that a pound of muscle burns up to 50 calories a day. Even I used to believe that. There is controversy over this, but you should all read this.

PLEASE read this article everyone. It's from the American Council on Exercise. You can trust this.

http://www.acefitness.org/fitnessqanda/fitnessqanda_display.aspx?itemid=358

bjohs

When people say, "muscle weighs more than fat", that is what they mean. A baseball-sized piece of muscle weighs more than a baseball-sized piece of fat. There is nothing wrong with the statement. If people read it as 1lb of muscle weighing more than 1lb of fat... sorry, that's an issue beyond not understanding the human body. There shouldn't be any need for the clarification.

The problem is when they are using it to explain why someone has not lost weight. This is my real issue with the statement. We're not talking equal volumes here. If someone has not lost weight, others tend to quickly state that maybe they gained muscle to compensate for the fat loss. This is impossible unless they have also shrunk in size. That was my only reason for the thread. It was not to insult. I apologize if you took it that way.

fnm101

glad you posted this; it responded to one of my pet peeves. i should reiterate your point about weight gain, especially for women: if the scale goes up it is more likely that you have 1) actually gained weight; 2) you have retained water; or 3) need to visit the potty real bad (sorry!). gaining muscle takes quite a bit of time and effort and unless you are lifting weights pretty consistently, you muscle gain will rarely (if ever) outpace your fat loss. i saw this empirically as a former college rower who did TONS of cardio and weight training and got in the "Bod Pod" (a machine that measures body composition) with the nutritionist every few weeks to monitor my muscle/fat ratio.

dumb_blondes_rock

true, but iron is heavier than a feather....but one pound of feathers = one pound of iron....i get your logical reasoning behind it. which is how it really is....But i also understand what they are saying.

debdptg

Yes, one pound of muscle weighs the same as one pound of fat - but I think the saying "muscle weighs more than fat" implies that it is by volume. In which case, muscle weighs more than fat.

Just sayin'

eeeekie

I hate hearing it also...it's such a common knowledge myth that really doesn't help anyone in the long run. If you're telling someone not to worry that they are creating muscle and muscle weighs more than fat...you may just be prolonging their plateau or lack of being able to lose. Seeing as it's such a HUGELY common misunderstanding I think it's never gonna go away...

c2sky

When people say, "muscle weighs more than fat", that is what they mean. A baseball-sized piece of muscle weighs more than a baseball-sized piece of fat. There is nothing wrong with the statement. If people read it as 1lb of muscle weighing more than 1lb of fat... sorry, that's an issue beyond not understanding the human body. There shouldn't be any need for the clarification.

The problem is when they are using it to explain why someone has not lost weight. This is my real issue with the statement. We're not talking equal volumes here. If someone has not lost weight, others tend to quickly state that maybe they gained muscle to compensate for the fat loss. This is impossible unless they have also shrunk in size. That was my only reason for the thread. It was not to insult. I apologize if you took it that way.

Again, please read the article I posted above. It states how long it takes just to build 3 pounds of muscle, on average. I too am bothered by people who think they are just building muscle. Folks, pay attention to how your clothes fit. Measure.

c2sky

Here is the article.

http://www.acefitness.org/fitnessqanda/fitnessqanda_display.aspx?itemid=358

NeuroticVirgo

Bump! Thanks for posting this! I agree! There is so much behind that phrase that people don't understand.

Someone will post, "Ugh I've been working out really hard all week and gained 2 lbs"...and someone (or multiple people) will reply "Oh you've probably gained muscle".....without realizing you'd need more than 7 days to put on 2lbs of muscle (of course unless your like an Olympic body builder). So I see what your saying.

bjohs

Yes, one pound of muscle weighs the same as one pound of fat - but I think the saying "muscle weighs more than fat" implies that it is by volume. In which case, muscle weighs more than fat.

Just sayin'

I understand. However, I ask you, do you know how much dedication it would take in weight training to gain the same volume in muscle as fat? It is very unlikely that someone, who has stayed the same pant size, to replace fat with muscle. When the statement is used in these forums, it is used when "weight" not "volume" is being addressed. That was my only point.

NeuroticVirgo

Thank you. I always tactfully include this when I respond to a post that has that phrase.

Another myth is that a pound of muscle burns up to 50 calories a day. Even I used to believe that. There is controversy over this, but you should all read this.

PLEASE read this article everyone. It's from the American Council on Exercise. You can trust this.

http://www.acefitness.org/fitnessqanda/fitnessqanda_display.aspx?itemid=358

I've read this before. Its a good article.