muslce weighs more than fat....hear me out!

Options
24

Replies

  • TheGoktor
    TheGoktor Posts: 1,138 Member
    Options
    LOL! The bones are implied :)

    LOL, I thought they probably were but I thought that in the current climate of pedantry....:laugh:
  • AndrewTub
    AndrewTub Posts: 86 Member
    Options
    I'm confused :S So what's heavier feathers or muscle? Joking :P

    Yea the higher density of muscle is why I don't trust BMI calculations when there is more than an average amount of muscle
  • TheGoktor
    TheGoktor Posts: 1,138 Member
    Options
    I'm confused :S So what's heavier feathers or muscle? Joking :P

    Yea the higher density of muscle is why I don't trust BMI calculations when there is more than an average amount of muscle

    Agreed - the BMI calculator doesn't take into account muscle mass, so a 220lb athlete would be classed as obese!
  • bunchesonothing
    bunchesonothing Posts: 1,015 Member
    Options
    That phrase will grate on anyone with a scientific mind(it does lack accuracy without further explanation), unless they have the social understanding to look past it. Very few people truly misunderstand the difference in the relationship.
  • AndrewTub
    AndrewTub Posts: 86 Member
    Options
    Nice pic by the way ! (the muscle v fat thing)
  • kimmerroze
    kimmerroze Posts: 1,330 Member
    Options
    That phrase will grate on anyone with a scientific mind(it does lack accuracy without further explanation), unless they have the social understanding to look past it. Very few people truly misunderstand the difference in the relationship.

    You are so smart! :flowerforyou:
  • kylies1219
    kylies1219 Posts: 80 Member
    Options
    LOL! What a silly argument! WHO CARES!?! (I do agree that muscle weighs more than fat, obviously bc it's more dense) but again, who cares!? I don't think anyone could argue that they would rather be 130lbs all fat than 130lbs all muscle. Obviously anyone who is all muscle is going to be slimmer (and less jiggly) than anyone who is all fat even if the all-fat person weighed 115lbs, the all muscle person would still be slimmer, healthier and more fit and isn't that why we are all here? To be a healthier you?

    UGH! I care, because when I am working my @$$ off and the scales are staying the same, but my pants are falling off, I like the best explanation. Or how my friend that doesn't work out weighs less than me and I workout, weigh more, but we wear the same size clothes, same body type etc...

    My guess is that you have more muscle than your friend if your exactly the same but you weigh more. And just because I feel compelled to give motherly advice here I'm just going to say that you would be much happier with yourself and your body (not saying your un-happy just that you could be happier) if you didn't compare yourself to your friend and just focused on how you feel about yourself.
  • rainbowbuggy
    rainbowbuggy Posts: 320
    Options
    In other words, if I take the same amount in volume of fat and muscle and weigh them, they should weigh the same?

    It just seems like if muscle is more dense, then in this particular case, muscle would weigh more if the volume of the two were the same....

    No, by volume (e.g. a square inch of each), the muscle would be heavier. However, a pound of muscle weighs the same as a pound of fat but takes up less space (i.e. volume). Lookie....

    fatvmuscle.jpg

    I love this....all this other crap is confusing me and driving me nuts....thanks! There should be no argument after this posting!
  • PeachyKeene
    PeachyKeene Posts: 1,645 Member
    Options
    LOL! What a silly argument! WHO CARES!?! (I do agree that muscle weighs more than fat, obviously bc it's more dense) but again, who cares!? I don't think anyone could argue that they would rather be 130lbs all fat than 130lbs all muscle. Obviously anyone who is all muscle is going to be slimmer (and less jiggly) than anyone who is all fat even if the all-fat person weighed 115lbs, the all muscle person would still be slimmer, healthier and more fit and isn't that why we are all here? To be a healthier you?

    UGH! I care, because when I am working my @$$ off and the scales are staying the same, but my pants are falling off, I like the best explanation. Or how my friend that doesn't work out weighs less than me and I workout, weigh more, but we wear the same size clothes, same body type etc...

    My guess is that you have more muscle than your friend if your exactly the same but you weigh more. And just because I feel compelled to give motherly advice here I'm just going to say that you would be much happier with yourself and your body (not saying your un-happy just that you could be happier) if you didn't compare yourself to your friend and just focused on how you feel about yourself.
    Yeah you are probably right! I do focus on my friend just a little to much. It is frustrating at times to me, but unfortunately I am not happy with my body and won't be even after I accomplish my weight loss goal. Sorry a little sensitive about the subject because I do deal with it in my personal life every single day. She brags of course.
  • aj_rock
    aj_rock Posts: 390 Member
    Options
    How ironic. For a topic about muscle vs. fat density, I'm seeing a lot of 'dense' replies...
  • kylies1219
    kylies1219 Posts: 80 Member
    Options
    How ironic. For a topic about muscle vs. fat density, I'm seeing a lot of 'dense' replies...

    lol
  • kimmerroze
    kimmerroze Posts: 1,330 Member
    Options
    How ironic. For a topic about muscle vs. fat density, I'm seeing a lot of 'dense' replies...

    :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
    This is so totally awesome.
  • SavCal71
    SavCal71 Posts: 350 Member
    Options
    I think that what the OP is trying to say is that muscle weighs more than fat *by volume*, which is true.

    And this is the correct contextual meaning of the phrase "muscle weighs more than fat" because most of the time we're discussing fitness results --- such as how someone can be working out and losing inches but gaining weight.
  • End6ame
    End6ame Posts: 903
    Options
    Ok, I noticed a comment about "muscle does not weigh more than fat" and googled and found all the many articles on the subject. But the fact of the matter is that muscle DOES weigh more than fat. I realize a pound is a pound is a pound so a pound of anything is a pound. That is not the issue I am arguing.

    If you hold one feather in your hand, it does not weigh the same as if you were to hold a quarter. They are both small, there is only one of each, but you will feel the quarter in your hand and not feel the feather. Just because a pound of feathers and a pound of quarters is still a pound does not mean the feather and the quarter weigh the same. It would take a lot more feathers to make up a pound than quarters.

    So lets look at this from a more reasonable (in my opinion) perspective. If you were to take a square inch of muscle, and a square inch of fat, the muscle would weigh more and so....

    muscle weighs more than fat

    You're still incorrect. Muscle is DENSER than fat. Muscle does NOT weigh more than fat.

    Because muscle is more dense, the earth's gravitational force causes it to be heavier than the less dense fat. The more dense something is the more it weighs.

    Thank you!

    It seems people are forgetting the concepts of high school physics. Mass and weight are not the same thing. Muscle has more mass then fat and therefore weighs more on earth.
  • End6ame
    End6ame Posts: 903
    Options
    Ok, I noticed a comment about "muscle does not weigh more than fat" and googled and found all the many articles on the subject. But the fact of the matter is that muscle DOES weigh more than fat. I realize a pound is a pound is a pound so a pound of anything is a pound. That is not the issue I am arguing.

    If you hold one feather in your hand, it does not weigh the same as if you were to hold a quarter. They are both small, there is only one of each, but you will feel the quarter in your hand and not feel the feather. Just because a pound of feathers and a pound of quarters is still a pound does not mean the feather and the quarter weigh the same. It would take a lot more feathers to make up a pound than quarters.

    So lets look at this from a more reasonable (in my opinion) perspective. If you were to take a square inch of muscle, and a square inch of fat, the muscle would weigh more and so....

    muscle weighs more than fat

    You're still incorrect. Muscle is DENSER than fat. Muscle does NOT weigh more than fat.

    Because muscle is more dense, the earth's gravitational force causes it to be heavier than the less dense fat. The more dense something is the more it weighs.

    How are you measuring this without gravity? I believe all measurements are done on Earth.


    There are several ways to measure mass without gravity (notice I said mass not weight. Weight is dependent upon gravity mass is not.) Water displacement is typically the easiest to understand method but another method it to use a balance device designed for this purpose.

    The weight of an object is the force of gravity on the object and may be defined as the mass times the acceleration of gravity. Since the weight is a force, its unit of measure is technically the newton. Density is mass/volume.
  • MrBrown72
    MrBrown72 Posts: 407 Member
    Options


    You're still incorrect. Muscle is DENSER than fat. Muscle does NOT weigh more than fat.

    Because muscle is more dense, the earth's gravitational force causes it to be heavier than the less dense fat. The more dense something is the more it weighs.

    How are you measuring this without gravity? I believe all measurements are done on Earth.


    There are several ways to measure mass without gravity (notice I said mass not weight. Weight is dependent upon gravity mass is not.) Water displacement is typically the easiest to understand method but another method it to use a balance device designed for this purpose.

    The weight of an object is the force of gravity on the object and may be defined as the mass times the acceleration of gravity. Since the weight is a force, its unit of measure is technically the newton. Density is mass/volume.

    Unfortunately altering the question and applying a more convenient or rehearsed answer does not answer the question of how one caused an item to "weigh" more than another item of the same weight due to its density. However this is not a debate or logic site so I'll withdraw from the conversation.
  • helenium
    helenium Posts: 546 Member
    Options
    In the hour's time this slightly pointless argument over semantics has been discussed, you could have burned a good 7th of a pound of fat off in exercise! :laugh:
  • BerryH
    BerryH Posts: 4,698 Member
    Options
    The density argument just makes me think of, "I'm not fat, I'm fluffy!" as Garfield used to say :laugh:
  • SarahLovesCheesecake
    Options
    Do you know how stupid you look raising this *again* !!!!!!
  • bunchesonothing
    bunchesonothing Posts: 1,015 Member
    Options
    Do you know how stupid you look raising this *again* !!!!!!

    :noway: Seriously?