Muscle DOES Weigh More Than Fat

liftingbro

In my entirely untechnical world view, if I say that something weighs more than something else, what I mean is that if I took the same cubic volume of the two things (say, lead and feathers), one would weigh more than the other.

This is apparently the commonsense the isn't so common around here.

NeedANewFocus

Uh .... no.

A pound of muscle and a pound of fat both weigh a pound. No more, no less.

A pound is a pound whether it's a pound of rock or a pound of marshmallows..

:flowerforyou:

If this is the case...then I'd rather be the pound of rock! :happy:

byukid

In my entirely untechnical world view, if I say that something weighs more than something else, what I mean is that if I took the same cubic volume of the two things (say, lead and feathers), one would weigh more than the other.

This is apparently the commonsense the isn't so common around here.

Still, it's an ambiguous statement to say that muscle weighs more than fat. To say it's more dense is concise, precise, and unambiguous.

Qarol

If your declaration was, simply, that "For equal volumes of substance, muscle would weight more than fat." Then it would be true and logical. Your failure to stipulate the condition is the crux of this whole argument.

Understood, however I did stipulate the conditions prior to performing the calculations and also emphasized that this type of assumption should be made, because saying that two constants are the same, is a given.

He did stipulate. But not right away. Ergo, a pound is a pound. With those same calculations, if you hold weight as your constant (with volume as the variable), then muscle and fat weigh the same.

If muscle "weighs" 150, according to your calculations, if fat were to also weigh 150, then volume would be 2.5. Which is greater than 2.

The title of the post is misleading. The title would better read, imo, "Muscle weighs more than fat given the same volume."

Then I could just say, Duh! So for the poor girl who said that a pound of rocks weighs the same as a pound of marshmallows and got berated for not reading the post...a truckload of rocks may not weigh the same as a truckload of marshmallows.

End6ame

In my entirely untechnical world view, if I say that something weighs more than something else, what I mean is that if I took the same cubic volume of the two things (say, lead and feathers), one would weigh more than the other.

This is apparently the commonsense the isn't so common around here.

Still, it's an ambiguous statement to say that muscle weighs more than fat. To say it's more dense is concise, precise, and unambiguous.

That may be, how er it is an obvious statement to say that a pound of fat weighs the same as a pound of muscle.

angiecakes82

1 lb of fat weighs the same as 1 lb of muscle....its simple mathematics people.

BUT muscle is more dense than fat

byukid

In my entirely untechnical world view, if I say that something weighs more than something else, what I mean is that if I took the same cubic volume of the two things (say, lead and feathers), one would weigh more than the other.

This is apparently the commonsense the isn't so common around here.

Still, it's an ambiguous statement to say that muscle weighs more than fat. To say it's more dense is concise, precise, and unambiguous.

That may be, how er it is an obvious statement to say that a pound of fat weighs the same as a pound of muscle.

Which is why saying that muscle weighs more can cause some to double take.

Qarol

That may be, how er it is an obvious statement to say that a pound of fat weighs the same as a pound of muscle.

Finally. A pound of muscle does indeed weigh the same as a pound of fat. They'll just have different volumes. So if your body dimensions stay the same, yet you lose a lot of fat and replace with a lot of muscle (just as an example), you may, in fact, weigh more in actual pounds.

We took the long road to get here, but good argument.

End6ame

That may be, how er it is an obvious statement to say that a pound of fat weighs the same as a pound of muscle.

Finally. A pound of muscle does indeed weigh the same as a pound of fat. They'll just have different volumes. So if your body dimensions stay the same, yet you lose a lot of fat and replace with a lot of muscle (just as an example), you may, in fact, weigh more in actual pounds.

We took the long road to get here, but good argument.

I never said that was not the case.

Maggie_Pie1

Ok, so I am moving this from my blog to the forums because I have already seen a metric *kitten* load of inaccurate posts/comments on the topic.

There seems to be a lot of confusion on this topic thought, and I don’t understand why. Maybe it is just because of how my thought process works, but I don’t understand how people cannot see that muscle does, in fact, weigh more than fat. So I am going to make a naive attempt at trying to settle this debate once and for all (lol) using simple math and the fundamentals of physics. The results are pretty difficult to argue with and will hopefully give the “lb is a lb” group of people a new perspective on the topic at hand.

So, does muscle weight more than fat? The answer is yes, and here is why.

Weight is a measure of force (so technically it is measured in Newtons), specifically the force gravity has on an object. Whereas, mass is a measure of how much matter an object has (measured in mg, g, kg, etc…). Mass is constant, where as weight is variable; granted we are all on Earth so it should remain relatively constant. I think we can agree on all of this, or at least I hope so, because it is pretty fundamental to the laws of physics.

Furthermore, in order to compare two objects, you need to have both a constant and a variable, otherwise there is really no point in comparing them. Saying that 1lb of fat weighs the same as 1lb of muscle is a given because you are only comparing the two constants and ignoring the variable. That is no different than me saying that 100 calories of butter is the same as 100 calories of lettuce, however the quantities, or volume, of both will obviously differ. So when someone says that muscle weighs more or has more mass than fat it should be assumed that we are not referring to the two obvious constants alone, but are referring to their weights as a variable with respect to a constant volume.

Additionally, It is impossible to say that muscle weighs the same as fat and is, at the same time, denser than fat. When you refer to density you are, by definition, referring to both mass and volume simultaneously because both mass and volume are required to find density. So if Weight = Mass x Gravity and Density = Mass/Volume then we can combine these two equations into one by saying that Weight = (Density x Volume) x Gravity. This equation perfectly illustrates how all three components account for the weight of any given object. Gravity is constant because we are all on Earth, so if we also hold volume constant, and we all agree that muscle is denser than fat, then the outcome of the equation can only result in muscle having a greater weight than fat.

You can even use completely arbitrary numbers to prove this, without the need for specific units or measurements. Let’s say that gravity is represented by the number 5 and volume is represented by the number 2. Since we are holding these to values constant they will be the same for both muscle and fat. We will then give fat a density of 12 and muscle a density of 15. Here it goes:

• Muscle: (15 x 2) x 5 = 150
• Fat: (12 x 2) x 5 = 120

Now, unless we are going to argue about which number is higher, that pretty much settles it. When thinking in terms of this equation there should no longer be any question or debate on the matter. Muscle is heavier, period.

I think I love you

MzPix

In my entirely untechnical world view, if I say that something weighs more than something else, what I mean is that if I took the same cubic volume of the two things (say, lead and feathers), one would weigh more than the other.

^^^This.

If muscle doesn't weigh more than fat, than really...
wouldn't that mean that lead doesn't weigh more than feathers?
And that adults don't weigh more than babies?
does ANYTHING weigh more than ANYTHING ELSE in the world?

If muscle and fat weigh the same amount (as the "a pound is a pound" people would like to proclaim) than everything weighs the same amount as everything else???

I need those folks to help me move my furniture. I'll carry the pillows and they can carry the oak desk that "weighs the same amount."

ilookthetype

You just went all nerdy/geeky on the forums and I swooned a little bit. Win.

KayteeBear

well done..this reminds me of the physics i took my first year of uni! ughh!

Zomg - what Mickey Mouse degree was that? This stuff first turns up for 11year olds in the UK!

This reminds me of high school... in either Chemistry or Physics our teacher asked a question and nobody answered (partly our of fear of being yelled at for being wrong or him making us look stupid lol) and he yelled at us "It's not Mickey Mouse!!" lol

Bodhizephyr

OMG where did all these worms come from?

Oh that can over there.

abzbargs

Perhaps it helps to say that this is why I weigh about the same as before but my clothes are loose; through exercise (and nutrition) I have built muscle and am smaller as a result.

THIS SIMPLIFIES IT. And later the lady who says se weighs the same as years ago but due to healthy living is several sizes smaller.

Qarol

That may be, how er it is an obvious statement to say that a pound of fat weighs the same as a pound of muscle.

A pound of muscle does indeed weigh the same as a pound of fat.

I never said that was not the case.
[/quote]
But, imo, your post title implied such.

Drunkadelic

I don't really understand why this post is necessary. Pretty much everyone understands that, in equal volumes, muscle weighs more than fat. And just as many people know that 1lb of muscle weighs the same as 1lb of fat, although the volume of fat will be greater.

World renowned math/physics discovery everyone!!! Please.

chrissyh

Let it die!

End6ame

That may be, how er it is an obvious statement to say that a pound of fat weighs the same as a pound of muscle.

A pound of muscle does indeed weigh the same as a pound of fat.

I never said that was not the case.

But, imo, your post title implied such.

Uh.. no it didn’t. I even address it in my post by saying the following;

“Saying that 1lb of fat weighs the same as 1lb of muscle is a given…”

I am fine with and enjoy intellectual disagreement, but don’t try and say that I am saying or implying something that blatantly isn’t the case.

ddanielle1407

Ok..I am a trainer and have three degrees in the medical field as well as have worked in the medical field for 13 years and this discussion is a little more complex. First, it is not logical to say "muscle weighs more than fat" because whose muscle are you talking about? A baby (different mass), a young adult (different mass), or an elderly woman whose muscles are going through atrophy (again different mass). When dealing with this question, your normal child-like human being can use that saying, but as an educated human being, we do not use this term. Muscle has more density than adipose tissue and for good reason. Muscle is located superior to bone and is made for strength and support. When a person works out, they are tearing the muscle fibers and like scar tissue, muscle fiber grows back a little thicker each time. Adipose tissue or the incorrect term, fat is made to cover the vital organs in the body for protection, is in the subcutaneous layer of the skin, which is superior to muscle. Carbohydrates are broken down and then stored in the body as glucose when to much is consumed. Hormones such estrogen and progesterone are produced in the reproductive system and as women get older, their bodies slow down on its' breakdown in the body and the excess is stored in the area closest to the reproductive organs, which is the stomach. When I work out, I do about an hour and a half of intense sprint-like cardio switching from the full stairs that move to the elliptical, to the bike, to the stairmaster. After, I continue with non-stop super sets with a 30 second break in between. I work out harder then most guys and never walk out and look like I didn't pee my pants. We do not use that expression because they are two completely different elements made up of different densities that can not be separated from the body (unless dead) and compared. Second who are we comparing? A baby is 90% water and bone has not formed, hence the reason they come out folded up like a suit case and need I say that they do not have a lot of muscle...Second, what people use that term for is when they get on the scale the day after the gym and weigh 3lbs more. "Oh, that is because muscle weighs more than fat"???What the F* are you talking about? Muscle worked out, fat did not. Lactic acid is released (fluids) when the muscle is torn and is the burning you feel the next day from being sore and also the more water that you drink, the more osmosis occurs in the body and moves the Na+Cl- from the inside of the body's cells to the outside, hence why women bloat and why weighing more occurs. Second, when you are working out your muscles, you are not working out adipose tissue. We are trying to keep what our body needs and lose the rest. When using these terms in health care, it does not make sense and not logical. The basic equation for mass=density X volume. This is the basic and most simplest formulas. The problem is that adipose and fat are different in its' molecular structure by the density (or how compact its' molecules are put together) not mass. The mass that you plug in is like finding the mass from an element in the periodic table and is needed to find out its' density. Density=mass/volume....Please explain to me how you would compare the bicep brachii (2 muscles in the are) weight from the adipose tissue in the arms? You can not! It is f-in not possible. That is like saying "Rocks weigh more than feathers"! It only ****ing matters when you are and can compare the two...Say for a feather pillow....You definitely want less rocks in the feather pillow.Wow...what I love the most is that in so many blogs and posts all that is ever mentioned is the fact that they do...they dont...its density....it is mass... I find it funny that no one ever bothered to ask What type of muscle"? Cardiac muscle fibers are different from skeletal muscle fibers as well as the contraction and resistance time and the types of twitch (type 1, type2). And Guess what? Their densities are different as well as the type of contraction and resistance rate of each....Then we get into nuerons, myoglobin, axons...THE POINT IS..that it goes way beyond that question and is not logical. It does not matter if people know what they mean, but say it different...That is the problem with the world...people are ignorant and argue with out making relevant points. When someone says, "That weighs more than this" it means that those two things were compared to each other's mass in weight at some point. Their is not a specific mass that muscle weighs and the same goes for adipose. Say what you mean and mean what you say.