Muscle vs. Fat
Options
Replies
-
Because it was hilarious...lolI don't know about you, but its really irritating when someone posts about how irritating it is that muscle weighs more than fat.
Thank you for the PSA though
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNlSv4SUYWo
Then why reply?0 -
I don't know about you guys but it's really irritating when I hear condescending comments assuming that everyone else is stupid and doesn't get science, when actually they just have no reading comprehension . Muscle weighs more than fat by volume! It's physics!
1 CUBE of muscle is heavier than 1 CUBE of fat...it's just that people with sticks up their bottoms like to try and belittle people by suggesting they mean pound for pound, when it's obviously volume they are talking about. Muscle DOES weigh more than fat, by volume. How come people don't get that?0 -
This is all BS. I was asked, just this morning, whether a pound of feathers weighed less than a pound of lead. I answered, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the pound of lead was heavier. Everyone knows this, and you'd be stupid to suggest otherwise. So, as muscle is denser--as is lead to feathers--than fat, one must deduce that, in fact, a pound of muscle weighs significantly more than a pound of fat...
Tragically, I don't think you're being sarcastic...
A pound of feathers and a pound of lead both weigh a pound. Don't think to hard about it (please).
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:0 -
Jeebus, glad I'm not the only one. Hope he was kidding.This is all BS. I was asked, just this morning, whether a pound of feathers weighed less than a pound of lead. I answered, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the pound of lead was heavier. Everyone knows this, and you'd be stupid to suggest otherwise. So, as muscle is denser--as is lead to feathers--than fat, one must deduce that, in fact, a pound of muscle weighs significantly more than a pound of fat...
I hope you posted this on purpose in the guise of sarcasm....Otherwise, I feel that our educational system is failing us!0 -
I don't know about you guys but it's really irritating when I hear condescending comments assuming that everyone else is stupid and doesn't get science, when actually they just have no reading comprehension . Muscle weighs more than fat by volume! It's physics!
1 CUBE of muscle is heavier than 1 CUBE of fat...it's just that people with sticks up their bottoms like to try and belittle people by suggesting they mean pound for pound, when it's obviously volume they are talking about. Muscle DOES weigh more than fat, by volume. How come people don't get that?
people do get it, but they want to be controversial. we all know what it means when someone says "muscle weighs more than fat". is it technically inaccurate, yes. saying muscle is denser than fat would be better, but peole have been saying "weighs" for so long there's no use changing it. everyone knows what a person means when they say it but some people need to make an arguement out of everything.0 -
I don't know about you guys but it's really irritating when I hear condescending comments assuming that everyone else is stupid and doesn't get science, when actually they just have no reading comprehension . Muscle weighs more than fat by volume! It's physics!
1 CUBE of muscle is heavier than 1 CUBE of fat...it's just that people with sticks up their bottoms like to try and belittle people by suggesting they mean pound for pound, when it's obviously volume they are talking about. Muscle DOES weigh more than fat, by volume. How come people don't get that?
people do get it, but they want to be controversial. we all know what it means when someone says "muscle weighs more than fat". is it technically inaccurate, yes. saying muscle is denser than fat would be better, but peole have been saying "weighs" for so long there's no use changing it. everyone knows what a person means when they say it but some people need to make an arguement out of everything.
I know. And technically muscle does weigh more than fat...they just forget to qualify it with "by volume". And when talking weight loss, of course people refer to volume! They don't mean "you look lighter" when they say you'be lost weight, they mean "you look smaller". Anyone with half a brain doesn't need the qualifier of "by volume" because it's obvious what it means.
It just makes the OP look stupid, because it makes them seem like they can't understand what people say in context, they need it drawn out detailed explanation with all the specifics perfect.0 -
I don't know about you guys but it's really irritating when I hear condescending comments assuming that everyone else is stupid and doesn't get science, when actually they just have no reading comprehension . Muscle weighs more than fat by volume! It's physics!
1 CUBE of muscle is heavier than 1 CUBE of fat...it's just that people with sticks up their bottoms like to try and belittle people by suggesting they mean pound for pound, when it's obviously volume they are talking about. Muscle DOES weigh more than fat, by volume. How come people don't get that?
people do get it, but they want to be controversial. we all know what it means when someone says "muscle weighs more than fat". is it technically inaccurate, yes. saying muscle is denser than fat would be better, but peole have been saying "weighs" for so long there's no use changing it. everyone knows what a person means when they say it but some people need to make an arguement out of everything.
I know. And technically muscle does weigh more than fat...they just forget to qualify it with "by volume". And when talking weight loss, of course people refer to volume! They don't mean "you look lighter" when they say you'be lost weight, they mean "you look smaller". Anyone with half a brain doesn't need the qualifier of "by volume" because it's obvious what it means.
It just makes the OP look stupid, because it makes them seem like they can't understand what people say in context, they need it drawn out detailed explanation with all the specifics perfect.
as a math teacher it bothers me a little when i hear muscle weighs more...but i know what people mean so why argue about it over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.0 -
When people say muscle weighs more than fat, the fact that equal volume is being referred to is obvious and doesn't need to be specified. What else COULD it be? By the OP's statement, nothing can weigh more than anything else because a pound = a pound.
A: Which weighs more, lead or feathers?
B: Neither, a pound of lead weighs the same as a pound of feathers.
A: OK, then you won't mind if I carry the bucket of feathers and you carry the bucket of lead.0 -
I think the same people saying this are the annoying ****heads who, when you tell them you are boiling would contradict you by taking your sentence literally.0
-
I'm a pretty smart person who's grammar is atrocious and uses the wrong words. Friends and intelligent people I talk to fill in the gaps, make the assumptions I'm making the smart point and know I don't care how I do it.
People who pull me up on this think they are dead smart, but are always the same boring d ick heads that have nothing valuable going on in their heads
The same people whining on about why this carb isn't that carb and that sugar isn't the other instead of just getting on with losing their 200lb
They don't impress me. I know the point people are making when they say Brad Pitt has a BMI of 28 and muscle weighs more than fat0 -
In this era everyone wants to be a perfect body with great muscles.0
-
When people say muscle weighs more than fat, the fact that equal volume is being referred to is obvious and doesn't need to be specified. What else COULD it be? By the OP's statement, nothing can weigh more than anything else because a pound = a pound.
This is an excellent point. Given that 1 pound always equals 1 pound, it's safe to assume that someone saying X weighs more than Y MUST be talking about volume. Context is one of the most powerful elements of human communication and it saves us from having to specify every last detail in a sentence in order for it to make sense.
Arguing the toss about weight is either because you genuinely think everyone is too stupid to understand the basics of mass and weight that we all learned in junior school or because you think we should all specify every little detail of what we say and leave nothing to context or to known and well-established assumptions. Either way, you are an obnoxious little cretin0 -
I like it when people post holier than thou threads and it backfires on them.0
-
I think the same people saying this are the annoying ****heads who, when you tell them you are boiling would contradict you by taking your sentence literally.
Chris, are you ok?
Want to address someone specifically?
It'd be nice if you could stop calling people idiots and ****heads. Obviously people are allowed to disagree...
Maybe they just aren't as smart as you!0 -
I think the same people saying this are the annoying ****heads who, when you tell them you are boiling would contradict you by taking your sentence literally.
Chris, are you ok?
Want to address someone specifically?
It'd be nice if you could stop calling people idiots and ****heads. Obviously people are allowed to disagree...
Maybe they just aren't as smart as you!
Fine thanks
No, too many to name
Some people are though. There's a difference between having differing opinions, and making statements purposefully to annoy others.
They probably aren't, you're correct.0 -
I don't know about you guys but it's really irritating when I hear "muscle weighs more than fat". Muscle and fat weigh the same...it's weight!
5 POUNDS of muscle is the same as 5 POUNDS of fat...it's just that muscle is less dense and takes up less room. How come people don't get that?
and a square metre of muscle weighs more than a square metre of fat.........go figure. don't know about you guys but it really irritates me when people don't understand a simple concept and realise that the two statements are both right. How come people don't get that?0 -
This is all BS. I was asked, just this morning, whether a pound of feathers weighed less than a pound of lead. I answered, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the pound of lead was heavier. Everyone knows this, and you'd be stupid to suggest otherwise. So, as muscle is denser--as is lead to feathers--than fat, one must deduce that, in fact, a pound of muscle weighs significantly more than a pound of fat...
Tragically, I don't think you're being sarcastic...
A pound of feathers and a pound of lead both weigh a pound. Don't think to hard about it (please).
Probably should have inserted a winkey smiley face after my post... Sarcasm does not translate well without tone of voice and body language! Also; YAY ME FOR ESSENTIALLY BUMPING A MONTH DEAD TOPIC!!!!!!! (Not sarcasm, genuinely proud of myself)0 -
*golf clap*0
-
golf clap appreciated. And hilarious, as golf was my response to this other thread!
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/700435-game-stuff-that-sounds-dirty-but-it-really-not?page=30
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions