Muscle weighs more than fat (?!!!)

This topic comes up often.

Of all the myths and misunderstandings about exercise and weight loss , this is the daftest and most stupid of all!

One pound of muscle = one pound of fat.
One kilogram of muscle = one kilogram of fat.

The amateur (professionally unqualified and self-proclaimed) 'experts' then say.....
"Yes, but muscle is denser than..... fat by volume". True.

But since when do bathroom scales measure humans by 'density' and 'volume'?

They don't.

So the statement that "muscle weighs more than fat" is irrelevant and ridiculously stupid.
Unfortunately, it's established in the brain of society.

The truth originally comes from a laboratory-based method of assessing body composition called 'hydrostatic weighing'.
A person to be assessed would be immersed in a water tank, suspended in a cradle' and then weighed. The displacement of water would also be assessed. Scientific calculations would then determine the person's body composition.

So. if two people of equal weight (on bathroom scales) were assessed by this method, the person with greater muscle mass would appear to weigh more.....under water..... than the person with a higher proportion of body fat. (Body fat means greater buoyancy).

NOTE: This isn't 'racist'.... it's a simple matter of human physiology.

Muscle does not 'weigh more' than fat.
1lb of muscle weighs the same as 1lb of fat..... on the scales that we use.

If you're exercising in the gym and not losing 'weight'..... then something else isn't working.
It's NOT because 'muscle weighs more than fat'.....it doesn't.

Source of this post?.... I''m a professionally qualified exercise physiologist and weight management consultant, and doing this as a full-time profession.

However, if you'd rather believe 'experts' at your local gym...... carry on doing what you've always done.... and you continue getting what you've always got (or not!).

PS..... Sadly, many 'qualified' gym instructors still tell people that 'muscle weighs more than fat'....... an indication of societal brainwashing..... zzzzzzzzzzzz
«134567

Replies

  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    I agree completely.

    If i hear one more person say "Well, I've been dieting and exercising but im not losing weight. I must be gaining muscle."

    No. just.... no.
  • jilliew
    jilliew Posts: 255 Member
    Wrong. Muscle DOES weigh more than fat. 1 cubic inch of muscle WEIGHS MORE than 1 cubic inch of fat. Period.
  • DamnImASexyBitch
    DamnImASexyBitch Posts: 740 Member
    Wrong. Muscle DOES weigh more than fat. 1 cubic inch of muscle WEIGHS MORE than 1 cubic inch of fat. Period.

    You don't weigh yourself by cubic inches.
  • ChangingAmanda
    ChangingAmanda Posts: 486 Member
    Wrong. Muscle DOES weigh more than fat. 1 cubic inch of muscle WEIGHS MORE than 1 cubic inch of fat. Period.


    A pound of muscle weighs the same as a pound of fat which weighs the same as a pound of feathers and all those weigh the same as a pound of gold. However, they all have different densities so those four substances will take up much different volumes of space.
  • msliu7911
    msliu7911 Posts: 638 Member
    Could it just be that the more muscle you build, the more water you are retaining? Which might lead to people thinking that they are "gaining weight because gaining muscle"?
  • BlueObsidian
    BlueObsidian Posts: 297 Member
    Wrong. Muscle DOES weigh more than fat. 1 cubic inch of muscle WEIGHS MORE than 1 cubic inch of fat. Period.

    You don't weigh yourself by cubic inches.

    You don't see the number on the scale when you look in the mirror.
  • Ultragirl2374
    Ultragirl2374 Posts: 390 Member
    But "fat" takes up more space. If you are composed by a high% of fat you will be BIGGER than a person who weighs the same as you that is composed of more muscle. Therefore, the fact that fat is less dense than muscle is an issue if you are trying to lose inches.
  • DamnImASexyBitch
    DamnImASexyBitch Posts: 740 Member
    Wrong. Muscle DOES weigh more than fat. 1 cubic inch of muscle WEIGHS MORE than 1 cubic inch of fat. Period.


    A pound of muscle weighs the same as a pound of fat which weighs the same as a pound of feathers and all those weigh the same as a pound of gold. However, they all have different densities so those four substances will take up much different volumes of space.

    Exactly!
  • DamnImASexyBitch
    DamnImASexyBitch Posts: 740 Member
    Wrong. Muscle DOES weigh more than fat. 1 cubic inch of muscle WEIGHS MORE than 1 cubic inch of fat. Period.

    You don't weigh yourself by cubic inches.

    You don't see the number on the scale when you look in the mirror.

    Sure you do... if you're 5'2'' and 200lbs you see every bit of that fat vs "muscle".
  • islandnutshel
    islandnutshel Posts: 1,143 Member
    If I had to put on 10 pounds I would rather it be muscle. Fat would look different. The scales have nothing to do with my jeans.
  • Doctorpurple
    Doctorpurple Posts: 507 Member
    It is true that muscle weighs the same as fat. One lb of muscle weighs the same as one lb of fat. The idea or reasoning behind people saying that maybe you are gaining muscle when you are working out but not losing weight is not a complete fallacy. People at relatively healthy weights doing p90x or other types of high intensity exercises gain muscle mass due to muscle hypertrophy and they can be burning fat at the same time. The end result is a change body composition where a person has a lower body fat percentage, leaner figure (due to muscle being more dense and taking less volume with the same weight) while maintaining the same weight.

    Source of post: I'm a medical student with training in nutrition, graduated with BS in physiology with teaching experience in exercise physiology, kinesiology and physical training.
  • pamwhite712
    pamwhite712 Posts: 193 Member
    Two people weigh 150 pounds. One has a much higher body fat percentage than the other. The one with the higher body fat percentage will look fatter than the other one. Is that right?
  • calihoya
    calihoya Posts: 80 Member
    I think the main point that is being missed is what is implied by the phrase "muscle weighs more than fat." Technically, yes, muscle weighs more than fat by volume. So, if you're weight training and lose 1 cubic inch of fat but gain 1 cubic inch of muscle you will weigh slightly more.
  • RonandDi
    RonandDi Posts: 120 Member
    Wrong. Muscle DOES weigh more than fat. 1 cubic inch of muscle WEIGHS MORE than 1 cubic inch of fat. Period.


    A pound of muscle weighs the same as a pound of fat which weighs the same as a pound of feathers and all those weigh the same as a pound of gold. However, they all have different densities so those four substances will take up much different volumes of space.

    Actually, that isn't completely correct...a pound of gold is measured in Troy pounds, which weighs less than a "normal" pound. So by definition, a pound of gold is lighter.

    What weighs more...feathers or lead? Fat or muscle?
  • Mokey41
    Mokey41 Posts: 5,769 Member
    And around and around and around it goes. I'm getting dizzy. I've given up on the topic. When someone tells me they aren't losing weight because they're gaining muscle doing that 2 mph 20 minute saunter on the treadmill, I just nod blankly and walk away.
  • msliu7911
    msliu7911 Posts: 638 Member
    Two people weigh 150 pounds. One has a much higher body fat percentage than the other. The one with the higher body fat percentage will look fatter than the other one. Is that right?

    Correctamundo.

    Think about someone who is 5'7 and weighs 150, versus someone who is 5'1 and weighs 150.

    IMO the only way the 5'1 person wouldn't look "fatter" is if they were 100% solid muscle and lean meat. That would look pretty funny though.

    Or even if you have 2 people who are 5'7 and 150 lbs, one may have a small frame and the other a large. So the one with the small frame may look overweight while the one with the large frame may look perfectly fit.
  • gseburn
    gseburn Posts: 456 Member
    Really. People still talk about this? lol:noway:
  • jilliew
    jilliew Posts: 255 Member
    This topic makes me laugh.
  • neandermagnon
    neandermagnon Posts: 7,436 Member
    Wrong. Muscle DOES weigh more than fat. 1 cubic inch of muscle WEIGHS MORE than 1 cubic inch of fat. Period.

    You don't weigh yourself by cubic inches.

    however it does make a difference to what dress size you can fit into

    two women, same height, same weight, same frame size, but one has 30% body fat and one has 15% body fat - the one who has 15% body fat will fit into a smaller dress size and look slimmer than the one who has 30% body fat.

    so yes, the relative density of muscle and fat does make a difference, and it's yet another reason why it's more helpful to base your goal weight/body composition on body fat percentage rather than weight. Stepping on a scale won't tell you how much fat you are carrying, it can't tell the difference between fat, muscle, water weight or anything else. Body fat percentage measured in a reliable way can tell you how much fat you're carrying, and how many lbs of fat you need to lose to get into the healthy range and/or to look the way you want to look, and you can base your goal weight on that rather than trying to just guess what weight you'd look best and be most healthy at.
  • No_Finish_Line
    No_Finish_Line Posts: 3,661 Member
    This is why, at Olympic Games level, no afro-carribeans win medals at swimming. Their greater body density means that they sink further into the water an create greater 'drag', so can't reach the speeds of the other swimmers.

    NOTE: This isn't 'racist'.... it's a simple matter of human physiology.

    no, pointing out the principals of boyancy is not racist

    BUT, assuming that all individuals of a certain race are of a certain body type IS.

    Plus your argument is rediculous... Phelps is pretty fat free

    Is this the same douche that ran this retarded topic last time, or a different one?
  • qifitness
    qifitness Posts: 49 Member
    Read the post again...... humans are not assessed through 'weight by volume'..... only on the scales.

    Read posts more carefully before making stupid replies.
  • qifitness
    qifitness Posts: 49 Member
    Humans are not assessed through 'weight by volume'.

    Do your scales do this?

    No.
  • qifitness
    qifitness Posts: 49 Member
    Yes, that can be true
  • qifitness
    qifitness Posts: 49 Member
    So true.

    Thanks for a sensible post!
  • No_Finish_Line
    No_Finish_Line Posts: 3,661 Member
    I agree completely.

    If i hear one more person say "Well, I've been dieting and exercising but im not losing weight. I must be gaining muscle."

    No. just.... no.

    this statement is kinda laughable, but its not because 1lbs = 1 lbs.

    its a rediculous semantic argument. the phrase 'no *kitten*' is the only adaquate response
  • qifitness
    qifitness Posts: 49 Member
    True.

    A tape measure is a far better means of assessing fat loss.
  • No_Finish_Line
    No_Finish_Line Posts: 3,661 Member
    So if I said to you a bowling ball weighs more than feathers, you're going tos ay. "NO YOU'RE WRONG, 1lbs of bowling balls has the same weight as 1lbs of feathers!!!!"


    I deal with mass almost daily, I am majoring to be a biochemistry. Lead weighs more than Sodium. (period) you don't say "well the density blah blah blah" no one cares.

    thank you
  • qifitness
    qifitness Posts: 49 Member
    Absolutely true.

    Use a tape measure rather than scales to assess fat loss.
  • qifitness
    qifitness Posts: 49 Member
    Thanks for your sensible (qualified) advice.
    Would be helpful to members here if they listened to such comments and not followed the rubbish they hear from the 'experts'.
  • qifitness
    qifitness Posts: 49 Member
    yes