Fitness myth pet peeves...

[

all these examples are using comparable measurements....wherease the one that started this is not using comparable measurments.....volume and weight are two different measurements with two different meanings.
suit yourself as to your choice of miscommunications....if it floats your boat, keep doing it. Do recognize you may be causing someone else confusion.

To be fair now, that's a tad patronising.

not trying to be patronising....just recognizing that people will continue to do as the wish.
I feel I've made my point about accuracy in what we're saying....and I do understand the desire to use shortcuts. However, I also recognize that it leads to confusion.

Hope you have a good day, and that this discussion hasn't caused any stress.
[/quote]

Not at all, I've genuinly enjoyed it. If we can't argue useless semantics with strangers on the internet then I see no reason for Broadband? I would however suggest that the use of universally accepted figures of speech or spoken norms doesn't so much constitute a desire for shortcuts as it does an acceptance of the use of everyday speech and and mannerisms.
It's going out of your way to correct those said mannerisms that demonstrates a desire.
But that said, we have both made our points, so all the best to ya fella.

See what you've done now?
You've ruined it for everyone!!

"You can gain muscle and lose fat at the same time"

Ohhh that hurt me to my heart when I found that out.

Whaaaaaaat?!?!?! Great...just ruined my day...:noway:

I disagree. I think that you CAN do both "at the same time." I know that I have greater muscle mass today than when I began my quest, yet I've dropped a lot of fat.

Q - If one eats more than TDEE at or around workout days yet still nets under TDEE over, e.g., a month, can muscle be added? What are the "cutoffs" that validate the "can't be done" theory? Over TDEE one day? Two? Under TDEE three days?

No, you can't.

If by "at the same time" you mean the EXACT. SAME. MOMENT. then I agree. OTT, I disagree as alluded to with my questions above.

Agreed

"Muscle weighs more than fat."

Anytime I read/hear this, it is like nails on a chalkboard. A pound of dirt weighs as much as a pound of feathers. Muscle is more DENSE than fat, so you can have more of it, but the two weigh EXACTLY the same.

Actually people complaining about this saying is my pet peeve.

The context (that a 180lb person with 10% BF looks better than a 180lb person with 30% BF) makes it pretty clear that everyone is aware that we are talking "for a given equal volume of each". As far as I'm concerned people complaining about this one just want to believe that everyone else is stupid in order to have an excuse to ***** about them.

This!

Myth: Muscle weighs more than fat.

Myth: Muscle is more dense than fat.

Myth: Muscle has less volume than fat.

Myth: Muscle is more massive than fat.

Myth: Muscle has less entropy than fat.

Myth: Muscle has a higher specific gravity than fat.

All these statements can be made true if a specific context is added, even if it is only implied. I explained in an earlier post. If you don't understand what I am talking about here, you have no business being in the argument. I'm talking about the science. Words are imperfect.

Myth: Muscle weighs more than fat.

Myth: Muscle is more dense than fat.

Myth: Muscle has less volume than fat.

Myth: Muscle is more massive than fat.

Myth: Muscle has less entropy than fat.

Myth: Muscle has a higher specific gravity than fat.

All these statements can be made true if a specific context is added, even if it is only implied. I explained in an earlier post. If you don't understand what I am talking about here, you have no business being in the argument. I'm talking about the science. Words are imperfect.

Oh it's understood, it's just that a lot of it would view the specific definition as being unnecessary for conversational or general purposes.

Myth: Muscle weighs more than fat.

Myth: Muscle is more dense than fat.

Myth: Muscle has less volume than fat.

Myth: Muscle is more massive than fat.

Myth: Muscle has less entropy than fat.

Myth: Muscle has a higher specific gravity than fat.

All these statements can be made true if a specific context is added, even if it is only implied. I explained in an earlier post. If you don't understand what I am talking about here, you have no business being in the argument. I'm talking about the science. Words are imperfect.

Myth: any of the above statements are even the slightest bit relevant to a conversation on this website.

Science, shmience. It's common sense that tells us what someone means when they say "Muscle weighs more than fat".

There is an old trick question that gets a lot of people who don't know it, "What weighs more, a pound of feathers or a pound of lead?"

Because it makes so much sense for you to be talking about weight by volume, people outright ignore the fact that your are explicitly comparing by a measurement of weight.

That is how much people are going to think you are talking about density. They will assume it is what you are doing even when you go out of your way not to do it.

"Im a NATURAL bodybuilder" but recently went off, "im a natural" but is on TRT, "im a natural" but uses grey market not yet classified prohormones and prosteroids....