Muscle weighs more then fat?
MyaAlisha6
Posts: 19 Member
So I have always been really solid...muscular with some fat. And I weigh a lot more then I look. Could this be a reason why I haven't seen the scale going down? I've been eating a calorie deficit. The first 2 1/2 weeks I started insanity and was too intense so I switch to t25 and the last 2 weeks I've been going to the gym 6 days a week doing about 30-45 on the treadmill and then doing another 45 mins weights. Yesterday I started doing t25 again in the morning and then going to the gym in the evening. Still haven't really noticed any results or weight loss...help!
0
Replies
-
1lb muscle =1lb fat sorry....
1lb Muscle may take up less space tho...
As for your deficet based on what I see you don't weigh your food....that can present a problem due to accuracy or lack there of.
As well how are you calculating your burns? HRM with a chest strap are good for steady state cardio but that's it....
So chances are if you are eating back all your exercise calories you are eating more than you think...
Along with logging cleaning...????
And what is fit body wrap???
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/872212-you-re-probably-eating-more-than-you-think0 -
By definition, if you were in a deficit, you'd be losing. Muscle weighs the same as fat but takes up less space. You cannot build any decent amount of muscle while eating at a deficit and it would be under special circumstance (from my understanding minor newbie gains or obese newbie) and it would be minor, nothing that would stall you.
How accurate is your logging? Weighing and measuring food? New exercises can cause minor water retention, so that may make the scale stall out for a teeny bit. Also, that's a lot. Focus on logging accuracy for weight loss, exercise for fitness (heavy lifting also helps with LBM retaining). Also, highly recommend reading
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1080242-a-guide-to-get-you-started-on-your-path-to-sexypants0 -
A lot of people report that they don't lose much weight in the first month of Insanity because the water weight from such an intense workout is masking their fat loss. This could be part of the problem for you, especially since you've changed routines several times in the last month. However, the scale should still be fluctuating downward a bit, so if you're not seeing any weight loss after 4 weeks there's likely something off.
If you're eating at a deficit then no, you are very unlikely to have put on enough muscle to offset the fat loss you should be seeing.
How accurately are you logging? I know we harp about food scales on here, but they're really the best tool to make sure that the serving size you log is the same as the serving size you eat. If you're not using a food scale are you at least being as precise as possible with measuring cups and spoons or are you eyeballing portion sizes? The inconsistencies can add up.0 -
The phrase "muscle weighs more than fat" is misleading. Muscle is denser and takes up less space than fat. But a pound is a pound is a pound. If you aren't losing weight or inches, you're eating too many calories. Period.0
-
1lb muscle =1lb fat sorry....
1lb Muscle may take up less space tho...
Muscle doesn't take up less space because 1 cubic inch of muscle = 1 cubic inch of fat.
All other variable being equal is implied in the statement. The same volume of muscle will weigh more than the same volume of fat, thus muscle weighs more than fat.
Unless one of them is on the moon.0 -
I guess I just carry my fat in all the right places because I do not look like I weigh 160-165 lbs. my friend was in shock when I told her the other day... And that's when she said well muscle weighs more then fat.... That's why I asked. I am not accurate at all in what I do. I just know that I haven't worked out in 6 years and I started the beginning of this month eating way healthier and I KNOW a lot less calories. I've been working really hard. Guess when I can I'll have a get a food scale ....what do you think about the watches you wear that tell you your heart rate and calories burned?0
-
It all starts and ends with your diet.
Most common people have no idea what body composition is or looks like. Most people just guess arbitrary numbers for weight. Some people guess I look 170- even though I am obviously a lot more than 170. Don't worry about what untrained persons assume or guess your body weight to be.0 -
Food scale is far more important than a heart rate monitor.0
-
Grab the 5 dice from Yahtzee. That is around the 5 cubic inches difference between 1-lb of muscle and fat.
Now picture having 100 of those dice. That is the difference in 20-lbs of fat vs muscle.
Cube of muscle 2.88-inches on each side weighs 1-lb. = 23.89 cubic inches
Cube of fat 3.09-inches on each side weighs 1-lb. = 29.05 cubic inches
1 US gallon of milk = 231 cubic inches = same space as 7.8-lbs of fat
20-lbs of fat is the same size as 2.56-gallons of milk.
7.8-lbs of muscle takes up 0.81/gallons (186.3 cubic inches)0 -
I don't weigh any more than my wife does. 1 lb of me weighs the same as 1 lb of her.
Right?0 -
This drives me crazy. Everyone knows what everyone else is saying here. Everyone is correct. "Per unit volume" is implied when people say muscle weighs more than fat and the unit of volume everyone is talking about is the human body.
I feel like people just argue about this to pontificate.0 -
So I have always been really solid...muscular with some fat. And I weigh a lot more then I look. Could this be a reason why I haven't seen the scale going down? I've been eating a calorie deficit. The first 2 1/2 weeks I started insanity and was too intense so I switch to t25 and the last 2 weeks I've been going to the gym 6 days a week doing about 30-45 on the treadmill and then doing another 45 mins weights. Yesterday I started doing t25 again in the morning and then going to the gym in the evening. Still haven't really noticed any results or weight loss...help!
Too bad the title of your thread has everyone on a stupid tangent - (I weigh the same as the earth because 1lb me = 1 lb earth. Derp.)
Anyway, I'll try to focus on your questions:
Most likely, after a few weeks this has little to do with muscle or fat. Intense new exercise results in edema to repair the tissue and to store glycogen. This edema is mostly water and salts and creates a weight masking effect. You can wait, and the weight will drop. Want to test it?
Take one day with little bread or other carbs and the next day, you'll drop a pound or two.
Or, since it is two weeks, it could be TOM, undigested food, etc... Give it time.
And on the exercise front, relax that a little, give yourself time to become used to it and avoid injury - 3-4 days of exercise a week is sufficient when starting. Take a long term view of what is practicable.0 -
Thank you
I saw this quote the other day that said "usually when your about to give up, is right around that time when that miracle happens... Don't give up (or Something like that). It's been keeping me going 0 -
Most people who think they have a lot of muscle, don't. Until you get to a lowish BF% it is actually pretty hard to tell unless you have been lean before and know how much you carry.
Even if you did, that has nothing to do with not being able to lose weight now.
You may well be retaining water if you started exercising which is masking 'real' weight loss. Either that or you are not at a deficit.0 -
1lb muscle =1lb fat sorry....
1lb Muscle may take up less space tho...
Muscle doesn't take up less space because 1 cubic inch of muscle = 1 cubic inch of fat.
All other variable being equal is implied in the statement. The same volume of muscle will weigh more than the same volume of fat, thus muscle weighs more than fat.
Unless one of them is on the moon.
:flowerforyou:0 -
You're likely retaining water for muscle repair, due to the exercise.
Make sure you're logging accurately, with a food scale. Eat back half of your exercise calories. Be patient. If you're not losing after a month consider reducing calories.0 -
YEAHThis drives me crazy. Everyone knows what everyone else is saying here. Everyone is correct. "Per unit volume" is implied when people say muscle weighs more than fat and the unit of volume everyone is talking about is the human body.
I feel like people just argue about this to pontificate.
0 -
1lb muscle =1lb fat sorry....
1lb Muscle may take up less space tho...
Muscle doesn't take up less space because 1 cubic inch of muscle = 1 cubic inch of fat.
All other variable being equal is implied in the statement. The same volume of muscle will weigh more than the same volume of fat, thus muscle weighs more than fat.
Unless one of them is on the moon.
Sweet reply!
But which weighs more, a pound of feathers or a pound of bricks? :laugh:0 -
This drives me crazy. Everyone knows what everyone else is saying here. Everyone is correct. "Per unit volume" is implied when people say muscle weighs more than fat and the unit of volume everyone is talking about is the human body.
I feel like people just argue about this to pontificate.
KEEL HAUL THEM!!!0 -
Of course muscle weighs more than fat, and you can prove it.
Take 1lb of fat
and 1 lab of muscle
put them in the pool
the muscle sinks, and the fat floats.
additionally, if you drop 2lbs of fat, and 1b of muscle, they will hit the ground at the same time.
duh!0 -
1lb muscle =1lb fat sorry....
1lb Muscle may take up less space tho...
Muscle doesn't take up less space because 1 cubic inch of muscle = 1 cubic inch of fat.
All other variable being equal is implied in the statement. The same volume of muscle will weigh more than the same volume of fat, thus muscle weighs more than fat.
Unless one of them is on the moon.
Fat Vs Muscle
http://www.amazon.com/form®-1-lb-5-lb-Replicas-Muscle/dp/B00F9UY73C/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1390947117&sr=8-4&keywords=5lb.++of+muscle+Replica0 -
This drives me crazy. Everyone knows what everyone else is saying here. Everyone is correct. "Per unit volume" is implied when people say muscle weighs more than fat and the unit of volume everyone is talking about is the human body.
I feel like people just argue about this to pontificate.
Yeah it's a huge pet peeve of mine, lol. People apparently just like to play dumb. It's like saying that lead doesn't weigh more than feathers... so dumb.
OP, if you compare two persons of the same weight and one has 10% less bodyfat than the other, he will be leaner. In the end though, if you want to lose weight, you need to eat a deficit... So either you're not losing weight because you're eating too much, or you're not losing weight because your muscles are still recovering from a new exercise program.0 -
And then fat does what???
Don't leave us in suspense...
...please do go on.0 -
anyone get bingo?0
-
This drives me crazy. Everyone knows what everyone else is saying here. Everyone is correct. "Per unit volume" is implied when people say muscle weighs more than fat and the unit of volume everyone is talking about is the human body.
I feel like people just argue about this to pontificate.
^This!0 -
Haha.....can of worms.
Yes, muscle does weigh more than fat, by volume.
However, this won't stop you losing weight. It's physically impossible to gain any weight (muscle or fat) at deficit. So, if you're not losing, you're not eating at deficit.
This is either because you have miscalculated either your BMR or activity level, or both or you are not logging accurately.0 -
I think it may be water retention. I've been kinda reading up on it. I have changed my routine 4 times, and I think my muscles are definitely still recovering.
Also right now I don't have a food scale. I scan the barcodes of everything I eat and log the amount....I actually a lot of the times double the amount just to be "safe" so I honestly don't think I am eating to many calories.
It says I should eat around 2,100 calories to keep my weight right where it's at. I've been trying to eat around 1350 calories a day which is a 750 calorie deficit. So I dont think I could be miss calculating that many calories, causing me to over eat.0 -
This drives me crazy. Everyone knows what everyone else is saying here. Everyone is correct. "Per unit volume" is implied when people say muscle weighs more than fat and the unit of volume everyone is talking about is the human body.
I feel like people just argue about this to pontificate.
You couldn't be more wrong0 -
Hi,
You seem to be doing the right things i.e. exercising and watching your diet. Maybe being a bit more exact on portion size and weighing food will help to get a more accurate report of your calorie intake. The fact that you are doing strength training as well as cardio may mean that you are building some muscle. It is key to measure your chest/ waist /hip/thigh size as you may be losing inches but not weight due to some muscle gain.
Good luck with your progress.
Feel free to friend me if you want some encouragement or advice.0 -
This drives me crazy. Everyone knows what everyone else is saying here. Everyone is correct. "Per unit volume" is implied when people say muscle weighs more than fat and the unit of volume everyone is talking about is the human body.
I feel like people just argue about this to pontificate.
You couldn't be more wrong
Personally, I could care less.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions