fat to muscle is it possible

Options
dlaplume2
dlaplume2 Posts: 1,658 Member
in Food and Nutrition
I know muscle burns more calories that fat and that muscle weighs more than fat.


Is it really possible to build a pound of muscle and not burn off a pound of fat while doing so? It just doesn't seem logical with all the energy it takes to build muscle.

Replies

  • crystal_sapphire
    crystal_sapphire Posts: 1,205 Member
    Options
    i'm a bit confused to what you're asking. as you said it does take a long time to build lean muscle (despite what people hope when they don't lose weight and have started exercising)

    i would say it's possible not to burn any fat - you would need to have a calorie surplus than deficit and be lifting heavy weights
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    Actually it is much easier to build muscle while not losing fat than it is to build muscle while losing fat.

    Fat cannot turn into muscle, they are completely separate. As mentioned above it is actually quite hard to put on muscle when losing fat, usually when people lose weight they actually lose some muscle mass. To build any significant amount of muscle you must be in a caloric surplus, and to lose fat you need to be in a caloric deficit so it is very hard to do both at the same time.

    It is actually much easier to go in phases. Cut phase is a caloric deficit phase to lose fat while maintaining as much muscle as possible (high protein combined with resistance training) Then when you get to your goal do a bulk phase in which you take in a caloric surplus again with high protein and even more aggressive heavy weight training)
  • Living9
    Living9 Posts: 4
    Options
    Would suggest you research Alpha Lopeic Acid also as a supplement; particularly if you are vegetarian.
  • BR1986FB
    BR1986FB Posts: 1,515 Member
    Options
    Aaaaaaaaargh....muscle does NOT weigh more than fat. Muscle is more DENSE than fat. A pound of muscle weighs as much as a pound of fat which weighs as much as a pound of feathers. Sorry for the rant but that misconception drives me nuts.

    You can't turn fat into muscle or muscle into fat. You can shrink your fat cells or build up your lean tissue but cellulite is going to ever become a bulging tricep.
  • TateFTW
    TateFTW Posts: 658 Member
    Options
    I know muscle burns more calories that fat and that muscle weighs more than fat.


    Is it really possible to build a pound of muscle and not burn off a pound of fat while doing so? It just doesn't seem logical with all the energy it takes to build muscle.

    I don't think you understand how all these things take place. You don't actually lose fat cells. You die with the same number of fat cells you are born with, they just get bigger and smaller. Muscle works very much the same way. The individual fibers get bigger as they adapt to new stresses, and get smaller as they atrophy from lack of use.

    You don't "have" to lose fat to gain muscle, nor do you have to lose muscle to gain fat. Look at powerlifters. Tons of muscle, sometimes tons of fat, sometimes not.
  • erickirb
    erickirb Posts: 12,293 Member
    Options
    Aaaaaaaaargh....muscle does NOT weigh more than fat. Muscle is more DENSE than fat. A pound of muscle weighs as much as a pound of fat which weighs as much as a pound of feathers. Sorry for the rant but that misconception drives me nuts.

    That is not what is meant when people say that, you know what they mean. If someone asks you what weighs more lead or feathers would you say the same if so you are wrong because embedded in the question is the assumption you are comparing the same volume of each material. They mean a Square inch of muscle weighs more than a square inch of fat but for short it is commonly stated as muscle weighs more than fat. You are just arguing semantics let it go, you know what they mean.
  • Teemo
    Teemo Posts: 338
    Options
    I don't think you understand how all these things take place. You don't actually lose fat cells. You die with the same number of fat cells you are born with, they just get bigger and smaller. Muscle works very much the same way. The individual fibers get bigger as they adapt to new stresses, and get smaller as they atrophy from lack of use.

    You don't "have" to lose fat to gain muscle, nor do you have to lose muscle to gain fat. Look at powerlifters. Tons of muscle, sometimes tons of fat, sometimes not.

    Your body can increase the number of fat cells. But you are right, they cannot decrease the number.

    Powerlifters are all fat. At least, the good ones are. :laugh:
  • mlb929
    mlb929 Posts: 1,974 Member
    Options
    Aaaaaaaaargh....muscle does NOT weigh more than fat. Muscle is more DENSE than fat. A pound of muscle weighs as much as a pound of fat which weighs as much as a pound of feathers. Sorry for the rant but that misconception drives me nuts.

    You can't turn fat into muscle or muscle into fat. You can shrink your fat cells or build up your lean tissue but cellulite is going to ever become a bulging tricep.

    Thank you for your rant! I've tried to understand forever exactly what that saying means as a pound will always weigh a pound. So I get it now! The reason why I am the same size clotheswise but weigh 10lbs more than I did last time when I was this "size" - would mean I have more muscle right?
  • BR1986FB
    BR1986FB Posts: 1,515 Member
    Options
    Aaaaaaaaargh....muscle does NOT weigh more than fat. Muscle is more DENSE than fat. A pound of muscle weighs as much as a pound of fat which weighs as much as a pound of feathers. Sorry for the rant but that misconception drives me nuts.

    That is not what is meant when people say that, you know what they mean. If someone asks you what weighs more lead or feathers would you say the same if so you are wrong because embedded in the question is the assumption you are comparing the same volume of each material. They mean a Square inch of muscle weighs more than a square inch of fat but for short it is commonly stated as muscle weighs more than fat. You are just arguing semantics let it go, you know what they mean.

    No, I don't. When people say "muscle weighs more than fat", most people that I know actually think that's true. A pound is a pound whether it's muscle, fat or animal crackers.
  • GiGi76
    GiGi76 Posts: 876 Member
    Options
    Aaaaaaaaargh....muscle does NOT weigh more than fat. Muscle is more DENSE than fat. A pound of muscle weighs as much as a pound of fat which weighs as much as a pound of feathers. Sorry for the rant but that misconception drives me nuts.

    That is not what is meant when people say that, you know what they mean. If someone asks you what weighs more lead or feathers would you say the same if so you are wrong because embedded in the question is the assumption you are comparing the same volume of each material. They mean a Square inch of muscle weighs more than a square inch of fat but for short it is commonly stated as muscle weighs more than fat. You are just arguing semantics let it go, you know what they mean.

    No, I don't. When people say "muscle weighs more than fat", most people that I know actually think that's true. A pound is a pound whether it's muscle, fat or animal crackers.

    I agree most people think "muscle weighs more than fat" they dont truly understand the concept!!!
  • mvl1014
    mvl1014 Posts: 531
    Options
    Aaaaaaaaargh....muscle does NOT weigh more than fat. Muscle is more DENSE than fat. A pound of muscle weighs as much as a pound of fat which weighs as much as a pound of feathers. Sorry for the rant but that misconception drives me nuts.

    That is not what is meant when people say that, you know what they mean. If someone asks you what weighs more lead or feathers would you say the same if so you are wrong because embedded in the question is the assumption you are comparing the same volume of each material. They mean a Square inch of muscle weighs more than a square inch of fat but for short it is commonly stated as muscle weighs more than fat. You are just arguing semantics let it go, you know what they mean.

    Precisely. (and it's unit of volume, which for example would be cubic inches, not square inches.)

Categories