Muscle does not weigh more than fat.
mrscates
Posts: 559 Member
5 lbs. of fat is much bulkier than the 5 lbs. of muscle, but five pounds is still five pounds. Muscle does not weigh more than fat.
Fat is bulky and lumpy so if you carry an extra five pounds of fat, you'll be lumpier than with five pounds more muscle. A five pound pile of fat will take up more space (volume) than a five pound pile of muscle; but five pounds is still five pounds, so for those of you that don't "get" English, you cannot say one thing weighing a certain weight weighs more than another thing at that same weight. It's a common joke to play on an 8-year old. The correct way to state the muscle weighs more than fat scenario is, "Muscle is heavier by volume than fat."
A woman weighing 150 pounds with 19% fat will look much smaller (and be much healthier) than a woman at 150 pounds with 35% fat. They weigh the same, yet the composition is different. Because muscle is more dense than fat the person with less fat and more muscle will look smaller.
Stop being so obsessed with body weight and start paying attention to body composition. How much body fat do you have compared to muscle? Simply seeing how much you weigh isn't very helpful.
Fat is bulky and lumpy so if you carry an extra five pounds of fat, you'll be lumpier than with five pounds more muscle. A five pound pile of fat will take up more space (volume) than a five pound pile of muscle; but five pounds is still five pounds, so for those of you that don't "get" English, you cannot say one thing weighing a certain weight weighs more than another thing at that same weight. It's a common joke to play on an 8-year old. The correct way to state the muscle weighs more than fat scenario is, "Muscle is heavier by volume than fat."
A woman weighing 150 pounds with 19% fat will look much smaller (and be much healthier) than a woman at 150 pounds with 35% fat. They weigh the same, yet the composition is different. Because muscle is more dense than fat the person with less fat and more muscle will look smaller.
Stop being so obsessed with body weight and start paying attention to body composition. How much body fat do you have compared to muscle? Simply seeing how much you weigh isn't very helpful.
0
Replies
-
Great post.
The scale only reveals a small part of the picture and should not be the sole measure of our success.0 -
"Muscle weighs more than fat" doesn't mean that 5 lbs of muscle will weigh more than 5 lbs of fat. It's saying that if you have a handful of muscle and a handful of fat taking up the same amount of space, the muscle will weigh more. You can weigh 130lbs and be chunky and lumpy if you have lil to no muscle, but you can't always take weight into account because if you work out and gain a lot of muscle you can still weigh 130 lbs and be lean and muscular.0
-
Very well explained. :drinker: (lots of water)0
-
Muscle weighs more than fat if you are comparing by volume. If you take an area of muscle and compare that to the same size area of fat, the muscle will weigh more. People use this saying as a way to understand why when they start to work out, they start to gain weight. Yes the scale is miss leading, however not everyone has the time of the money to properly have their body fat determined.0
-
True statement Katie0
-
Muscle absolutely weighs more than fat. 5 lbs. of bricks weighs the same as 5 lbs. of feathers, but a brick weighs more than a feather.
Your message about the scale is essentially correct, but your logic is a little skewed.0 -
Wow lol...I can't believe I never thought about that lol. That's like when people say "what's heavier? A lb of socks or a lb of pennies?" Lol they weigh the same....DUH!! I feel dumb lol. I always thought muscle weighted more lol0
-
This wasn't my logic....
http://www.onemorebite-weightloss.com/muscle-to-fat.htmlMuscle absolutely weighs more than fat. 5 lbs. of bricks weighs the same as 5 lbs. of feathers, but a brick weighs more than a feather.
Your message about the scale is essentially correct, but your logic is a little skewed.0 -
Well, suuuuure, if you wanna get all technical... =D
I hear you. I kinda makes me nuts too. It's on my loooooong list of things that make me nuts. :bigsmile:0 -
Wow lol...I can't believe I never thought about that lol. That's like when people say "what's heavier? A lb of socks or a lb of pennies?" Lol they weigh the same....DUH!! I feel dumb lol. I always thought muscle weighted more lol
Muscle does weigh more. By volume. Which is what people are talking about when they say muscle weighs more than fat.0 -
It's more of a "weight per certain amount of space" thing (in other words, 5 lbs of muscle takes up less space than 5 pounds of fat - or you could say one square inch of muscle weighs more than one square inch of fat) People are just wording it incorrectly. Muscle is more dense and therefore the same amount weight-wise will take up less space than squishy (icky!!) fat. : )0
-
Who cares about the weight really. The benefit of fat loss and muscle gain is that Muscles burn more calories. Studies have estimated that for each pound of muscle that you add to your body, you burn an additional 35 to 50 calories per day. So, an extra 10 pounds of muscle will burn approximately 350 to 500 calories a day, or an extra pound of fat every 7 to 10 days, without making any other changes. In another study, researchers found that regular weight training boosts basal metabolic rate by about 15%. This is because muscle is 'metabolically active ' and burns more calories than other body tissue even when you're not moving.
Forget what you weigh, practice full body workouts, gain some muscle, elevate the metabolism, and the weigh will come off. If all you do is cardio and starve yourself, you will lose fat, lose muscle, and eventually plateau or start gaining weight again.0 -
bump...I am interested in reading more..0
-
This post wasn't actually to get the one nutritionist on MFP to critique info I found. This was simply letting ppl know (like myself) who have said "I have more muscle, that is why I weigh more"...because in OUR minds its a way to make being over weight "ok". I use to say it that way and mean it that way. I now do not focus solely on my scale. I do however weight, measure and do caliper testing.0
-
This post wasn't actually to get the one nutritionist on MFP to critique info I found. This was simply letting ppl know (like myself) who have said "I have more muscle, that is why I weigh more"...because in OUR minds its a way to make being over weight "ok". I use to say it that way and mean it that way. I now do not focus solely on my scale. I do however weight, measure and do caliper testing.
Who's a nutritionist? From that standpoint, I can see where you're coming from -- not using muscle weight as an excuse for being overweight. That makes sense. I've never heard that excuse -- the only thing I ever hear about in that regard is "big bones." :-P0 -
Caliper testing is a smart way to go. Body fat is a far better measure of overall health than weight.0
-
This is a major pet peeve of mine. Muscle is more DENSE than fat, not heavier.0
-
Yep, I agree, "density" is the correct word, not "weight". Muscle is more dense than fat.
The technical definition of density is "mass per unit volume". To a physicist, mass is different from weight, but the two can be read synonymously for the purpose of this discussion. Density effectively means the weight of a given volume of stuff (note volume, not area as someone suggested).
One pound of fat weighs the same as one pount of muscle, it's just that the one pound of muscle will take up less volume.0 -
Muscle absolutely weighs more than fat. 5 lbs. of bricks weighs the same as 5 lbs. of feathers, but a brick weighs more than a feather.
Your message about the scale is essentially correct, but your logic is a little skewed.
It depends how big the feathers and bricks are (i.e. how much volume they have). What about a tiny tiny tiny tiny brick, and a really really really really big feather? That's why you need to specify volumes to compare the weight of different substances (density is useful because it combines weight and volume into one handy measurement).
It doesn't make any sense to say "muscle weighs more than fat" since muscle and fat aren't specific objects with well defined volumes.0 -
of course 5lbs is 5lbs...lol;. no-one has ever disputed that.
though per cubic inch, muscle is heavier....and that is what people mean by muscle is heavier...not pound for pound of course...0 -
Muscle absolutely weighs more than fat. 5 lbs. of bricks weighs the same as 5 lbs. of feathers, but a brick weighs more than a feather.
Your message about the scale is essentially correct, but your logic is a little skewed.
It depends how big the feathers and bricks are (i.e. how much volume they have). What about a tiny tiny tiny tiny brick, and a really really really really big feather? That's why you need to specify volumes to compare the weight of different substances (density is useful because it combines weight and volume into one handy measurement).
It doesn't make any sense to say "muscle weighs more than fat" since muscle and fat aren't specific objects with well defined volumes.
By your same logic, I can't make comments like "I can run faster than an infant" because I might be a paraplegic and the infant might be a newborn horse. The statement is not meant to be read in to as much as people are trying to here.0 -
"muscle weights more than fat" generally gets used when you plateau. That's when all the professionals rush in to tell you that you're actually losing flab, but you might still be gaining weight; you're just increasing your muscle%. I have never heard it being used as an excuse for being overweight though; I'm more of the "I'm big boned" variety myself.
You are correct in saying that 5lb of muscle doesn't weigh more than 5lb fat, but one cm3 of muscle will weigh more than one cm3 of fat. It depends on the viewpoint. Tomato, tomahto. In all honesty, I don't think a female weighing 250lb with a belly hanging over their trousers looks at themselves and thinks "ooh, look at my wonderful muscleyness". I know I sure don't. It wobbles; it's fat. It doesn't wobble; it's muscle.0 -
You know, I've often wondered about those body fat percentage calcs that use weight as the determining factor -- I'm thinking that right now, at 206 (on the way down), I'm more in shape than I was a couple of years ago at 206 (but on the way up). Both would have given me the same body fat percentage numbers, right (?), but now, I'm guessing that my lean muscle mass is greater than it was back then...? Hmm...0
-
Muscle absolutely weighs more than fat. 5 lbs. of bricks weighs the same as 5 lbs. of feathers, but a brick weighs more than a feather.
Your message about the scale is essentially correct, but your logic is a little skewed.
It depends how big the feathers and bricks are (i.e. how much volume they have). What about a tiny tiny tiny tiny brick, and a really really really really big feather? That's why you need to specify volumes to compare the weight of different substances (density is useful because it combines weight and volume into one handy measurement).
It doesn't make any sense to say "muscle weighs more than fat" since muscle and fat aren't specific objects with well defined volumes.
By your same logic, I can't make comments like "I can run faster than an infant" because I might be a paraplegic and the infant might be a newborn horse. The statement is not meant to be read in to as much as people are trying to here.
I absolutely take your point that in language there’s often meaning not explicitly expressed, and I’m sure everyone knows what is meant by “muscle weighs more than fat”. I just think, why use “weight” when you can use the more accurate word “density”. Each to his own I suppose. Onto more interesting discussions about exercise!
(P.S. the feather and brick example brought back memories of high school physics class when we were asked by the teacher what weighs more, polystyrene or steel. After giving our answers, the teacher got out a huge polystyrene cube, maybe a meter or more each side, and a tiny steel ball. I couldn’t resist making the same point with your example.)0 -
Oh I see now....so I shouldn't feel so dumb then lolWow lol...I can't believe I never thought about that lol. That's like when people say "what's heavier? A lb of socks or a lb of pennies?" Lol they weigh the same....DUH!! I feel dumb lol. I always thought muscle weighted more lol
Muscle does weigh more. By volume. Which is what people are talking about when they say muscle weighs more than fat.0 -
This whole topic was really screwing with my head.This post wasn't actually to get the one nutritionist on MFP to critique info I found. This was simply letting ppl know (like myself) who have said "I have more muscle, that is why I weigh more"...because in OUR minds its a way to make being over weight "ok". I use to say it that way and mean it that way. I now do not focus solely on my scale. I do however weight, measure and do caliper testing.
My weight hasn’t changed much, I hadn’t seen any change on the scale at first and I started getting discouraged.
My weight loss has only been 5-8 lbs but, I’m down 3 inches in my waist, I’ve see huge gains in strength, and muscle.
The big measurement was when my wife said my neck (traps), shoulders and arms are getting big.
Am I still overweight, yes. I know I still have a long way to go but I feel and look better than I did0 -
I use to be an elite athlete (sad to say "use to" but I am working on it) and though I was thin and full of muscles, I would lie about my weight by 10-15 pounds (less than I actually was) and people would still say, "there is no way you weight that much." Even though muscle is heavier, people are sometimes shocked because they imagine if they weighed that much with THEIR body composition. Ya the scale does not tell the real story, at all.0
-
When I really started to focus on adding strength training in with my cardio, my weight loss leveled out for a while...but I'm now needing almost all new clothes! I could care less what the scale says, as long as my clothes keep mysteriously growing.0
-
When I really started to focus on adding strength training in with my cardio, my weight loss leveled out for a while...but I'm now needing almost all new clothes! I could care less what the scale says, as long as my clothes keep mysteriously growing.
Best post in this thread yet.0
This discussion has been closed.
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