What weighs more?
sweetsarahj
Posts: 701 Member
If I hear one more person say that muscle weighs more than fat, I will scream.
What weighs more.... 1 lb of muscle, or 1 lb of fat? They both weigh one pound!
What people mean to say is that muscle is more dense than fat.....thereby taking up less physical space on our body.
This is a pet peeve of mine, right up there with those people on Maury who say "I'm 150% sure he's the father!"
What weighs more.... 1 lb of muscle, or 1 lb of fat? They both weigh one pound!
What people mean to say is that muscle is more dense than fat.....thereby taking up less physical space on our body.
This is a pet peeve of mine, right up there with those people on Maury who say "I'm 150% sure he's the father!"
0
Replies
-
AMEN!!0
-
Hahahaha. I'm with you, on both!!0
-
Thank you! This has been driving me crazy for years!0
-
You are right, I say it when I really do know the difference, I should pay more attention.
My pet peeve is 'future plans' instead of 'plans for the future' Who else has one?0 -
I have been on MFP for almost 2 years and I have to say I am amused that this is a topic once every couple of months (that I notice and I don't surf the boards much). You are right a pound is a pound some people just express themselves incorrectly, you catch their drift though. Don't let it bug you, you obviously know the truth.0
-
If I hear one more person say that muscle weighs more than fat, I will scream.
What weighs more.... 1 lb of muscle, or 1 lb of fat? They both weigh one pound!
What people mean to say is that muscle is more dense than fat.....thereby taking up less physical space on our body.
This is a pet peeve of mine, right up there with those people on Maury who say "I'm 150% sure he's the father!"
If I hear one more person say that muscle weighs the same as fat I will scream. Muscle does weigh more than fat because it is more dense. Muscle is about 30% more dense therefore weighs about 30% more.
Would you then argue that every person weighs the same since 1lb of them weighs the same as 1lb of anybody else? That is essentially what you are doing with your 1lb = 1lb statement. When someone says muscle weighs more than fat they are referring to the fact that by volume muscle weighs more than fat, they are implying the volume part and therefore no reason to state it.
I have a question for you, what has more caloires chocolate or carrots? If you said chocolate I would agree with you, but it would go against your argument as 1 calories of chocolate has the same calories as 1 calories of carrots. Would you make that argument? If not, there is really no difference to what you are doing with weight.0 -
If I hear one more person say that muscle weighs more than fat, I will scream.
What weighs more.... 1 lb of muscle, or 1 lb of fat? They both weigh one pound!
What people mean to say is that muscle is more dense than fat.....thereby taking up less physical space on our body.
This is a pet peeve of mine, right up there with those people on Maury who say "I'm 150% sure he's the father!"
If I hear one more person say that muscle weighs the same as fat I will scream. Muscle does weigh more than fat because it is more dense.
Would you then argue that every person weighs the same since 1lb of them weighs the same as 1lb of anybody else? That is essentially what you are doing with your 1lb = 1lb statement. When someone says muscle weighs more than fat they are referring to the fact that by volume muscle weighs more than fat, they are implying the volume part and therefore no reason to state it.
I have a question for you, what has more caloires chocolate or carrots? If you said chocolate I would agree with you but it would go against your argument as 1 calories of chocolate has the same calories as 1 calories of carrots. Would you make that argument? If not there is really no difference to what you are doing with weight.
Of course carrots and chocolate don't have the same caloric value. But if you put 100 cal of carrots beside 100 cals of chocolate, they would have the same value.
Just because something is more dense, that doesn't mean it actually "weighs more". You're thinking of concentration- percentage of weight by volume. I'm talking about fat vs muscle in terms of people weighing themselves on a scale and the fallacy that you could weigh more because "muscle weighs more than fat."
Am I being nit-picky? Yes I probably am.0 -
^5I have been on MFP for almost 2 years and I have to say I am amused that this is a topic once every couple of months (that I notice and I don't surf the boards much). You are right a pound is a pound some people just express themselves incorrectly, you catch their drift though. Don't let it bug you, you obviously know the truth.0 -
If I hear one more person say that muscle weighs more than fat, I will scream.
What weighs more.... 1 lb of muscle, or 1 lb of fat? They both weigh one pound!
What people mean to say is that muscle is more dense than fat.....thereby taking up less physical space on our body.
This is a pet peeve of mine, right up there with those people on Maury who say "I'm 150% sure he's the father!"
If I hear one more person say that muscle weighs the same as fat I will scream. Muscle does weigh more than fat because it is more dense.
Would you then argue that every person weighs the same since 1lb of them weighs the same as 1lb of anybody else? That is essentially what you are doing with your 1lb = 1lb statement. When someone says muscle weighs more than fat they are referring to the fact that by volume muscle weighs more than fat, they are implying the volume part and therefore no reason to state it.
I have a question for you, what has more caloires chocolate or carrots? If you said chocolate I would agree with you but it would go against your argument as 1 calories of chocolate has the same calories as 1 calories of carrots. Would you make that argument? If not there is really no difference to what you are doing with weight.
You completely missed the point. Of course carrots and chocolate don't have the same caloric value. But if you put 100 cal of carrots beside 100 cals of chocolate, they would have the same value.
Just because something is more dense, that doesn't mean it actually "weighs more". You're thinking of concentration- percentage of weight by volume. I'm talking about fat vs muscle in terms of people weighing themselves on a scale and the fallacy that you could weigh more because "muscle weighs more than fat."
because muscle is dense it takes up less space so you can gain weight (muscle) and be smaller, all because muscle is more dense (heavier) than fat. People know that muscle takes up less space so it is easier to say muscle weighs more than fat rather than since muscle is more dense than the same weight of fat, it will take up less room than the same weight of fat. They mean muscle takes up less room because it is more dense, we all know what they mean.0 -
Just like when people say "I ain't got nothing to do with that" we know they mean "I have nothing to do with that"0
-
If I hear one more person say that muscle weighs more than fat, I will scream.
What weighs more.... 1 lb of muscle, or 1 lb of fat? They both weigh one pound!
What people mean to say is that muscle is more dense than fat.....thereby taking up less physical space on our body.
This is a pet peeve of mine, right up there with those people on Maury who say "I'm 150% sure he's the father!"
If I hear one more person say that muscle weighs the same as fat I will scream. Muscle does weigh more than fat because it is more dense.
Would you then argue that every person weighs the same since 1lb of them weighs the same as 1lb of anybody else? That is essentially what you are doing with your 1lb = 1lb statement. When someone says muscle weighs more than fat they are referring to the fact that by volume muscle weighs more than fat, they are implying the volume part and therefore no reason to state it.
I have a question for you, what has more caloires chocolate or carrots? If you said chocolate I would agree with you but it would go against your argument as 1 calories of chocolate has the same calories as 1 calories of carrots. Would you make that argument? If not there is really no difference to what you are doing with weight.
You completely missed the point. Of course carrots and chocolate don't have the same caloric value. But if you put 100 cal of carrots beside 100 cals of chocolate, they would have the same value.
Just because something is more dense, that doesn't mean it actually "weighs more". You're thinking of concentration- percentage of weight by volume. I'm talking about fat vs muscle in terms of people weighing themselves on a scale and the fallacy that you could weigh more because "muscle weighs more than fat."
because muscle is dense it takes up less space so you can gain weight (muscle) and be smaller, all because muscle is more dense (heavier) than fat. People know that muscle takes up less space so it is easier to say muscle weighs more than fat rather than since muscle is more dense than the same weight of fat, it will take up less room than the same weight of fat. They mean muscle takes up less room because it is more dense, we all know what they mean.
Not EVERYONE knows that muscle takes up less space than fat (when compared at equal weights). I have seen it questioned and confused on the the message boards several times. Just because something is common knowledge to you doesn't mean it is common knowledge to everyone. Sometimes specificity is needed for clarity.0 -
If I hear one more person say that muscle weighs more than fat, I will scream.
What weighs more.... 1 lb of muscle, or 1 lb of fat? They both weigh one pound!
What people mean to say is that muscle is more dense than fat.....thereby taking up less physical space on our body.
This is a pet peeve of mine, right up there with those people on Maury who say "I'm 150% sure he's the father!"
If I hear one more person say that muscle weighs the same as fat I will scream. Muscle does weigh more than fat because it is more dense. Muscle is about 30% more dense therefore weighs about 30% more.
Would you then argue that every person weighs the same since 1lb of them weighs the same as 1lb of anybody else? That is essentially what you are doing with your 1lb = 1lb statement. When someone says muscle weighs more than fat they are referring to the fact that by volume muscle weighs more than fat, they are implying the volume part and therefore no reason to state it.
I have a question for you, what has more caloires chocolate or carrots? If you said chocolate I would agree with you, but it would go against your argument as 1 calories of chocolate has the same calories as 1 calories of carrots. Would you make that argument? If not, there is really no difference to what you are doing with weight.
If you added a "by volume" on the end of your statement it would be correct. But density/volume measurement is NOT interchangeable with weight. A pound is a pound is a pound. If you put 2 - 145 people side by side, they still both weigh 145#. Yet one might be a couple of sizes smaller than the other due to "density." The fact that muscle is "more dense" is related to volume.
IMO saying muscle is more dense than fat is just as easy to say as muscle weighs more than fat..
8 oz of cocolate and 8 oz of carrots still weigh...wait for it...8 oz. But they will look completely different on the scale. And nutritional density is another post entirely.0 -
OK how about this: Muscle wieghs more than fat per unit volume... People are just leaving off the "per unit volume". Forget about it, you know what they mean.0
-
If I hear one more person say that muscle weighs more than fat, I will scream.
What weighs more.... 1 lb of muscle, or 1 lb of fat? They both weigh one pound!
Read minds, do you?
You know, that old "ton of feathers, ton of lead" trick question works only because the unit of measure for the two quantities being compared is specified and a lot of people don't listen closely enough to notice. If there's any analogy at all to "muscle weighs more than fat" argument, it's that lot of people fail to notice that a unit of measure HAS NOT been specified. So they supply one - one that sounds completely stupid because it makes zero, zilch, no sense whatsoever - and then proceed to play gotcha at the other person's expense. Why do this when you know (well, probably know) what the writer means?0 -
Hmmm ( Being devil's advocate) ... comparisons: "carrots weigh more than feathers" would be wrong? as a # of either is still a #, yet, most people would understand that they are saying one carrot weighs more than one feather , therefore a carrot weighs more than a feather....ie. carrots are heavier than feathers... and in that light, muscle is heavier than fat ...interpreted as muscle weighs more than fat. :happy:0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 398.2K Introduce Yourself
- 44.7K Getting Started
- 261K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.4K Food and Nutrition
- 47.7K Recipes
- 233K Fitness and Exercise
- 462 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.7K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.5K Motivation and Support
- 8.4K Challenges
- 1.4K Debate Club
- 96.5K Chit-Chat
- 2.6K Fun and Games
- 4.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 12 News and Announcements
- 21 MyFitnessPal Academy
- 1.6K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions