muscle DOES NOT weigh more than fat

kacka68
kacka68 Posts: 79 Member
edited September 25 in Health and Weight Loss
5lbs of muscle does not weigh anymore than 5lbs of fat....they both weigh 5lbs!

But - 5lb of muscle is smaller, firmer, less lumpy and a whole heap better looking than it's equivilant in fat. Just check out the picture below an see which one you'd rather have on your thighs/hips.

fat-v-muscle.jpg

I pull out this picture every time I need some motivaton. Works a treat - don't you think?

Replies

  • jo_marnes
    jo_marnes Posts: 1,601 Member
    Great pic!
  • Amcantar
    Amcantar Posts: 43 Member
    Muscle does weight more than fat.
    One square foot of muscle would weight more than one square foot of fat.
    You cannot use the same unit of measurement to define a thing twice. Volume vs. weight = Muscle weighs more than fat.
    Look how small that piece of muscle is in relation to that fat.
    Thank you.
  • bmj1985
    bmj1985 Posts: 32
    Thank you!! It really bothers me when people make that claim! It's like 5 pounds of feathers and 5 pounds of bricks is still 5 pounds! Hahaha :noway:
  • albragg
    albragg Posts: 55
    Muscle does weight more than fat.
    One square foot of muscle would weight more than one square foot of fat.
    You cannot use the same unit of measurement to define a thing twice. Volume vs. weight = Muscle weighs more than fat.
    Look how small that piece of muscle is in relation to that fat.
    Thank you.

    In terms of volume, yes muscle weighs more than fat.
  • pkgirrl
    pkgirrl Posts: 587
    Actually, the correct terminology would be that it is more dense. So the poster was correct in saying it doesn't weigh more.
  • smartyart
    smartyart Posts: 9 Member
    5lbs is 5lbs no matter how twist it arouind. 5lbs of fat weighs just as much as 5lbs of muscle :-)
  • kdao
    kdao Posts: 265
    Actually, the correct terminology would be that it is more dense. So the poster was correct in saying it doesn't weigh more.

    Exactly!
  • thumper44
    thumper44 Posts: 1,464 Member
    5lbs is 5lbs no matter how twist it arouind. 5lbs of fat weighs just as much as 5lbs of muscle :-)
    Which weighs the same as 5 lbs of feathers, or 5 lbs of bricks.
  • rachellepilcher
    rachellepilcher Posts: 95
    when someone uses that phrase they are talking about an equal VOLUME of muscle and fat in which the muscle does weigh more
  • thumper44
    thumper44 Posts: 1,464 Member
    when someone uses that phrase they are talking about an equal VOLUME of muscle and fat in which the muscle does weigh more
    correct.

    ok, let's throw a twist.
    You have 4 shoeboxes.

    You fill one up each with. You can carve it up...
    muscle, fat............ bricks, and feathers.

    Now which one is heavier.
  • autumn13
    autumn13 Posts: 295
    Pictures sure do speak louder than words!
  • Zara11
    Zara11 Posts: 1,247 Member
    Guys... c'mon. We get the point. Perhaps it can be phrased in a more accurate manner, but it I'm pretty sure everyone gets the idea.

    Fat < muscle.

    It's a great picture, btw. Thanks for sharing!

    EDIT: If we're going to beat dead horses, then I feel compelled to ask.... do I have to eat my exercise calories???
  • abray84
    abray84 Posts: 55
    Great picture. It sure does make you think. I'd rather have the muscle for sure.
  • ninyagwa
    ninyagwa Posts: 341 Member
    For serious! It is a huge pet peeve of mine when people use that terminology, because no matter how you slice it muscle is just more dense it doesn't weight more....here's the proper use of that phrasing: I weigh more than a baby calf. But you are talking about things without referring to their specific size, muscle and fat within a person varies and is hard to really quantify, so you can't really use the expression properly ever.

    Or I just made all that up.

    = D
  • TropicalKitty
    TropicalKitty Posts: 2,298 Member
    Muscle does weight more than fat.
    One square foot of muscle would weight more than one square foot of fat.
    You cannot use the same unit of measurement to define a thing twice. Volume vs. weight = Muscle weighs more than fat.
    Look how small that piece of muscle is in relation to that fat.
    Thank you.

    That isn't at all what the OP was saying. Unfortunately, this is a great case of people implying things. A given mass is the same regardless of the substance. The volumes are different.

    What it seems like the OP is saying is "muscle doesn't weigh more than fat. Instead, it is more dense. I would rather have denser mass on my body by being muscular than being larger with the same mass of less dense fat."
  • abyssfully
    abyssfully Posts: 410 Member
    lol - that's awesome.
  • TropicalKitty
    TropicalKitty Posts: 2,298 Member
    Guys... c'mon. We get the point. Perhaps it can be phrased in a more accurate manner, but it I'm pretty sure everyone gets the idea.

    Fat < muscle.

    It's a great picture, btw. Thanks for sharing!

    EDIT: If we're going to beat dead horses, then I feel compelled to ask.... do I have to eat my exercise calories???

    hahaha! Love it!
  • EricMurano
    EricMurano Posts: 825 Member
    Actually, the correct terminology would be that it is more dense. So the poster was correct in saying it doesn't weigh more.

    +1
  • corpus_validum
    corpus_validum Posts: 292 Member
    This is such a stupid argument. I think everyone is smart enough to know that people are implying that a certain volume of muscle weighs more than the exact same volume of fat. Density. The people peeved with the wording can be described as dense as well...that or uptight:bigsmile:

    Thanks for the pic though...a very good illustration. The dilemma is how to obtain one and not the other...and the answer isn't loads of cardio:tongue:
  • xraychick77
    xraychick77 Posts: 1,775 Member
    it does weigh more by volume.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories