Muscle weighs more than fat??!! No it doesn't!
qifitness
Posts: 49 Member
Hi Everyone
Since this is recurring throughout the messages, I hope this will help:
Muscle does NOT weigh more than fat. This is the biggest and daftest of all fitness myths.
1lb muscle = 1lb fat = 1lb muscle. They weigh exactly the same.
1kg fat = 1kg muscle = 1kg fat. They weigh exactly the same.
1 ton muscle = 1 ton fat = 1 ton muscle. They weigh exactly the same.
So when someone's weight starts increasing again, and they are exercising, it is NOT because 'muscle weighs more than fat.
It doesn't. (Look again at the info above.)
Another very important point to be aware of is that although we can set targets to work towards and motivate us, with 'weight' loss regimes, we are tampering with our bodies' natural ability to regulate itself (homeostasis). Consequently, we can't simply choose a new lower weight and expect that it's realistic. Plateauing will eventually occur as our bodies 'settle' to their natural weight. Unfortunately, this can also mean returning to a higher weight.
The truth of the myth lies in the fact that muscle is a denser tissue than body fat.
It is more 'compact', but does not 'weigh more'. So, two people of the same gender, height and build can weigh the same, but look different, if each has a different proportion/ratio of fat/muscle tissue.
I hope this might be helpful in understanding this issue of weight increase.
Best wishes.
Since this is recurring throughout the messages, I hope this will help:
Muscle does NOT weigh more than fat. This is the biggest and daftest of all fitness myths.
1lb muscle = 1lb fat = 1lb muscle. They weigh exactly the same.
1kg fat = 1kg muscle = 1kg fat. They weigh exactly the same.
1 ton muscle = 1 ton fat = 1 ton muscle. They weigh exactly the same.
So when someone's weight starts increasing again, and they are exercising, it is NOT because 'muscle weighs more than fat.
It doesn't. (Look again at the info above.)
Another very important point to be aware of is that although we can set targets to work towards and motivate us, with 'weight' loss regimes, we are tampering with our bodies' natural ability to regulate itself (homeostasis). Consequently, we can't simply choose a new lower weight and expect that it's realistic. Plateauing will eventually occur as our bodies 'settle' to their natural weight. Unfortunately, this can also mean returning to a higher weight.
The truth of the myth lies in the fact that muscle is a denser tissue than body fat.
It is more 'compact', but does not 'weigh more'. So, two people of the same gender, height and build can weigh the same, but look different, if each has a different proportion/ratio of fat/muscle tissue.
I hope this might be helpful in understanding this issue of weight increase.
Best wishes.
0
Replies
-
I always repeat the same thing. What confuses people, IMO, is that a pound of muscle is more dense than a pound of fat, thus a pound of muscle takes up less space in your body that a pound of fat. So, if you are, in fact, increasing lean muscle mass, you may very well weigh exactly the same in lbs/kgs. on the scale, but your body will be smaller in size.
And yep...if you aren't exercising and you're gaining weight, it's most certainly not an increase in lean muscle mass.0 -
You've got that spot on. I hope other members here begin to see that too.
What can make things more confusing is that many fitness instructors and personal trainers will tell their clients 'muscle weighs more than fat' when these clients start gaining weight or stop losing it!
I used to teach advanced professional training courses in the UK for fitness instructors and it was quite staggering how many of these 'qualified' people still believed this myth, despite their professional training!0 -
All very true, but I think the point is the same, even if the way of explaining it isn't exactly accurate - you are still getting smaller despite the # on the scale going up. Part of me wish I had the courage to just throw my scale away and just go by how my clothes feel and how I feel and look - it's so easy to get hung up on a silly number that, as you said earlier, may not even be realistic for you. One of my dearest friends has the most terrific figure I've ever seen - she's 5'4 and to look at her you would think she was maybe 110 - tops. She's 155 - and in perfect shape. So many fitness myths out there...it's hard to know what to advice to follow!0
-
And thanks for explaining this!!!0
-
thanks for clearing this up0
-
Follow professionally qualified advice.
The subjects of health, fitness and nutrition are riddled with myths masquerading as 'well-known facts' (aka 'conventional wisdom').
The information posted is correct (and from a professionally qualified health and fitness specialist.0 -
when i signed up at the gym, the trainer sat down and he explained the same thing to me......1lb = 1lb no matter what it is.
BUT - he did point out, one pound of fat is the size of a basketball , where as one pound of muscle is almost a softball.0 -
Not quite the size of a basketball, but quite a nice way of putting it nonetheless
0 -
I just deleted a post that was a little too mean. Here's the nice version; Muscle is more DENSE then fat. If you take the same volumetric measure of fat and muscle, the muscle will way MORE. The point being that you can change the ratio of fat to muscle in your body to a more favorable one while not losing or actually gaining weight.0
-
Hi TateFTW
That's what I originally wrote - muscle is more dense than fat.
While it's true that an equal volume of fat and muscle would show a difference in weight, humans aren't measured by volume, so the analogy is irrelevant.
The basis of this 'well-known fact' (=myth) derives from a laboratory process of body composition assessment known as 'hydrostatic weighing'.
A human subject is suspended in water and weighed. With muscle being more dense than fat it appears to weigh more, displacing more water. Body composition can then be calculated using established mathematical formulae.
An example of this principle is seen when weighing two people of the same weight (on dry land, relying on the effect of gravity).
In the process of hydrostatic weighing the person with a higher proportion of lean mass (muscle) will appear to weigh more when suspended in water.
Although this process has been considered the 'gold standard' and most accurate method of assessing body composition, it has now been replaced by the more 'subject friendly' methods using x-ray and infra-red.
Without access to any of this stuff (i.e. most of us), the simple tape measure will have to suffice.0 -
Hi Everyone
Since this is recurring throughout the messages, I hope this will help:
Muscle does NOT weigh more than fat. This is the biggest and daftest of all fitness myths.
1lb muscle = 1lb fat = 1lb muscle. They weigh exactly the same.
1kg fat = 1kg muscle = 1kg fat. They weigh exactly the same.
1 ton muscle = 1 ton fat = 1 ton muscle. They weigh exactly the same.
So when someone's weight starts increasing again, and they are exercising, it is NOT because 'muscle weighs more than fat.
It doesn't. (Look again at the info above.)
Another very important point to be aware of is that although we can set targets to work towards and motivate us, with 'weight' loss regimes, we are tampering with our bodies' natural ability to regulate itself (homeostasis). Consequently, we can't simply choose a new lower weight and expect that it's realistic. Plateauing will eventually occur as our bodies 'settle' to their natural weight. Unfortunately, this can also mean returning to a higher weight.
The truth of the myth lies in the fact that muscle is a denser tissue than body fat.
It is more 'compact', but does not 'weigh more'. So, two people of the same gender, height and build can weigh the same, but look different, if each has a different proportion/ratio of fat/muscle tissue.
I hope this might be helpful in understanding this issue of weight increase.
Best wishes.
I think it's safe to say that anytime somebody says that "Muscle weighs more than fat", they really mean "Muscle weighs more than fat per unit volume". Any given volume of muscle weighs more than that same volume of fat. It's like playing a game with words.0 -
Hi Everyone
Since this is recurring throughout the messages, I hope this will help:
Muscle does NOT weigh more than fat. This is the biggest and daftest of all fitness myths.
1lb muscle = 1lb fat = 1lb muscle. They weigh exactly the same.
1kg fat = 1kg muscle = 1kg fat. They weigh exactly the same.
1 ton muscle = 1 ton fat = 1 ton muscle. They weigh exactly the same.
So when someone's weight starts increasing again, and they are exercising, it is NOT because 'muscle weighs more than fat.
It doesn't. (Look again at the info above.)
Another very important point to be aware of is that although we can set targets to work towards and motivate us, with 'weight' loss regimes, we are tampering with our bodies' natural ability to regulate itself (homeostasis). Consequently, we can't simply choose a new lower weight and expect that it's realistic. Plateauing will eventually occur as our bodies 'settle' to their natural weight. Unfortunately, this can also mean returning to a higher weight.
The truth of the myth lies in the fact that muscle is a denser tissue than body fat.
It is more 'compact', but does not 'weigh more'. So, two people of the same gender, height and build can weigh the same, but look different, if each has a different proportion/ratio of fat/muscle tissue.
I hope this might be helpful in understanding this issue of weight increase.
Best wishes.
I think it's safe to say that anytime somebody says that "Muscle weighs more than fat", they really mean "Muscle weighs more than fat per unit volume". Any given volume of muscle weighs more than that same volume of fat. It's like playing a game with words.
This is what I always assumed when I heard someone ever say that. Obviously 1lb = 1lb no matter what it is. It would only make sense if someone meant it as "Muscle weighs more than fat per unit volume".
Seems like a non-issue? I guess maybe not all take it that way then if there is a thread about it.0 -
It should be a non issue, but I'm not quite sure where there are always threads saying the same thing. Each thread says this (paraphrasing): muscle does not weigh more than fat! 1 pound is 1 pound, BUT muscle is more dense so it takes up less room!Hi Everyone
Since this is recurring throughout the messages, I hope this will help:
Muscle does NOT weigh more than fat. This is the biggest and daftest of all fitness myths.
1lb muscle = 1lb fat = 1lb muscle. They weigh exactly the same.
1kg fat = 1kg muscle = 1kg fat. They weigh exactly the same.
1 ton muscle = 1 ton fat = 1 ton muscle. They weigh exactly the same.
So when someone's weight starts increasing again, and they are exercising, it is NOT because 'muscle weighs more than fat.
It doesn't. (Look again at the info above.)
Another very important point to be aware of is that although we can set targets to work towards and motivate us, with 'weight' loss regimes, we are tampering with our bodies' natural ability to regulate itself (homeostasis). Consequently, we can't simply choose a new lower weight and expect that it's realistic. Plateauing will eventually occur as our bodies 'settle' to their natural weight. Unfortunately, this can also mean returning to a higher weight.
The truth of the myth lies in the fact that muscle is a denser tissue than body fat.
It is more 'compact', but does not 'weigh more'. So, two people of the same gender, height and build can weigh the same, but look different, if each has a different proportion/ratio of fat/muscle tissue.
I hope this might be helpful in understanding this issue of weight increase.
Best wishes.
I think it's safe to say that anytime somebody says that "Muscle weighs more than fat", they really mean "Muscle weighs more than fat per unit volume". Any given volume of muscle weighs more than that same volume of fat. It's like playing a game with words.
This is what I always assumed when I heard someone ever say that. Obviously 1lb = 1lb no matter what it is. It would only make sense if someone meant it as "Muscle weighs more than fat per unit volume".
Seems like a non-issue? I guess maybe not all take it that way then if there is a thread about it.
Duh, that's what muscle weighing more than fat means, the comment is based on volume.
Saying muscle and fat weigh the same is akin to saying chocolate and celery have the same amount of calories since 1 calories = 1 calorie. Obviously, the context is implied. In the case of fat/muscle the implied context is volume. With celery and chocolate, the implied context is a serving.0 -
I always repeat the same thing. What confuses people, IMO, is that a pound of muscle is more dense than a pound of fat, thus a pound of muscle takes up less space in your body that a pound of fat. So, if you are, in fact, increasing lean muscle mass, you may very well weigh exactly the same in lbs/kgs. on the scale, but your body will be smaller in size.
And yep...if you aren't exercising and you're gaining weight, it's most certainly not an increase in lean muscle mass.
I am not a scientist or math person by any stretch of the imagination...so I think this is what confuses people and makes them think that muscle weighs more than fat (above)....they think that dense=heavier. They don't see all that formula figuring when they are looking at the scale, they are just thinking that muscle is hard and fat is soft, so muscle must be heavier.0 -
Great info to clarify understanding.
If you have the same volume of fat and muscle example: 1 cubic inch of fat would weight less than 1cubic inch of muscle. So muscle does weight more than fat when you are measuring the same volumes.0 -
Here's another way to put it:
By saying that muscle does not weighs more than fat, you are essentially saying that everything in the world weighs the same (ie, iron and feathers weigh the same). That's a useless statement to make, because it has no meaning. Obviously some things are heavier than others. To communicate that, you either define what you are comparing (this car weighs more than that feather), or it is implied (lead is heavier than feathers, the implication that you are talking about the same volume is understood).
Do you ever wonder why the trick question; "what weighs more, a pound of feathers, or a pound of lead" tricks peope so often? I'd venture to guess that the implied comparison of volume is so commonly understood, that people don't even pay attention to the weight comparrison.0 -
okay... I'm not really sure what to think of this whole post... LOL is the best way to sum it up...
At the risk of sounding pretentious, or demeaning in ANY WAY... if you think that 1lb is anything other than 1 lb... you're a retard.
it's OBVIOUS (to me at least) that "muscle weighs more than fat" ... is a statement about density, not volume. (facepalm) come on, use some logic people.0 -
OK, folks, this little meme has run its course.
What people mean when they say X is heavier than Y (*) is that equal VOLUMES of X weigh more (or better, have a higher mass) than THE SAME VOLUME of Y. Of course it doesn't mean that equal weights have different weights, which would be a very silly thing to think.
Is diesel these days more expensive than unleaded gas? Well, according to you, no! Because if you buy $10 worth of diesel you pay just the same as when you buy $10 worth of unleaded gas!
Is gold more expensive than straw? Is a box made of lead heavier than a box of the same dimensions made of wood?
So please, it's completely reasonable to say that muscle is heavier than fat.
This leads to the effect that you replace a certain quantity of fat that makes up your body mass by muscle, you either:
- weigh the same but look smaller -- muscle weighs more per unit of volume, so if you replace a given weight, you get a smaller volume
- weigh more while taking up the same amount of space but looking more muscular (heavy bodybuilders who can pack on muscle)
- most likely, something in the middle but MUCH closer to the first option.
(*) That is, where X and Y are designated by mass nouns. For something that comes in units the problem doesn't occur -- "a car is heavier than a bicycle" doesn't seem to give people just as many problems of reasoning.0 -
This is one of my least favorite recurring themes on these boards, right up there with "HOW DARE YOU HAVE A CHEAT MEAL! YOU'RE ONLY CHEATING YOURSELF!"
Whatever. We all understand that 1 lb. of any given substance weighs exactly the same as 1 lb. of any other given substance. That's not what anyone is talking about when they say muscle weighs more than fat. They're talking about the fact that you can start out with a flabby body at a certain weight, then build up some muscle, lose inches, and generally become smaller and tighter without losing any weight because muscle, by volume, weighs more than fat.
It is not an "irrelevant analogy" because we most certainly do measure ourselves in terms of inches lost, in addition to pounds lost. You may be smaller, but you weigh the same because MUSCLE. WEIGHS. MORE. THAN. FAT.0 -
Case in point, I am very fit, fitter than I have been in my life. The last time I weighed what I do now I was in a size 14, I am now a size 8. So I weigh the same but I am way smaller and firmer!
But I do think it is implied that a pound of muscle takes up less space than a pound of fat when someone says a pound of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat.0 -
Density is what people get confused.0
-
Ok I didn't read all the comments but no offence this is dumb...
Anyone that says muscle weighs more the fat is NOT implying that 1 pound of muscle weighs more than 1 pound of fat. The unit of comparison is not weight it volume. They're are comparing 1 volume of muscle to 1 volume of fat.
Yes 1 pound of feathers weighs the same as 1 pound of lead. But does one bucket of feathers way the same as one bucket of lead?0 -
It doesn't really matter how someone puts it. Bottom line is that if you have more muscle and less fat the leaner you are.
What's dumb is this debate. I know that if someone says "1lb of fat muscle weighs more than 1lb of fat" what they mean.0 -
This thread hasnt been posted on in a while, but people still keep correcting others that say 'muscle weighs more than fat'.
The OP stated that volume is irrelevant, which is incorrect. Everyones 'muscle weighs more than fat' statements are made in the context of fitness. If you were all fat, and the size of a prius, and I was all muscle and normal human size, you would be fat. And you wouldnt be saying "a pound is a pound ".
A pound is defined as 0.45359237 kg. Kilograms are a unit of Mass. Mass = Density x Volume. Weight = Mass x Gravity.
Therefore Volume is a necessary part of the equation.
The point is that everyone should stop corrected the statement. when someone says "a pound of fat > a pound of muscle" that is incorrect, and deserves correction. When someone says, "muscle weighs more than fat" that statement is correct, and does not merit correction.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions