Replacing fat with muscle?

jtintx
jtintx Posts: 445 Member
edited September 19 in Health and Weight Loss
So many times I see posts where people say, "Don't worry, you are replacing fat with muscle." Now maybe I'm wrong but you can't replace fat with anything - am I right? Muscle is muscle and fat is fat and one cannot be "replaced" with another. You can either shrink fat cells or build muscle fiber, right? Also, I'd be curious to know how much muscle weight a person can really put on. Seems to me it really wouldn't be that much...especially for women...but they seem to be the ones telling each other that you're gaining muscle. Is this really legit? I'm sure men can pack on some muscle weight, but women? Not that much, right?

Replies

  • jtintx
    jtintx Posts: 445 Member
    So many times I see posts where people say, "Don't worry, you are replacing fat with muscle." Now maybe I'm wrong but you can't replace fat with anything - am I right? Muscle is muscle and fat is fat and one cannot be "replaced" with another. You can either shrink fat cells or build muscle fiber, right? Also, I'd be curious to know how much muscle weight a person can really put on. Seems to me it really wouldn't be that much...especially for women...but they seem to be the ones telling each other that you're gaining muscle. Is this really legit? I'm sure men can pack on some muscle weight, but women? Not that much, right?
  • Itmomma
    Itmomma Posts: 21 Member
    So, my way of thinking is this....you are Burning fat and Gaining muscle. I am not sure if replacing is exactly the right word. As far as how much muscle women can pack on, that depends on your body type, genes play a huge roll in that. Obviously there are women bodybuilders out there that have put on a ton of muscle, but the "average" woman won't put on a whole lot. Also, I think part of it may be that we have a good deal of muscle to begin with but it is well "insulated", when we strip off the fat we see more. Does that help at all?
  • schoonmp
    schoonmp Posts: 175
    So many times I see posts where people say, "Don't worry, you are replacing fat with muscle." Now maybe I'm wrong but you can't replace fat with anything - am I right? Muscle is muscle and fat is fat and one cannot be "replaced" with another. You can either shrink fat cells or build muscle fiber, right? Also, I'd be curious to know how much muscle weight a person can really put on. Seems to me it really wouldn't be that much...especially for women...but they seem to be the ones telling each other that you're gaining muscle. Is this really legit? I'm sure men can pack on some muscle weight, but women? Not that much, right?

    You asked some very good questions that I would like to know also. I've also heard that once you have fat cells they never go away, just shrink. But I don't know that answer for sure.
    Pam
  • ktthegr8
    ktthegr8 Posts: 479
    I know that I look a lot different since I've been working out. About 8 years ago, I went on Weight Watchers and lost 50 pounds. But I didn't exercise at all. This time around, I started exercising before dieting. Now I am wearing clothes at 167 lbs that fit me when I was 155. I don't think it is the same for everyone but I notice about a 10 pound difference. I hope this makes sense and kind of answers your question.:flowerforyou:
  • singfree
    singfree Posts: 1,591 Member
    People like to use phrases that are either wrong or misleading. You are right, fat is fat and muscle is muscle. Fat does not turn to muscle or vice versa. In a way, you can "replace" fat with muscle. If you work out and eat right to burn off your fat deposits, and lift weights to build muscle mass, then you are replacing the lost fat weight with lean muscle. That is why some people do not see a drop in scale weight, even though they are losing inches.

    As far as gaining muscle, it all depends on your workouts. You need to constantly challenge your muscles. Lifting 2 lb dumbbells will not cut it. Bodybuilding.com has some very good articles on this subject, geared for women.
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    This is going to be far more then you really needed to know, but oh well, here I go.:tongue:


    Technically you can't replace fat with muscle, and (this is VERY important to note) you won't put on significant muscle while in caloric deficit.

    What you CAN do while at a deficit is build muscle density, and increase the mitochondria in your muscle cells (mitochondria are what converts glycogen and oxygen into ATP, the energy muscle use as go go juice). This makes muscles more dense, heavier, and thus you gain lean mass but not volume.

    So what happens is this, when you work out at submaximal levels (aerobic workouts), your body burns fat stores and directly ingested glucose first, becaues the body never runs out of oxygen, the muscles never fill up with lactic acid, and thus the body can continue for a long time producing ATP at a sufficient level.
    this burns fat and stored glycogen pretty well, this is why cardio burns fat better then weight training.

    BUT,
    When we work out maximally (anaerobically), our muscles burn ATP faster then our body can produce more, leading to a build up in lactic acid (the byproduct of ATP consumption), and thus the "burn" you get when you say... lift weights, or sprint for an extended period.
    This doesn't really burn too much fat, simply because the body isn't able to keep up this activity for long enough to need to dip into fat stores significantly. BUT what the body will do is recognize that you didn't have enough muscle mass to do the task you gave it without running out of fuel, thus it will add volume to the muscle, as well as increase density, which makes you bigger, and stronger in that specific muscle.

    So if you are at a caloric deficit and trying to build muscle, you have a conflict, your metabolic processes need the calories for daily function, but your muscles are screaming for more stuff to build them up, this hampers both processes, and will lead to other areas being neglected and can even cause the body to canabalize muscles that aren't used as often.

    All that said, the two types of exercise have a meeting point, a place where you can do both to a degree, sometimes called interval training, sometimes call High Intensity Interval Training, it utilizes both technique, and is actually quite effective, BUT you should be at a relatively small deficit (or none at all) when doing this kind of workout as it will tax your body pretty harshly.
  • jtintx
    jtintx Posts: 445 Member
    That is exactly the type of info I'm looking for. So am I correct...you aren't really putting on muscle, or increasing muscle density, enough to use the "excuse" that you aren't losing weight because you are gaining muscle? Or is that a valid excuse? Is it possible to increase muscle density in let's say a week, to account for not losing weight that week?
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    That is exactly the type of info I'm looking for. So am I correct...you aren't really putting on muscle, or increasing muscle density, enough to use the "excuse" that you aren't losing weight because you are gaining muscle? Or is that a valid excuse? Is it possible to increase muscle density in let's say a week, to account for not losing weight that week?

    Ahh, probably not. You can increase muscle volume, and often when you change from a cardio heavy workout to a anaerobic workout schedule, your body chemistry alters (you generally store more water this way, and I think a little more glycogen too), so that can account for weight gain at the beginning of a change, but straight muscle gain while losing fat? I doubt it very much. It took me 5 months to gain 4 lbs, and I work out pretty hard, and eat at an actual surplus.
  • jtintx
    jtintx Posts: 445 Member
    That is exactly the type of info I'm looking for. So am I correct...you aren't really putting on muscle, or increasing muscle density, enough to use the "excuse" that you aren't losing weight because you are gaining muscle? Or is that a valid excuse? Is it possible to increase muscle density in let's say a week, to account for not losing weight that week?

    Ahh, probably not. You can increase muscle volume, and often when you change from a cardio heavy workout to a anaerobic workout schedule, your body chemistry alters (you generally store more water this way, and I think a little more glycogen too), so that can account for weight gain at the beginning of a change, but straight muscle gain while losing fat? I doubt it very much. It took me 5 months to gain 4 lbs, and I work out pretty hard, and eat at an actual surplus.
    So why do we keep telling each other that our weight is unchanged due to replacing fat with muscle? Ok, this is my new pet peeve.
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    That is exactly the type of info I'm looking for. So am I correct...you aren't really putting on muscle, or increasing muscle density, enough to use the "excuse" that you aren't losing weight because you are gaining muscle? Or is that a valid excuse? Is it possible to increase muscle density in let's say a week, to account for not losing weight that week?

    Ahh, probably not. You can increase muscle volume, and often when you change from a cardio heavy workout to a anaerobic workout schedule, your body chemistry alters (you generally store more water this way, and I think a little more glycogen too), so that can account for weight gain at the beginning of a change, but straight muscle gain while losing fat? I doubt it very much. It took me 5 months to gain 4 lbs, and I work out pretty hard, and eat at an actual surplus.
    So why do we keep telling each other that our weight is unchanged due to replacing fat with muscle? Ok, this is my new pet peeve.

    Because nobody believe in the power of water weight.
    Also because nobody understands that it takes at a minimum, weeks for substantial changes (in the absence of extreme changes)
    And because people don't read the historical threads on here. :tongue:

    don't sweat it, trust me, after a while you get used to it. It used to piss me off too. Eventually you learn that, a certain percentage of people in life believe what they choose to believe, no matter how many hard facts you lay down infront of them.
  • You know because of this thread, I'm just going to stop using weights all together. I want to lost the fat first. This means more cardio, more cardio, and more cardio. Would it be fair to say that after I finally reach my goal if I want a toned look I'd probably would want to then add weights to my work out plan or by just doing cardio with maybe intervals will help achieve that tone look?
  • Vanessa1969
    Vanessa1969 Posts: 144 Member
    This takes me back to cellular respiration in Biology. And I was convinced that I would never, ever need that information in 'real' life. Was I ever wrong.
    :laugh:
  • singfree
    singfree Posts: 1,591 Member
    road2hotness, please reconsider giving up weight training. In your quest to lose maximum fat, you will also lose some muscle along the way. Strength training has many benefits. IMO cardio and strength training go hand in hand. You will never have a "toned" look without weights.
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    I agree, you really don't need to completely eliminate weight training. And yeah, while doing cardio, just by the way our body's work, you will burn some lean tissue as well, so the weight training is beneficial in that it keeps your fat to muscle ratio in balance. You probably don't need to do a lot, but 1 or two days a week is still a good idea.

    If you have a lot of fat to lose, then yeah, concentrating on cardio is probably the right way to go, but giving up muscle building activity won't really help that, it will just slowly reduce your muscle mass, which will make you weaker, which will reduce the amount of cardio you can do and also make you look far less fit (as singfree said) after the fat does come off.
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    This takes me back to cellular respiration in Biology. And I was convinced that I would never, ever need that information in 'real' life. Was I ever wrong.
    :laugh:

    See? Who says school is for losers! Remember what your highschool biology teacher used to say? "Mitochondria are the powerhouses of the cell!" LOL! I'll never forget that.
  • Isa25
    Isa25 Posts: 46
    bump
  • Stewie316
    Stewie316 Posts: 266 Member
    I want to lose another 5 pounds and I also want to tone or gain muscle. What would be the best way to accomplish this? I'm currently at a calorie deficit, so I can't gain muscle at a deficit right? Should I stay with my deficit and then once I get to my goal weight up my calories and do strength training? Do I need to be at a surplus to gain muscle?
  • lmk224
    lmk224 Posts: 41 Member
    Bump
  • SHBoss1673
    SHBoss1673 Posts: 7,161 Member
    I want to lose another 5 pounds and I also want to tone or gain muscle. What would be the best way to accomplish this? I'm currently at a calorie deficit, so I can't gain muscle at a deficit right? Should I stay with my deficit and then once I get to my goal weight up my calories and do strength training? Do I need to be at a surplus to gain muscle?

    without overly complicating it, yes, the easiest way to do what you want to do is first lose the fat, then concentrate on muscle building activity.

    You asked if you need to be in a surplus to gain muscle. The real answer to this is very very complicated. There are ways to gain some small amounts of muscle mass while in a small deficit, but they are very strict processes and difficult to sustain. For most of us, it's best to be at maintenance or at a very small surplus when trying to gain lean mass. Then again, 5 lbs of fat loss is really a very small amount. I don't see any reason why you can't try to gain mass now and gradually reduce body fat % in the process by exercise and healthy eating without a deficit.
This discussion has been closed.