Berry78 4,261 Posted September 13, 2017 Interesting article. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/16/health/la-he-fitness-muscle-myth-20110516 1 Apple1 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apple1 2,572 Posted September 13, 2017 47 minutes ago, Berry78 said: Interesting article. http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/16/health/la-he-fitness-muscle-myth-20110516 I really like the last paragraph of that article: "Bill Phillips told me through an assistant that weightlifting is better for fat loss because "each new pound of muscle tissue increases chronic total energy expenditure/metabolism" and that "aerobic exercise alone does not offer this benefit." However, a sizable body of research shows that intense aerobic activity like running burns twice as many calories per hour as hard weightlifting, and the metabolic boost from added muscle is not nearly enough to compensate for this difference." I"ll keep right on running..lol.. I know I should do some lifting a couple days a week, but for some reason I just can't get motivated to do it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Berry78 4,261 Posted September 13, 2017 Ok, in the above article, it's basically agreeing with you, @Mhy12784. But if you look at the part where he gained 20lbs of muscle, lost 50lbs of fat.. and his caloric needs remained essentially the same... What would have happened if he hadn't been working out, gaining the muscle? The loss of 50lbs of fat would have made his caloric needs go down by 100 calories a day. Then because he weighs less, his current muscles that are used to carrying the extra 50lbs shrink. I don't know how much they shrink.. but it's safe to say he now needs to eat... say...110 calories less per day. Not much, right? But if he doesn't pay attention and eats that every day.. 110x365= gaining almost 11 and a half pounds the very first year! As it was, he was able to maintain and even increase the amount of food he was able to consume as a lean, fit person, rather than a heavier out of shape one. Just for fun.. another article. https://www.google.com/amp/s/legionathletics.com/body-recomposition/amp/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Berry78 4,261 Posted September 13, 2017 3 minutes ago, Apple1 said: I really like the last paragraph of that article: "Bill Phillips told me through an assistant that weightlifting is better for fat loss because "each new pound of muscle tissue increases chronic total energy expenditure/metabolism" and that "aerobic exercise alone does not offer this benefit." However, a sizable body of research shows that intense aerobic activity like running burns twice as many calories per hour as hard weightlifting, and the metabolic boost from added muscle is not nearly enough to compensate for this difference." I"ll keep right on running..lol.. I know I should do some lifting a couple days a week, but for some reason I just can't get motivated to do it. Running absolutely increases the metabolism and burns tons of calories. No question about that. You'll be a lean, mean, running machine! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mhy12784 423 Posted September 13, 2017 55 minutes ago, Berry78 said: Ok, in the above article, it's basically agreeing with you, @Mhy12784. But if you look at the part where he gained 20lbs of muscle, lost 50lbs of fat.. and his caloric needs remained essentially the same... What would have happened if he hadn't been working out, gaining the muscle? The loss of 50lbs of fat would have made his caloric needs go down by 100 calories a day. Then because he weighs less, his current muscles that are used to carrying the extra 50lbs shrink. I don't know how much they shrink.. but it's safe to say he now needs to eat... say...110 calories less per day. Not much, right? But if he doesn't pay attention and eats that every day.. 110x365= gaining almost 11 and a half pounds the very first year! As it was, he was able to maintain and even increase the amount of food he was able to consume as a lean, fit person, rather than a heavier out of shape one. Just for fun.. another article. https://www.google.com/amp/s/legionathletics.com/body-recomposition/amp/ It's not a scientific article though. There's no evidence he actually calculated how much muscle he gained (or was it muscle vs lbm which is very different) and his before and after RMR. It's a lot of broscience and myth which is why it's so hard to get educated on the topic 1 Berry78 reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
