One thing I often hear is that muscle burns more energy than fat. Of that I have no argument because it is true, but the amount of energy is what people neglect to tell you. The problem is the muscle versus fat argument is so believable and logical people look no deeper.
Normally when I research I try to find published papers from recognised universities. Unfortunately in this case I have not been able to find any scientific papers that I'm able to quote, but I'll provide here a link to an often quoted Christian Finn who is an author and to quote from his page, "Christian Finn holds a master's degree in exercise science, is a certified personal trainer".
I have not confirmed the credentials of Christian Finn but unfortunately for lack of a better resource, it is the only material I can refer to. Please treat this information as non-substantied material. From what I've it does appear to be credible.
http://muscleevo.net/muscle-metabolism/#.U39FexYxHlI
There is a problem with this article in that it refers to calories with a lower case c. The problem is when people are talking about Calories are actually talking about Calories with an upper case C. Using the lower case isn't the same. It is a factor 1,000 less. I've cross checked one figure from the article from one of the references and by converting a MJ figure I believe the article should be using the unit of measure Calories and not calories. So let's proceed on the basis that this is a common typographical error and where the article mentions calories, we'll assume it means Calories.
According to this article fat burns 2 Calories per pound per day and muscle 6 Calories per pound per day. In metric this is 18.4 kJ per kg per day for fat and 55.2 kJ per kg day for muscle.
In the example study of a period of 18 weeks the men undertook resistance training and were able to increase their fat-free mass by 2 kg. Note that is 2 kg in a period of around 4 months which if you think about it is not a great amount.
Now putting together the fat-free mass increase and the energy per day we get 2 kg x 55.2 kJ which is 110 kJ per day.
In effect, for four months of resistance training the additional energy burnt off each day is approximately the same as a third of a Tim Tam, less than two teaspoons of sugar, a third of a slice of bread.
In other words for the amount of benefit is tiny compared to the effort required. This isn't to say don't exercise, because you should, but if you want to lose weight you need to focus where you'll gain the most results.
Having one slice of bread for toast in the morning instead of two will have achieved three times the benefit instantly in terms of reduced kilojoules.
To put this into context, to lose weight through dieting people reduce their food energy intake in the thousands of kilojoules. An amount of 110 kJ if we're are looking at losing weight is insignificant compared to dieting.
All I'm trying to do here is for people to understand the numbers so they can make a better decision. Exercise is good for you. Fat-free mass will burn more energy than fat. But putting too much of your focus into an area with a relatively small effect on reaching your weight loss goal is not the best way to lose weight.
Exercise because it is good for you and take advantage of the extra energy you use. But make sure you get your diet in order as diet has the greatest effect.
Kelvin Eldridge
Normally when I research I try to find published papers from recognised universities. Unfortunately in this case I have not been able to find any scientific papers that I'm able to quote, but I'll provide here a link to an often quoted Christian Finn who is an author and to quote from his page, "Christian Finn holds a master's degree in exercise science, is a certified personal trainer".
I have not confirmed the credentials of Christian Finn but unfortunately for lack of a better resource, it is the only material I can refer to. Please treat this information as non-substantied material. From what I've it does appear to be credible.
http://muscleevo.net/muscle-metabolism/#.U39FexYxHlI
There is a problem with this article in that it refers to calories with a lower case c. The problem is when people are talking about Calories are actually talking about Calories with an upper case C. Using the lower case isn't the same. It is a factor 1,000 less. I've cross checked one figure from the article from one of the references and by converting a MJ figure I believe the article should be using the unit of measure Calories and not calories. So let's proceed on the basis that this is a common typographical error and where the article mentions calories, we'll assume it means Calories.
According to this article fat burns 2 Calories per pound per day and muscle 6 Calories per pound per day. In metric this is 18.4 kJ per kg per day for fat and 55.2 kJ per kg day for muscle.
In the example study of a period of 18 weeks the men undertook resistance training and were able to increase their fat-free mass by 2 kg. Note that is 2 kg in a period of around 4 months which if you think about it is not a great amount.
Now putting together the fat-free mass increase and the energy per day we get 2 kg x 55.2 kJ which is 110 kJ per day.
In effect, for four months of resistance training the additional energy burnt off each day is approximately the same as a third of a Tim Tam, less than two teaspoons of sugar, a third of a slice of bread.
In other words for the amount of benefit is tiny compared to the effort required. This isn't to say don't exercise, because you should, but if you want to lose weight you need to focus where you'll gain the most results.
Having one slice of bread for toast in the morning instead of two will have achieved three times the benefit instantly in terms of reduced kilojoules.
To put this into context, to lose weight through dieting people reduce their food energy intake in the thousands of kilojoules. An amount of 110 kJ if we're are looking at losing weight is insignificant compared to dieting.
All I'm trying to do here is for people to understand the numbers so they can make a better decision. Exercise is good for you. Fat-free mass will burn more energy than fat. But putting too much of your focus into an area with a relatively small effect on reaching your weight loss goal is not the best way to lose weight.
Exercise because it is good for you and take advantage of the extra energy you use. But make sure you get your diet in order as diet has the greatest effect.
Kelvin Eldridge
