In-Your-Face Fitness: The myth of ripped muscles and calorie burns

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 1:39 AM GMT
    http://www.latimes.com/health/la-he-fitness-muscle-myth-20110516,0,7417131.story

    I have no clue about this nor am I too concerned; I'm a scrawny-ass runner not wanting too much muscle mass. I can barely keep enough calories in me the way it is. I still found it quite interesting.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 2:26 AM GMT
    LOL. That article was a whole lot of nothing. LA Times probably pays by word count. Only the last paragraph was worth reading..

    All of this, in any case, ignores the most important part of weight loss: what you eat. "The bottom line is that weight loss is 90% about diet," obesity researcher Dr. Sue Pedersen, a specialist in endocrinology and metabolism in Calgary, told me. "The studies show that exercise alone is not going to result in weight loss."

    In other words, hours of running and weightlifting won't burn your belly fat if you fuel that exercise with Haagen-Dazs.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 2:42 AM GMT
    Yeah, I figured there was some debatable stuff in there. Does one pound of muscle really burn 50 calories/day@ rest? I've always thought that was a bit high, but never had any reason to question it, or be concerned by it. I do hear some of my friends use that line as an excuse not to do cardio. Most of my excuses not to lift are total bullshit, I do know that.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 19, 2011 3:06 AM GMT
    I do believe that the more muscle mass you have, the more calories your body burns at rest. But I also agree that the numbers floating around are high. Everyone has different metabolism, so it's inaccurate to throw out some one-size-fits all ratio.