Questions about Building Muscles, Losing Fat

[StevenR]

I read that a pound of muscle can burn as much as 50 calories a day. Is this true? I was thinking if this was the case, then building muscles is also the best strategy for long term fat loss as well. It would also explain why so many people who just diet gain back the weight and then some(because they lost muscle as well as fat).
So when I do the math, assume I gain 1/2 pound of muscle a week working out in the gym consistently. That is 2 pounds of muscle every 4 weeks of consistent training. That is 100 extra calories you can burn every day as long as you maintain that, correct? 100x30=3000, That means for every 5 weeks you work out in the gym, assuming the rate of muscle growth continues, you will lose a pound of fat a month if your caloric intake stays the same and you maintain that muscle. And that would be cumulative if you continue to gain muscle mass. 10 weeks of training at this level would result in a loss of 2lbs per month, either that or you can now get away with eating an extra 250 calories a day and maintain your bodyfat.
Is this how it works in the real world, or is this just a mathematical abstraction I came up with? If true then it would seem that building muscle would be the best way to lose fat and keep it off, it takes longer than a crash diet, but if you maintain muscle mass you would be a lot less likely to gain the fat back unless you really ate like a pig, correct?
I am also curious, for a 5'8"-5'9" man how many pounds of muscle would I gain to have a BMI of 25 and look athletic. I have no desire to look like the Incredible Hulk or some sort of steroid monster, just to have nice, natural looking well defined musculature, like Bruce Willis or something. How many pounds of muscle is that for a guy my height?

 

[EFFORT]

I read that a pound of muscle can burn as much as 50 calories a day. Is this true? I was thinking if this was the case, then building muscles is also the best strategy for long term fat loss as well. It would also explain why so many people who just diet gain back the weight and then some(because they lost muscle as well as fat).
So when I do the math, assume I gain 1/2 pound of muscle a week working out in the gym consistently. That is 2 pounds of muscle every 4 weeks of consistent training. That is 100 extra calories you can burn every day as long as you maintain that, correct? 100x30=3000, That means for every 5 weeks you work out in the gym, assuming the rate of muscle growth continues, you will lose a pound of fat a month if your caloric intake stays the same and you maintain that muscle. And that would be cumulative if you continue to gain muscle mass. 10 weeks of training at this level would result in a loss of 2lbs per month, either that or you can now get away with eating an extra 250 calories a day and maintain your bodyfat.
Is this how it works in the real world, or is this just a mathematical abstraction I came up with? If true then it would seem that building muscle would be the best way to lose fat and keep it off, it takes longer than a crash diet, but if you maintain muscle mass you would be a lot less likely to gain the fat back unless you really ate like a pig, correct?
I am also curious, for a 5'8"-5'9" man how many pounds of muscle would I gain to have a BMI of 25 and look athletic. I have no desire to look like the Incredible Hulk or some sort of steroid monster, just to have nice, natural looking well defined musculature, like Bruce Willis or something. How many pounds of muscle is that for a guy my height?

The mathematical stuff sounds nice in theory but in practice doesn't come out so cut and dry. I'd focus on just following a standard muscle building /fat loss process and start maintaining once you like what you see in the mirror

 

[Throttle]

have no desire to look like the Incredible Hulk or some sort of steroid monster

watch out -- work out too much and you might end up looking like the Incredible Hulk!

:crackup:

just to have nice, natural looking well defined musculature, like Bruce Willis or something. How many pounds of muscle is that for a guy my height?

it's irrelevant. start adding muscle, and you'll see just how hard it is to gain significant muscle mass w/o chemical assistance (i.e. your "steroid monster"). get back to us when you're "bigger than Bruce Willis" and we'll help you figure out how to slim down to merely "Bruce Willis size"

 

[StevenR]

what I asked was how many pounds of muscle do you have to put on to get like that. Assuming an average ideal weight for me would be 63lbs with average muscle build. How many pounds of muscle does it take to go from that to a well defined physique. And I can understand somewhat your skepticism but there are people on bodybuilding.com who went from being fat blobs to in 1-3 building an impressive muscular body. Including people my age and even some 40 year olds.

 

[Quiksilver]

It's subjective mate, that's why we can't answer it for you.

Assuming you're 163lbs with an average build and height, you'll be able to get down to the 150lbs at a low bodyfat. So, add 30lbs to that low bodyfat frame and people will be able to tell you go to the gym. Another 20lbs and you'll be pretty big.

Taking that rough math, add that initial 30lbs to your average build and you'll be at 193 with an average bodyfat, and look fairly muscular.

-

Also, a lot of this stuff is self-experimental. The methods are easy, but YOU have to determine the right mixture of these three factors to get results.

1. Hit the gym, and as WORKEROUTER said, bust your ass. The methods never change. If you're trying to gain weight and eating accordingly, then aim to beat the logbook every workout or as close to it as possible. If you're trying to recomp then aim to beat the logbook as much as you can, but be prepared to stall out occasionally. If you're trying to cut weight, then be prepared to lose a little strength and muscle mass and don't expect to set any PRs.

2. Do various types of cardio to keep bodyfat down or in check. Adjust the amount of cardio you do depending on your goals. For awhile you'll be able to get away with substantial amounts of cardio without sacraficing muscle mass, but after a certain point you might have to reduce the cardio workload, in order to build more muscle/strength. Find the type of cardio that works best for your body through 8-12 week experiments.

3. Eat a high protein/mod.high fat/low carb diet, and tailor the total calorie intake(ie. 2500cals) and carb consumption to your goals. Trying to gain weight? Eat over maintenance and keep carbs up. Trying to recomp? Eat maintenance and keep carbs at a level your body is comfortable with. Trying to lose weight? Eat under maintenance and strictly control your carb intake.

--

After you've dialed in all those factors and spent considerable time(upwards of 2-3 years) building a physique, then you can use that old bodybuilding analogy of "sculpting your statue". If you're a little too fat, adjust your cardio accordingly. If you're a little too muscular, adjust your diet accordingly. Look in the mirror and decide where you want to make adjustments. Once you know how to get there, the ONLY thing left to do is experiment with what works for your body type, and then do it.

Those are the three factors you have to tweak, and YOU have to find out how your body responds best to each.

We don't mean to be rude but it's not easy to build a good body and over-thinking just delays the process.

 

[SinJester]

http://www.burnthefat.com/

If you seriously want to know what to do and how it works.

 

[Throttle]

it's not just the amount of muscle, it's also bf%, size of your frame, length of your limbs, and all sorts of other factors we can't even begin to judge, even if you tried to describe them.

simple example: with lower bf%, down to at least 8%, losing bodyfat will make you look more muscular with your shirt off, but less so with your shirt on.

of course getting that physique is do-able. but not if you keep asking the wrong questions and insisting that they're the right ones.

 

[mrRuckus]

Say you are 150 lbs.

Maybe 100 lbs of muscle. I have no idea i'm making that up but given or take 20 lbs it doesn't make much difference in the following:

100 lbs muscle * 50 calories = 5000 calories.

AND THAT IS JUST SITTING THERE before you take into account the number of calories from actual movement, heartbeat, temperature control, YOUR BRAIN (which takes a lot of calories to run all day), etc.

Do you eat like 7000 calories a day?

See how ridiculous?

 

[StevenR]

I said in my original post that muscles burn 50 calories a day, but I have now read some other things disputing that claim so I don't know what to believe. Some sources say only 6 calories a day, which would make it negligible for burning fat, others say 13, 20, 35, one even said 100! Does anyone really know? Is there anecdotal evidence that having lots of muscle does burn up considerable calories, like Micheal Phelps case? Anyone who has built up a lot of muscle care to comment on whether they can eat more than they used to without gaining very much fat?

 

[EFFORT]

The mathematical stuff sounds nice in theory but in practice doesn't come out so cut and dry. I'd focus on just following a standard muscle building /fat loss process and start maintaining once you like what you see in the mirror

 

[mrRuckus]

Some sources say only 6 calories a day,

Add 20 lbs of muscle and you'd be burning 120 more calories a day just by its maintenance. Then you have to carry around the extra weight. How is that negligible?

And it's pretty obvious you're burning more calories with more muscle because eating for example 2500 calories a day works at 150 lbs to gain weight but not when you are 200. It's harder to get beyond maintenance that size.