Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ok, for starters the myth about extra muscle burning more calories isn't even that true. Even a male who works out for years and build muscle won't be able to eat more than perhaps 700-800 calories more than he did years prior AT MOST (just lol at all the fat dudes eating 4000+ calories a day thinking their lard is muscle). Secondly, women can't even put on anywhere near as much muscle as men can so even after years of lifting whatever muscle they will build would probably burn no more than perhaps a few hundred extra calories a day (wow, a whole donut!).
Quote:
Originally Posted by reneeh63
Okay...there's so much to comment on ....but I'll stick to this - considering many women's base caloric requirement including moderate activity may only be 1,500-1,800 calories a day, you're damned right that I'll take an extra 300! YAYYYYY...DONUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And for a guy to have an extra 700-800? Isn't that like an entire extra meal a day? Since when does an increase like that not even count for something?
OP needs to return to this planet.
He seems to be laboring under the delusion that we are trying to eat like men, lift like men, and put on muscle like men.
lelz at all the guys here recommending strength training to women as a means to lose weight.
Can't even read your mumbo jumbo. Who can take someone seriously who starts a sentence off with lelz? If you can't speak English or an actual language, how can anyone have an actual conversation with you. You sound like a Mr. Know It All who knows pretty much nothing.
Can't even read your mumbo jumbo. Who can take someone seriously who starts a sentence off with lelz? If you can't speak English or an actual language, how can anyone have an actual conversation with you. You sound like a Mr. Know It All who knows pretty much nothing.
Some people gain weight while they're gaining muscle and others don't. It depends on your genetics and on what you eat. I happen to think that it's better (and more attractive) to be strong and muscular, even if you're a little fat, than to be lean and weak.
lelz at all the guys here recommending strength training to women as a means to lose weight. The argument here basically is that lifting weights burns extra calories and that the additional muscle mass will increase metabolism or some nonsense.
Ok, for starters the myth about extra muscle burning more calories isn't even that true. Even a male who works out for years and build muscle won't be able to eat more than perhaps 700-800 calories more than he did years prior AT MOST (just lol at all the fat dudes eating 4000+ calories a day thinking their lard is muscle). Secondly, women can't even put on anywhere near as much muscle as men can so even after years of lifting whatever muscle they will build would probably burn no more than perhaps a few hundred extra calories a day (wow, a whole donut!). But thirdly and most importantly, you need to eat at a caloric surplus to gain strength and muscle, and this isn't possible to do without putting on fat.
Even men who bulk only very slowly (which imo is the only correct way to do it) will still put on fat, and as they gain more and more muscle the amount of fat they put on grows as well. It's not possible to maximize strength gains and still be lean. Bulking slowly will REDUCE the amount of fat they will put on, but it's not possible to avoid putting on fat except only at the very beginning when your body is so out of shape that doing almost anything will put on at least some muscle and burn at least some fat. For men this isn't that big of a deal assuming they are smart about their weight gain (which 90% of them aren't), but that is because they have and can put on considerably greater amounts of muscle than women can. And on top of that, women also don't gain strength at anywhere near the same pace. That means women will have to eat more to fuel more strength gain but without actually gaining that much muscle. And what happens, is that they get fat.
I have seen this many times in the gym I use to go to (I work out at home now). Every single woman I saw that was lifting anything heavier than the small dumbbells was either fat or in the process of getting fat.
I can already imagine what the typical counter-arguments are going to look like: "Hurr dur you don't have to put on fat to get stronger just don't eat too much". No, this isn't how your body works. Strength gains have to be fueled with more calories, and with more calories comes more fat. This is true even for men, and for women it's even worse because they have to eat more to fuel strength gains while still producing less muscle.
No lean woman who isn't abusing steroids is going to be lifting any respectable amount of weight. This makes the whole plan of lifting to lose weight a completely laughable plan for women, because in order to get the calorie burning muscle mass (which won't even burn that many calories anyway) they would have to get fat anyway. In fact, I would argue that this entire idea is actually just kinda dumb for everybody.
Just lol at women who actually do this thinking it's the secret to leanness. Just lol.
EDIT: Some of the posters are saying I am mocking women who want to improve themselves. This is untrue. I am making fun of the people who call for this exact method of weight loss and am pointing out that it makes no sense.
I agree. Here's my cousin. She works out every other day. Look how fat she is!! Totally fat and getting fatter!!!!!!!!
lelz at all the guys here recommending strength training to women as a means to lose weight. The argument here basically is that lifting weights burns extra calories and that the additional muscle mass will increase metabolism or some nonsense.
Ok, for starters the myth about extra muscle burning more calories isn't even that true. Even a male who works out for years and build muscle won't be able to eat more than perhaps 700-800 calories more than he did years prior AT MOST (just lol at all the fat dudes eating 4000+ calories a day thinking their lard is muscle). Secondly, women can't even put on anywhere near as much muscle as men can so even after years of lifting whatever muscle they will build would probably burn no more than perhaps a few hundred extra calories a day (wow, a whole donut!). But thirdly and most importantly, you need to eat at a caloric surplus to gain strength and muscle, and this isn't possible to do without putting on fat.
Even men who bulk only very slowly (which imo is the only correct way to do it) will still put on fat, and as they gain more and more muscle the amount of fat they put on grows as well. It's not possible to maximize strength gains and still be lean. Bulking slowly will REDUCE the amount of fat they will put on, but it's not possible to avoid putting on fat except only at the very beginning when your body is so out of shape that doing almost anything will put on at least some muscle and burn at least some fat. For men this isn't that big of a deal assuming they are smart about their weight gain (which 90% of them aren't), but that is because they have and can put on considerably greater amounts of muscle than women can. And on top of that, women also don't gain strength at anywhere near the same pace. That means women will have to eat more to fuel more strength gain but without actually gaining that much muscle. And what happens, is that they get fat.
I have seen this many times in the gym I use to go to (I work out at home now). Every single woman I saw that was lifting anything heavier than the small dumbbells was either fat or in the process of getting fat.
I can already imagine what the typical counter-arguments are going to look like: "Hurr dur you don't have to put on fat to get stronger just don't eat too much". No, this isn't how your body works. Strength gains have to be fueled with more calories, and with more calories comes more fat. This is true even for men, and for women it's even worse because they have to eat more to fuel strength gains while still producing less muscle.
No lean woman who isn't abusing steroids is going to be lifting any respectable amount of weight. This makes the whole plan of lifting to lose weight a completely laughable plan for women, because in order to get the calorie burning muscle mass (which won't even burn that many calories anyway) they would have to get fat anyway. In fact, I would argue that this entire idea is actually just kinda dumb for everybody.
Just lol at women who actually do this thinking it's the secret to leanness. Just lol.
EDIT: Some of the posters are saying I am mocking women who want to improve themselves. This is untrue. I am making fun of the people who call for this exact method of weight loss and am pointing out that it makes no sense.
Strength training will make you leaner.
Take two women with the same genetics and the same diet/caloric intake. Have one woman burn 3000 calories a week running and the other burn the same while adding a strength training routine. The woman that lifts will be visibly leaner.
Yes, it takes lots of food to put Big bulky muscles on a woman's body, but if you think resistance training combined with a low caloric intake won't get you more results than aerobic exercise alone I suggest you start watching gymnastics or MMA.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
