13 pds. of muscle in 10 yrs. -- M&F article

[jgoycoolea]

Did anyone else read the article in M&F Hers about putting on muscle? I just checked the article. It is called "Cutting Crew," but most definitely discuss gaining mass.

One of the fitnes competitors, Lovena Stamatiou-Tuley says one would be lucky to gain 3 pounds of muscle a year, and that she has gained only 13 pounds of muscle in 10 years! And you can bet she is doing everything optimally. What about others who aren't so perfect?

At first I was shocked and thought "Wow, so much work for so little muscle." Good thing I enjoy it. Then I tried to imagine how 10 pounds felt in my hand. How heavy is it? I also thought about how such a little (?) bit of muscle is supposed to help us burn calories? I forget how many calories a pound of muscle burns in a day. 50 is it?

50 calories at 1.5 (?) pounds of muscle a year. That's 75 calories a day X 365 days a year = 27,375 calories a year. Divided by 3500 calories in a pound = 7.8 pounds lost a year through just having muscle. (And I think 1.5 sounds optimistic for the average woman.)

I can't decide how I feel about having read this article and these numbers. Anyone else have any thoughts?

Jeanne

 

[Aquajock]

My thoughts are: take what a "fitness competitor" says in a commercial, popularized magazine with a few grains of salt - or maybe a whole salt lick next to your reading chair. Competitive fitness is a whole different breed of cat from the fitness regimes us normal people enjoy, what with the supplementation competitors use, the radical eating programs they put themselves through when preparing for competition, and the punishing training programs they put themselves through as well. Further, I question how this person even determined how much muscle weight she put on; self-reporting in that regard is always a little suspect.

Annette Q. Aquajock
The Skeptical Cathe Monogamist

 

[kweller]

I, too, thought it sounded low (suspect, as Annette would say!)
A bit off the direct topic, but as for calorie burn: I believe that your metabolism is humming after a workout for about 24 hours, as well. So it's not just the muscle that's burning up the calories, it's the activity itself. Also, I have to agree with Annette, you gotta take this stuff with a grain of salt - take what applies and use it, and leave the rest by the side of the road! There is *so much* conflicting information on this subject - I just go by how my body feels and look at what the new 'theory of the day' is with a guarded eye.
Kathy

 

[AKirkland]

I got the impression that this article featured, and was targeted at ,ectomorphs - those of us unfortunate folks that are small of build and have a very difficult time gaining muscle mass. The first two ladies in particular were both mentioned as "stick figure" and "skinny minnie" respectively.

If you're an endo or lucky enough to be a meso, you'd probably see better and/or faster results.

Angela

 

[getnfit@38]

I also read the article and I believe Angela is correct. I'm almost positive the article was talking about ectomorphs and giving "strategies" for gaining lean muscle mass for those who have had a difficult time gaining lean mass.
As an endomorph (for all the thought I really give it!) I can tell you it is possible to gain more than 3lbs of muscle in 1 year.
But like Annette said, "take it with a grain of salt!" Our bodies are so different, and just because 1 person experiences weight gain/loss or muscle gain/loss one way, doesn't mean everyone else will too!

Donna

 

[heidi36]

That brings up a good point. That article was targeting women who are "hard gainers". But at first when I read it I felt a little dishartened because if we tend to gain a little weight and we have switched up our training programs, we immediately attribute it to "muscle gains". But Annette's right, how can she determine wheather she had definately put on 13lbs of muscle in 10 years. I have learned to stay away from the scale for the most part.

 

[Maribeth]

I read the article and I echo Annette's sentiment--you HAVE to take what the "fitness competitor" says with HUGE grain of salt. Here's why.

Unless the fitness competitor is also an exercise scientist--a degreed exercise scientist--you can bet the only thing he or she is basing their statements on are their own experiences and/or the words and workouts of other fitness competitors--that very select portion of the population who are genetically gifted. The average person, even if they trained and ate EXACTLY like any given fitness competitor, would never be able to look like the person whose training regimen was featured in "M&F Hers".

Why? Because of differences in muscle fiber density, predominant location of storage fat cells, muscle belly to tendon length ratio, limb length, muscular insertion distance from the joint axis of rotation (all are unalterable, except via surgical methods and are determined by genetics), predominant fiber type, VO2 max, hormonal levels--I won't even mention the variables in ligamentous stability, joint surface integrity, pain threshold, history of injury, etc.

The point here is that trying to use the musings of a fitness model or bodybuilder lacking formal training as an exercise scientist for anything other than a possible source of variety in exercise is a mistake. Even expecting the program that works incredibly well for Cathe to work well for everybody here on this forum is a mistake. If your body type isn't exactly like that of the person whose workout you are trying to duplicate, your results won't be the same.

So, what DOES work? Using tried and true principles of exercise science and applying them as per your specific body type and goals. This plus a heaping helping of dedication and determination will get you the furthest.
Maribeth