Hi, unless I’m reading it wrong I make it 60%. Just FWIW no biggie.

Well, gee Lyle… why to spoil the muscle beach party!

I’m sorry to hear the shocking news… and yet I appreciate the painstaking effort you’ve put forth to reveal this.

Honestly, while I’m as guilty as anyone of innocently and eagerly endorsing the (likely) inflated energy value of muscle, I can’t say this step towards a revelation comes as a shocking surprise.

It doesn’t take a math wiz to do some basic calculations and see that if my muscle was burning 50 cals/lb. per day, I’d be eating 2-3 times the food I am and losing weight. Right.

That said, I also don’t think the number really matters. Sure, why it’s been overused and overvalued it’s largely been done so in and to an audience that is well served by the over-hyped valuation.

“Muscle burns fat” is less a critical variable than a positive marketing strategy, a way to engage people, to interest those who would otherwise dismiss muscle, seeking only the negative path to weight loss… eating less and burning more.

It’s a little like over-hyping the hybrid vehicles. Okay, so they don’t actually change the world, if you look at the reality, but they are a hell of good step in the right direction. And it’s better to have more people believing the higher numbers of hybrids and muscle at least until they’ve taken a step towards them…

In my last book, Strength-for-Life is didn’t go for the big, big numbers but I did accept a rosy outlook on the calories while setting in place a much more complete and integrated case for gaining muscle. So, I didn’t stand on this alone…. for good reason.

For the purpose of your site and conversation, I can see why you desire to get real for at some point in the continuum it does matter.

As for the masses out there, the people who need to get fit, gain strength, lose fat, and increase their wellbeing and energy, I think can all agree that more muscle and less fat is an across the board winner–all math aside.

And I agree with your statement: “I expect the major effect to be from the effort of stimulating muscle mass gains along with the energy needed to synthesize that muscle tissue. But once it’s there it doesn’t burn many calories.”

Which really tends to make it a bit of a moot point for if its the gaining of muscle that is really the burn and the story of calories being incinerated gets people to take this action, has not the means justified the ends? Or better yet, perhaps they are getting the desired benefit regardless.

And say this person gets the muscle packed on, now they have to work to keep it, to shape it. They are now more aware, more engaged and likely vested in their new body shape and strength… they’ve completed some feedback loop that has engaged them and we know have them on “our side” – the good side, the bright side.

And then, you’re hear to help them better understand how to improve, sustain, elevate… life and separate and the like…

…or something like that.

Appreciate your Insights…

In Strength…

Your Friend,

Shawn Phillips

Boldizar: The body does increase energy expenditure (through either shivering or non-shivering thermogenesis) in response to cold but I”m not sure I can quantify it (it will also depend on the degree of temperature decrease).

A Jones: As stated in the article:

“Practically, this means that equations that estimate resting energy expenditure based solely on body weight will tend to overestimate larger individuals to some degree. Of course, as I recently discussed in Adjusting the Diet, since all estimates of energy expenditure and/or caloric intake have to be adjusted based on real-world changes anyhow, I’m not sure how important this is practically.”

So there will tend to be a skewing at very high or low BMI/bodyfat/bodyweight levels due to varying proportions of organs to other tissues.

Heat does use up electricity, batteries, etc., at a very fast rate, and intuitively my friend’s approach seems logical, but I’ve never seen any studies backing it up.

One question — what was the methodology for identifying the rates in the table by tissue type? Did they cut people apart?

Also, I would note that this study will likely be used to show the exact opposite of your conclusion because one could truthfully say that muscle mass burns 3 TIMES the amount of calories as fat. I can see the come-ons now.

Finally, although I think the level of writing in your column is excellent and in a league of its own in this field, I feel compelled to point out that the expression should be written “suffice it to say” and not “sufficed to say.”