If muscle weighs more than fat...

[OakLeaf]

Neither the OP nor anyone else said that a "pound" of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat.

A liter of muscle DOES weigh more than a liter of fat. And that's exactly what she was remarking on.

[marni]

the one thing that no one has mentioned is that while muscle may weigh as much as fat, muscle does burn more calories than fat, so that is certainly an incentive for changing the ratios.

If I go by scale weight, bmi my body fat is 26% which puts me just barely in the normal range. If I go by circumference measurements, my body fat % is 19 %, if I go by caliper meaurements, my body fat % is 22% so I have a choice. I mostly go by how my favorite skirt, pair of pants and dress feel and look like on me.

marni

[grey]

My BMI is right in the middle range, though I look lighter than I am. What I want to know is, with all this muscle building and fat burning, why is it the Twins disappear first, and the gut fat hangs on for dear life? I don't even care too much about the girls disappearing - they make padded bras for that - I just want the belly to GO AWAY. My legs look great. My butt looks good. Even my arms look better from the holding-in-the drops position on the road bike. But my Little Buddha giggle-jiggle is still here.

[rubysoho]

My BMI is right in the middle range, though I look lighter than I am. What I want to know is, with all this muscle building and fat burning, why is it the Twins disappear first, and the gut fat hangs on for dear life? I don't even care too much about the girls disappearing - they make padded bras for that - I just want the belly to GO AWAY. My legs look great. My butt looks good. Even my arms look better from the holding-in-the drops position on the road bike. But my Little Buddha giggle-jiggle is still here.

Because your body is protecting your reproductive organs. The middle is the first place we gain and the last place we lose fat. The "science people" explained (and I am sorry, I do not have a source to quote online) that it was to protect those reproductive organs - and possibly the unborn child - during winter when we would naturally burn more calories trying to stay warm and have less food to eat.

[OakLeaf]

I don't know, I'm not a science person but that doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

If that were the evolutionary reason, then (1) why would men carry more belly fat than women, and (2) why wouldn't women's bodies also retain fat around their breasts, to protect their born children?

Personally I don't have trouble losing waist fat, it's my thighs. Maybe I'm thigh-pregnant.

[Veronica]

I think where we hold fat is based on genetics, not gender. What I have left is all in my legs, not so much on my belly.

Veronica

[indysteel]

Personally I don't have trouble losing waist fat, it's my thighs. Maybe I'm thigh-pregnant.

LOL! I think I'm carrying butt and thigh twins.

[Susan]

A guy referred to me at our weekend ride, saying it was no wonder I could outride the guys on a climb being such a "small woman".

I'm 5'4'' and weight 140 pounds, still struggling to get into an acceptable BMI range...

[rubysoho]

I don't know, I'm not a science person but that doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

If that were the evolutionary reason, then (1) why would men carry more belly fat than women, and (2) why wouldn't women's bodies also retain fat around their breasts, to protect their born children?

Personally I don't have trouble losing waist fat, it's my thighs. Maybe I'm thigh-pregnant.

I totally understand. I do have a larger butt and thighs as well. I was just repeating what I read elsewhere. I do lose weight from the outside-in though. And I have seen people who look like their heads have shrunk while their bodies have yet to lose more weight. Then they went to the other end of the spectrum with itty bitty bodies and lollipop heads.

Oh well. Feel free to ignore my reference.

[zoom-zoom]

(2) why wouldn't women's bodies also retain fat around their breasts, to protect their born children?

Well, for one...fat doesn't make milk, otherwise women with A cups wouldn't be able to breastfeed.

I've always gained and lost weight pretty evenly all over my body. I have a couple of stubborn spots. And my boobs are the first place I gain and the last I lose--which isn't a great thing, given that I'm a D cup AFTER breast reduction surgery.

I would wager that our fat gain/loss patterns have a lot to do with body type...mesomorph, endomorph, ectomorph. I'm mostly a mesomorph. Most of my dad's side are endomorphs. My mom is a mesomorph (though with age she's starting to carry weight more in her middle...mostly because she is so inactive), brother is a mesomorph, sister is an endomorph.

[OakLeaf]

Well, for one...fat doesn't make milk, otherwise women with A cups wouldn't be able to breastfeed.

Fat doesn't make babies either ... my point was that when fat is broken down for nutrition, it's carried by the bloodstream, and I'm not aware of any advantage in fat being deposited near the organ it's supposed to be feeding. If that were the case then our brain would be near our lungs, right? And if the idea has to do with physically insulating the organ from traumatic injuries, then it would be even more important around the breasts than in the abdominal area?

[malkin]

Neither the OP nor anyone else said that a "pound" of muscle weighs more than a pound of fat.

A liter of muscle DOES weigh more than a liter of fat. And that's exactly what she was remarking on.

Right.

Go to the grocery store and compare the sizes of a pound of butter, a pound of cheese and a pound of the leanest meat they have. Check the size of something that is mostly water too--like produce or juice.