Question

[Angie]

I have looked everywhere for where I read about how many calories a pound of muscle burns at rest. I 'think' I read it was 60 calories??? Can someone verify that or not please?

THANK YOU!
Angie

[Tim Wescott]

Angie ,for each pound of muscle you add to your body,you will burn 75 extra calories,even at rest.

On the flip side,if you add one pound of bodyfat,only 2 calories are burned to maintain it !!

[hossjob]

I've oft wondered, in what amount of time? i. e. - 75 calories/day, hour, etc...

[Robert]

Nice info Tim. Mind if i use it for my news fader. I will have to remember that for future use.

[Tim Wescott]

Robert,feel free to use anything on the board that interests you!!

[Troyster]

Great info. Tim, that's a nice way to sum it up

T

[Angie]

hossjob said:

I've oft wondered, in what amount of time? i. e. - 75 calories/day, hour, etc...

I'm assuming that is a day? Right?

[Tim Wescott]

Yes it is in a day`s time !

Sorry about that.

[ChrisC]

Tim:

Out of curiosity, where did you get the 75cals per day figure? I'm only asking because I've read different articles that list anywhere between 10 and 120 per day - I've never been able to find a definitive answer.

I've often wondered whether there is a specific figure or if it is indivudal specific - e.g. does 1lb of Lance Armstrong's muscle burn calories at rest at the same rate as a couch potato?

chris

[Angie]

Good question!!

I did find the source where I read this recently. It was from Pete Sisco's Precision Training article "4 Things".

He said "Muscle is considered "active tissue" because it requires energy to sustain itself. That's great news... because that energy comes from burning calories 24 hours a day, 365 days a year! Every pound of muscle you add burns about 60 calories per day. Every day!"

I'm wondering now too how 'active' the muscle is of a couch potato compared to an athelete.

Another question I have, has anyone read Pete Sisco's e-book "Train Smart" or has anyone tried the 'Static Contraction Training'? I just did the 3 week test he offers although I don't have access to a leg press yet I did do the bench press and the shrug. First week Bench press was 205lbs, 2nd week was 220lbs & 3rd week was 245lbs... now mind you this is not a full range lift, but I was seeing progress PLUS I was sore like I had lifted several lbs for several reps when I only lifted this once and held it for 7 seconds. In 3 weeks I've seen some fat lost and muscle gains also. So that shows me this works. I just wondered if his e-book was worth the read? I'm impress with everything I've read on the site so far and proved to myself that those 3 excersises I improved each time.

Anyway I'm rambling... just wanted some thoughts back.

Thanks,
Angie

[ChrisC]

Angie:

I hope this doesn't come across in a negative manner, I took a look at his website and I'm very skeptical to say the least.

For those who haven't read it, take a look at this page from his website...

www.precisiontraining.com/ebook.cfm

It would take a long time to rebut each one of his points because that page is full of them, I'm not going to do that - there are plenty of net resources that do a very good job of debunking his theories.

His site contains a lot of pseudo-science and excel charts with very vague (non-existent) descriptions. My personal favorite is his chest exercise chart with the "ten most common chest exercises". He wraps this up in a whole bunch of scientific sounding acronyms for good measure.

to address your specific case: If you haven't previously worked out, then any form of weight training will result in an increase in muscle mass and strength. What you are likely to find is that these gains will stagnate quickly. Secondly, training static hold will likely increase your strength - in that static hold. It that's all you do, then it's not going to translate into strength in a full range of motion movement.

I'm sure his methods will lead to an increase in strength in an untrained individual, but the claims he makes on his site are ridiculous.

chris.

[Tim Wescott]

Chris,I`ve seen it in several different articles over the years and I often see it as 30-75 calories per day.


I would guess it differs per individual,probably depending on a lot of factors.

[ChrisC]

Angie:

Just re-read my last post and it sounds fairly harsh. I don't want to give you the impression that I was in any way dismissing your training methods. If i did, I apologize.

Incorporating some of what Sisco says into a balanced routine isn't necessairily a bad thing. i.e. base a routine around plenty of full range of motion compound exercises and then maybe add in some of the static stuff afterwards. I just get kinda mad when sites make outrageous claims about the efficacy of a particular approach and present it as scientific fact (and Pete Sisco is a master of this).

Chris.

[Angie]

LOL!!! No need to apologize for anything. That is exactly the feed back I wanted to hear. I didn't think that static contraction training was the end all be all to training like he claims. HA!! I just wondered about it for breaking through plateaus and such and if anyone ever used it, tried it and had any results from it.

Thanks for your honest opinions that is exactly what I was looking for.

I sat down and wrote me a new workout routine last night that is a 4 day split. I'm going to hit each body part hard. With this split I will have 6 days between each body part trained. I do believe in giving your muscles time to rest and recuperate. Up till now I had been doing a body for life style workout that was getting old and stagnent.

The 3 weeks I did static contraction training helped me break a rut. So I'll do the 4 day split till I feel like changing up again. LOL!!

THANKS Chris!

Angie