Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 2 Jul 2009 17:49:46 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Muscle is more dense, therefore it stands to reason that it would weigh more, given the same volume.
"so I've been told"
Message sent from my Blackberry!
----- Original Message -----
From: Paleolithic Eating Support List <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thu Jul 02 17:25:46 2009
Subject: Was: Fructose now: muscle vs. fat
> On Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:30:29 -0500, Padraig Hogan
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> ... 180lbs people are not really natural phenomena,
>> they come about from eating processed sugars.
>
Well, my son is 6'6" tall and weighs between 220 and 230 lbs. He eats mostly paleo, excercises via a variety of seasonal sports as well as cross training w/ his personal trainer; he has a lot of muscle. His height runs in our Dutch Frisian family; I have male relatives 7' tall and women over 6'. If you are 7' tall, 180 lbs. would be awfully lean.
Are you saying that tall people are a result of eating processed sugars? We've always eaten a lot of cold water fish, high in omega 3's.
A football coach once told me that muscle weighs more than fat. Is their any evidence for this??
Kath
|
|
|