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