Printable View
There's never an absolute right choice, is there! Annoying. No, the sleeve isn't on the public list yet - although having said that, I last saw the surgeon 3 years ago, so it could've changed since then.
I'll have a cat to my GP about it this week. I'm not gonna have $10k in the next 2 years (unless I win Lotto, which is highly unlikely as I don't play!), so I might as well go on a waiting list.
No it doesn't weigh more than fat. A kg of muscle weighs the same as a kg of fat. The fat just takes up more room.:
But muscle apparently weighs 4 times more than fat, at least that's what I've been told. So if u had a kilo of fat and turned that in to muscle, you would have 4kg of muscle to take up the same amount of room that the fat did. Does that make sense?:
A kilo, is a kilo, is a kilo, regardless of what is consists of, fat, muscle or feathers.
What you are referring to is volume. Take the same volume of fat and muscle. Muscle will weigh more for that same volume. Really it is just a matter of using the correct terminology. "Muscle weighs more than fat" is an incomplete term and hence the confusion.
In terms of health impact, gaining a kilo of muscle is very different to gaining a kilo of fat. Yes, it is possible to gain weight as a result of dieting and exercise, by simultaneously losing fat stores & building muscle volume, or even just building muscle without a fat loss. There are metabolic changes associated with that, meaning that if that was happening you could be getting a significant health benefit without the scale budging - but difficult to tell unless you were taking body measurements and/or using one of those thingos that measure your water volume. I think that's what the original muscle comment was about.