Best muscles to develop for weight loss

Hi all,

I'm a novice at weight training. I got into it coz they say that building more muscle helps burn more fat. I'm not so concerned about the weight that I put on coz I know that weight is muscle. What I really want to control is the flab. Though I don't mind losing weight as well in the process. Lets just say I'm willing to trade less flab for a little more weight.

Anyway, my question is, is there a muscle group that we can develop than would help us burn more fat? :rolleyes:
 
I've always heard working any large muscle group makes the body work more to repair itself. The large muscles in the legs, chest and back are what I've been working heavily. I try to get a well rounded workout in, but I usually push the big muscles a bit more. I went for 6 months with no weight lost, but I felt better. Then suddenly it all started moving, and I've lost 20 pounds.
What I'm thinking is larger muscles need more calories to repair, so the larger you make your muscles, the more fat your going to burn.
 
I've always read that lifting weights does not burn fat off your body or at least not a lot. For that you'd have to do cardio but I'd imagine a circuit workout where you address all main muscle groups would be the most fat burning and would build muscle. For a circuit, you'd have less or no time in between each set to rest as opposed to lifting where you take a 30 sec to min break between sets. That way, your body will constantly be working to burn off fat and building muscle at the same time.
 
lifting weights in it self will burn calories (which is what you burn, not fat, shortly put) also, since lifting weights is very intense, you will burn more calories after you're done training due to something called EPOC (excessive post-exercise oxygen comsumption) google it if you haven't heard of it.

Getting more muscle will make your body burn more calories, becuse muscle needs more calories a day than fat, however, it is not a lot and probably won't make a big noticable difference when trying to lose fat. However, having muscle will make you look a lot better when the fat goes away.
 
lifting weights in it self will burn calories (which is what you burn, not fat, shortly put) also, since lifting weights is very intense, you will burn more calories after you're done training due to something called EPOC (excessive post-exercise oxygen comsumption) google it if you haven't heard of it.

I think this is negligible at best.
 
For more clarification on EPOC and the benefits of weight lifting although the calories burnt after lifiting might be negligible, it affects the storing process which can have big consequences.
 
Muscles require energy to maintain and repair. Your heart and lungs are required to transport and create this energy in the first place.

If your muscles are demanding energy to repair and maintain themselves, this will help you burn fat.

If your heart is in great shape and your body is functioning properly to convert food and oxygen into usable energy, this will help your body burn fat.

If your muscles are demanding additional energy to recover, and your heart and lungs are working harder and providing more of this blood and energy to the recovering muscles, then your body is working at max efficiency in all respects, which means faster muscle growth, faster recovery from injury, and more calories being burned to maintain this improved level of function.

If you're trying to grow muscles in an environment which can only provide so much energy and oxygen, you're only going to get a certain level of results for your effort. If the systems your body uses to recover these muscles are working more efficiently, your muscles will recover more efficiently, and you'll get better results all around.

So, make sure your heart and lungs are in good shape, then make sure EVERY muscle you can manage to work is tired. Large muscle groups are good to work because you can make your body recover over a large surface area without doing a huge variety of workouts to target the same surface area over several smaller muscles. However working your smaller muscles will give you the exact same advantage, you'll just have to be thorough in your exercise to make sure you work them all. With a weak cardio system, this whole recovery concept will only work at a fraction of the speed and efficiency.

There's no tricks or keys. Anything 1 muscle does will impact the entire system of your body in some way. The only trick is to maximize everything to develop a synergy of fitness between a collection of healthy and well functioning systems. Otherwise you really are just pushing yourself to achieve the minimal requirements.

Furthermore, I think it's important for your own health and safety to consider this. There's a strong tendency for 'fit' people, men particularly, to focus a lot on their strength training over their cardio workouts. We also see a lot of fit people collapsing from strokes, heart attacks, and other medical problems you wouldn't expect to see in someone eating well and exercising. I'm not going to pretend this is carved in stone as fact, or taught by training experts, it's just personal opinion. But when you're training your muscles to a fitness level beyond that of your heart and lungs, you're basically doing exercises that those organs would never be expected to perform. Since lifting weights isn't based off your heart, you can complete the exercise. But rest assured you're delivering a harder, and faster shock to your system than that system would normally expect given the level of fitness its been adapted to. People didn't thrive by standing around lifting weights. We thrived by hunting and gathering, which would have combined both strength AND cardio. Our bodies would not do much growth in one respect while getting little development in the other. For this reason I thinks it's important for long term health to maintain an even level of fitness throughout all your body's systems. Best case and point example would be in someone starting out running with weak legs. Sure, their heart and lungs will allow them to keep running, but their legs just hurt too much to continue and they might even get injuries in their legs. I personally feel that this works both ways for cardio and strength training, and thus, my advice is to keep a balance of maximized effort throughout the entire system and try not to develop anything excessively further than anything else.

The exercises we're doing do not reflect the activities our bodies were designed to perform. We have a lot more freedom to control how we develop, and a lot more freedom to train ourselves in ways, and focus on aspects of our fitness that we'd never have the luxury of isolating and giving so much extra focus towards. It's my personal, and humble opinion that because of our freedom, our concepts of beauty, and ideals of self image, that people often end up training in ways that will produce aesthetically noticeable results, and often neglect the systems of our body which show very few aesthetic improvements. It's my opinion that this creates a state inside your body that parts of your body are not properly equipped to meet the demands for, and over time, these systems get stressed.
 
Last edited:
Bench and squats. those 2 exercises will hit the most muscle.
Bench Press is going to hit Pecs, Shoulders(delts), as well as your Bis and Tris.
Squats will hit your quads, glutes, and the hammies and calves to a lesser extent.

There are a few other exercises that will allow you hit a lot of muscles, but these are the 2 easiest. But of course, working ANY muscle, doing ANY exercise will always help, even if its just a little bit.
 
I don't think the bench press is up in the top exercises when it comes to what hits more muscles.. if you include stuff like oly lifting, then I don't even think that the squat is, but that is sorta besides the point.
 
For how easy they are to do anywhere, with any equipment, I would say they are the 2 best to start with. upper/lower. Olympic lifts take time practice, good form, etc. But of course doing a lift like a clean and jerk that uses both upper and lower will hit more muscles =D
Keyword I saw was 'novice' at lifting.
 
do you have anything to support that? Other than your experience?

Hell no. I don't even know how many calories I burn when I workout, just stating a personal opinion that I don't think as many calories are burned as many people think.
 
And why is that? everything I've ever read on EPOC suggests that you burn quite a bit of calories for quite some time after training.

Firstly, I always go by reality first before I turn to what I've "read." I've been working with people long enough in the training capacity that I feel I have a pretty good grasp of what's going on in response to the various forms of exercise and intensities.

Yea, I know you don't care about that, lol. :)

I've also done a good bit of work with the bodybugg and I haven't seen much in terms of an afterburn effect from HIIT or resistance training. I believe Leigh has noted the same thing, and I believe she has used the device more extensively than me.

There is also research to support such things. LaForgia's et al big review was pretty monstrous in 2006:

"Because the EPOC is sensitive to work intensity, far less supramaximal than submaximal work is required to produce comparable EPOCs. The contribution of the EPOC to the net total oxygen cost of exercise following supramaximal exercise is therefore much greater than for submaximal work (*6%). Nevertheless, the EPOC remains a relatively minor component of the net total oxygen cost of exercise (*14%) even following exhaustive supramaximal protocols. Furthermore, when the EPOC differences between submaximal and supramaximal workloads are translated into energy equivalents, it is clear that such differences impact minimally on the energy balance of athletes. LaForgia et al. (1997) reported that the 135 kJ greater elevated postexercise energy expenditure for their supramaximal treatment could be easily replaced by ingesting only 75 ml of orange juice. Finally, supramaximal exercise, which is primarily the realm of athletes, is unlikely to be undertaken by untrained and overweight individuals who are seeking to maximize energy expenditure."
 
"Because the EPOC is sensitive to work intensity, far less supramaximal than submaximal work is required to produce comparable EPOCs. The contribution of the EPOC to the net total oxygen cost of exercise following supramaximal exercise is therefore much greater than for submaximal work (*6%). Nevertheless, the EPOC remains a relatively minor component of the net total oxygen cost of exercise (*14%) even following exhaustive supramaximal protocols. Furthermore, when the EPOC differences between submaximal and supramaximal workloads are translated into energy equivalents, it is clear that such differences impact minimally on the energy balance of athletes. LaForgia et al. (1997) reported that the 135 kJ greater elevated postexercise energy expenditure for their supramaximal treatment could be easily replaced by ingesting only 75 ml of orange juice. Finally, supramaximal exercise, which is primarily the realm of athletes, is unlikely to be undertaken by untrained and overweight individuals who are seeking to maximize energy expenditure."

Its based on this now.
 
Back
Top