In a post on another thread, @infromsea remarked that he has been thinking lately about being muscular vs. being lean for health & longevity.
I’m wondering about the same thing. I know that the health benefits of stimulating our muscles are tremendous, but I also know that there are metabolic costs associated with carrying a lot of muscle around. (Based on one presentation from Ted Naiman, my understanding is that our non-bulky muscle tissue is super-efficient and has a very low metabolic cost, but the muscles we pump up with weight training are very expensive for our bodies to maintain–which is why we lose them quickly if we don’t do the work necessary to maintain them).
I’ve seen plenty of data to suggest that one of the healthiest things I can do as a man over 40 is to add muscle, so I’m doing that. But I’m beginning to think that I should add that muscle as SLOWLY as possible–that I don’t want it to accumulate because I’m not interested in paying the steep metabolic cost that comes with carrying a lot of muscle around.
I know everyone says that if you have more muscle mass, you get to eat more, but I don’t want to eat more. I like eating one meal a day to satiety; it saves time and keeps food/eating appropriately compartmentalized for my life.
So can you folks point me to any relevant research on the benefits of keeping our muscles healthy without necessarily trying to bulk them up over time?