Does having muscle mass mean a higher metabolism?

[Anonymous]

This is me. I only have a little bit of muscle mass, but the reason I'm asking this question is because, well, my diet isn't very strict. I eat whatever I want. Cake , cookies, icecream, pizza, fries, soda etc; and I can never seem to gain much weight. I'm 28 so I'm past the "still growing" stage. But I heard that muscle burns calories. Could that be it? Am I not gaining weight due to having a bit of muscle?

[osboraar]

Generally, yes, more muscle equates to a higher metabolic rate. That being said, resting metabolism rates differ from person to person in general. Also, if you talk to a body builder, they'll tell you that putting on mass is much more difficult than losing it. A lot of people have to eat several meals a day at a ratio of 30/30/40 (carbs/fats/protein).

If you really want to gain muscle mass, I'd recommend looking up the average calories needed for your age, height, weight and activity level (Also known as your basal metabolic rate). Then add a couple hundred calories utilizing the above ratio. Assuming you're doing a reasonable amount of physical activity, you should put on mass. If you don't see results, gradually continue increasing your calories until you see weight gain. Note, you will likely put on body fat as well.

[Angular]

Muscles take more energy than no muscles. You resting metabolism is generally higher the more muscle mass you have just to maintain itself.

Also realize, there are different levels of eating whatever you want. One person might eat whatever they want but eat sugary stuff once or twice a week and someone else eats whatever they want but has sugar with every meal.

[Guy13]

Yes, as long as there’s plenty of water to keep engine running evenly