I used to think this too, it's a popular talking point in favor of strength training.

But as far as I know it's wrong.

A one hour session of strength training will involve some amount of work, and a lot of rest. Compared to doing cardio, where an hour of work is an entire hour of elevated energy expenditure, you're effectively burning a lot less during strength training.

In addition, the "after burn" effect is very minor (in the extra tens of calories only range).

Btw as far as I know the only way to burn bodymass with sports is to have a heart rate of 120-140 for at least one hour. And then it starts. And to loose one gramm of fat one needs to burn 4kcal ( it takes 4kcal to generate the fuel from the body. Fat has usualy 8kcal). Also to loose around 200g of bodyfat a day one has to run at least 2 hours. ( with 500kcal/hour burned)

You burn bodymass by spending more energy than you intake. Lifting something very heavy a few times will take a lot of energy and if you do a few sets the muscles will need repairing before they can work optimally again, which means your body will use energy doing this for the next couple of days. Overall a lot of energy used.

Not on time. You cant lift weihgts for hours. But riding a bike or running goes for at least an hour. Golf burns a lot of calories because it takes 3 hours to complete. And lifting weight is also the wrong „zone“ for burning fat. It only burns avaible sugar. And to have that much fuel one needs to eat much ….

> This is not accurate, weightlifting with a reasonably difficult weight for your strength level is one of the most effective ways to burn calories.

It wont make you loose weight however. It will likely make you gain weight as your muscles will grow. Which is explicit goal of many guys who start lifting weights.

True, but for many people "lose weight" is really code for "lose body fat", since that has desirable health and aesthetic benefits.

I think that this depends on your training regimen. You can train for strength, not muscle mass. This is especially important for some athletes, like cyclists, where extra weight is a liability (more mass for the same force means less acceleration).

When the gyms closed for the pandemic, I lost 5 kg of muscle. After coming back, I started doing fewer sets and have not regained the muscle mass. But my strength (the amount of weight I can lift) is now very close to pre-pandemic levels.

No, it won't, unless you are eating excess calories. It takes a lot of energy to repair muscles and grow them.

Muscles weight more then fat. This is something that easily and regularly happen. I am not even saying it is bad thing to happen.

The scenario was "20lbs for 3 years".

Most "standard adults" (e.g no injuries, obesity or illnesses) would not consider 20 lbs "difficult", to start with. And especially not after 6 months of regular practice.

It is accurate. He didn't use the phrase "burn calories" at all ;)

Isn't it anaerobic exercise, though, and from what I remember to lose weight you want aerobic exercise?

Thats correct. Yes it burns much fuel but also the wrong one

I'm confused. I'm being downvoted but you're saying I'm right?

Lol I dont know why. Okey one can loose weight with anerobic exercis but it should be way less imho. Because it takes time to start loosing bodyfat. There is the freely accesible energy storage first. To deplet them one needs time. Hmm the difference is between fat burning and bodyfat burning