44.1kHz is the sample rate, not the bitrate. The bitrate, as Drakino just posted, is 1411.2kbps. But bitrate isn't an accurate descriptor of lossiness. Just look at all the studies done comparing reproduction quality between different codecs at the same bitrate, or even the comparisons for different mp3 encoders at the same bitrate.

The mp3 specification does not allow bitrates that even come close to the bitrate of a CD, much less over it. Even if it did, it wouldn't be called compression any more, and few people are looking to get the same data encoded in a bigger data set. If you wanted that, you'd just use the lossless WAV.

While CD-style PCM encoding is obviously losing data from the sound made in the air, that's not really the definition of "lossy" we're talking about. The notion of "lossy" is only relevant where "losslessness" is possible. Analog sounds, from vinyl to tape to the original sound coming out of someone's mouth, are impossible to reproduce losslessly, as there is no sample rate that matches the sample rate of the universe. People might argue that analog does a better job reproducing analog sounds than digital due to the fact that analog doesn't sample, but analog recordings almost always have a much higher noise floor. Of course, it may be that master recordings are made at a different sample rate. 48kHz is also a common sample rate, used often in DVD audio, for example. If the master was 48kHz, you might be able to measure the lossiness involved in transcoding to 44.1kHz, but that's some math I'm not interested in doing.