844
Oh lord yes
(piefed.cdn.blahaj.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2026
844 points (100.0% liked)
History Memes
2679 readers
830 users here now
A place to share history memes!
Rules:
-
No sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, assorted bigotry, etc.
-
No fascism (including tankies/red fash), atrocity denial or apologia, etc.
-
Tag NSFW pics as NSFW.
-
Follow all Piefed.social rules.
-
History referenced must be 20+ years old.
-
Avoid posting AI-generated content whenever possible.
Banner courtesy of @setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world
OTHER COMMS IN THE HISTORYVERSE:
- !historyruins@piefed.social
- !historyart@piefed.social
- !historyartifacts@piefed.social
- !historyphotos@piefed.social
- !askhistorians@piefed.social
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Who said anything about eating less? Exercise is very good for many things including keeping fit, and some people say it helps with their mood although I can't attest to that personally, but to be honest if you're doing it to lose weight you're better off just dieting (the right kind of diet, not just these fad ones that don't work and just leave you hungry all the time).
I can eat one kit kat finger and basically waste an entire 60 minute workout session.
You could very well be right. Depending on your weight, athleticism, and how much you move, it could take an hour to burn off a Kit-Kat bars worth of calories, that's pretty normal
Someone more athletic can get more movement in during that hour so they could burn off that Kit-Kat faster
Where someone less athletic probably gets less motion in during that same hour so it would take them longer, the entire hour or more, to burn off that same Kit-Kat
But moving more an eating less grantees you will lose weight because the laws of physics will not allow you to spend more energy than you take in and still keep or produce more mass
There are even more moving parts as far as weight loss goes! Heavier people tend to burn more calories, for example, and people with higher muscle content also burn more calories. Its not just about how much you move.
Can't forget, athletes performing a routine motion do it much more efficiently, expending less energy than a layperson to do the same thing. So a given body's response to the same exercise can be expected to change over time, too (as they do it enough to get better at it, that is).
Exactly, there are just so many metrics involved, plus athletes could be any body type.
Well that just tells me exercise is futile.
It isn't futile but it's not the way to lose weight. The human metabolism doesn't really work with exercise, We're not fast predators, we don't chase after pray and run them down. We throw a spare at it, and then let it limp away, then we track it for 4 days until it gives up. We are persistence hunters. That doesn't use a lot of calories up so running on a treadmill for 30 minutes, while obviously it will burn off some fat, won't burn off as much as it would for something like a cat metabolism.
If you want to build up muscle, or resilience, or rehabilitate a weakened muscle, exercises is fantastic. But most people don't want to do any of those things, most people want to be thinner, so gyms advertise themselves as weight loss programs. Which they're not.
No I just wanna eat kitkats