• JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    7 days ago

    NGL when I commuted on train/subway, my fat ass would take the stairs nearly everytime.

    Not because it’s healthier, but because all the other fatasses on the already-too-narrow escalator have absolutely no concept of escalator etiquette, and I got a fucking train to catch because our subway ran 20 minutes late.

    • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 days ago

      I take the stairs because you can’t take the escalator with a bike but I can easily carry my bike up the stairs. Well, at least when other people don’t crowd around me then complain when they get smacked in the shin by a pedal. Like wtf did you think would happen? I am clearly carrying a bike and it’s not exactly soft.

    • MadhuGururajan@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      6 days ago

      I hate the concept of escalator etiquette because there’s the smallest amount of space and people feel the need to carve it up for those who can’t be patient or use the wide stairs. there’s no reason someone can’t use stairs if they are in a hurry.

      • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        The reason to use the escalators when you’re in a hurry is because it’s twice as fast if you walk up them.

        If you want to take the escalators to be lazy, that’s fine…stay to the right and out of my way. Same rules as the highway. Not complicated.

        How fucking entitled are you that you “hate the concept of escalator etiquette” and you think it’s acceptable to not let people pass you? Were you a bollard in a former life?

        • MadhuGururajan@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 days ago

          maybe the concept of being in a hurry is alien to me as I am not tardy or impatient, or accept that I will be late and just not act like a baboon rushing towards a potential lunch.

          • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            6 days ago

            Yeah bro sorry my subway already ran twenty minutes late and I wanna catch this train so I can see my kids before they go to bed.

            You keep being a dick.

            • MadhuGururajan@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              6 days ago

              shame of you to pull the “I have kids!” card just so you can shove people aside in public for your tardiness. It would seem one can act like a complete ape with no sense of time in public and be excused because “Oh I have kids, you wouldn’t understand!”.

              guess what? Everybody has kids or have had kids! If to u really care about them take the damn stairs? I don’t think you would have “fat lazy” people blocking your way?

              • Alfredolin@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                5 days ago

                Pardon my French, but I think this exchange needs a couple verses:

                "Je me balade -même si j’ai tort- avec nonchalance

                ton étiquette d’escalator, je m’en balance!"

              • EddoWagt@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                5 days ago

                Is it really so much effort for you to stand on the right side instead of the left? Why can’t we just be nice to eachother

                • MadhuGururajan@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 days ago

                  I wouldn’t block someone on an escalator. But, in any debate about the topic, I would vehemently oppose any argument that allows people to run through a narrow escalator full of old people or people with disabilities when a wide flight of stairs is right next to it.

  • PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    I’m gonna take. this opportunity to point out how stupid it is that 1 Calorie = 1kilocalorie. Actually my least favorite unit.

    • Tilgare@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 days ago

      It took me a moment when I saw the pic to come to terms with the fact that, for as many times as I’ve seen kcal previously, I somehow never realized it was was short hand for kilocalories. 🤯

      • Golden Lox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        7 days ago

        what is typically called a ‘calorie’ is actually 1000 of the real unit.

        the real size of a calorie is too small to used effectively, but saying ‘kilocalorie’ is too long or smth idk.

        people just need to use kilojoules and fuck Imperial off.

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 days ago

          Wrong, a Calorie is 1000 calories. Virtually nobody uses calories though so don’t worry about it too much.

            • JackbyDev@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              6 days ago

              Exactly. They use a unit representing 1000 calories. They don’t use calories. In the US we use “Calories” which are 1000 calories. Lowercase c calories are just too small of a unit to be useful and virtually nobody uses them.

              • Zwiebel@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days ago

                You misunderstand metric prefixes. kcal is not a separate unit from cal, it is the same unit with a prefix slapped infront

                1000 cal = 1k cal = 1 kcal

                The equal sign here is not a unit conversion

  • ikidd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    7 days ago

    And since a kilocalorie is what we would call a “calorie” from food, this shows precisely how you can’t outrun a bad diet.

    • JackbyDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      kcals are actually what we call Calories (note the uppercase letter). Most people don’t know that and just use lowercase without thinking though.

    • superkret@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Exercise still does a lot in the long term. Just 3x30 minutes of moderate exercise per week would make you lose 10 pounds in a year while eating the same as before

    • OutlierBlue@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Yep, absolutely. When people start exercising and find out how few calories they’ve actually burned, the solution is always simple. It’s much easier to limit the intake than burn it off later.

    • gerbler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      Keep in mind that the more muscle you build, the more energy it takes to move that muscle therefore the more calories you’ll burn during your activities through the day. It’s not necessarily about the calories you burn during the workout but the aggregate impact downstream.

      I could be wrong though I don’t go to the gym lol.

      • Zwiebel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        You are kind of wrong, in that the effect of the extra muscle is pretty minimal. See this video on the topic:

        What about muscles? Muscles burn 3 times more calories at rest than fat. This sounds impressive, but tissues like your brain, skin or intestines burn way more. In absolute terms, a more muscular body composition makes a difference for how many calories your body burns, but it’s relatively small. Muscles matter a lot for health, longevity and performance, but not that much for weight loss.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSSkDos2hzo

      • ikidd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        7 days ago

        By that logic a morbidly obese person is exercising harder than anyone else by moving their 600lb ass around the living room.

        • Delphia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          6 days ago

          They are.

          A 600lb person walking a mile burns significantly more calories than a 200lb person doing the same thing. Im 200lbs and I can back squat 300lbs, a 600lb person squatting down and standing back up is moving more weight than I am… If they can manage it.

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          I think this is sort of why people eating more than usual and keeping that end up heavier instead of just gaining weight forever. You burn more calories when you’re heavier.

          But, yeah, someone who is 600 pounds is burning more calories by moving than someone who is 200 pounds.

        • mouserat@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          The statement was that the amount of moved muscle is related to the amount of calories that are burnt - an obese person does not have large muscles automatically. When they move the weight definitely has an impact on their muscles - a workout without additional weights would have a bigger impact on burnt calories as for a skinny person with same muscle mass. But the impact of moving through the living room on overall calorie balance should be neglectible.

      • Obi@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        What you learn quickly is that the effects of calorie burning are real but way less than what people think. You can go destroy yourself running to the point you’re half dead and that’s gonna burn like 300 calories (like, one protein bar).

        But yes on topic of the gym there’s a few downstream effects, the bigger you get the more you eat to be on equilibrium. Also strength workouts keep your muscles “activated” for up to 48h during which you also burn a bit more calories at rest.

        And finally of course there’s the whole bulking/cutting thing, the basics is that basically, no matter how much you lift you’re not gonna grow muscle unless you also have a calorie surplus in particular protein. During this process it’s unavoidable to also put on fat so you bulk for a while (eat a lot+ workout a lot and improve personal records) then you cut (eat at deficit, maintenance workouts) so the fat recedes and etc.

    • ramble81@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      Calories out just need to exceed calories in. Diets help do that easier but it’s all the same principle

      • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        7 days ago

        Yeah, I just mean it’s easier to manipulate the intake side of the equation. Burning a couple hundred calories is a lot of work; choosing not to drink a soda is easy.

      • Belgdore@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 days ago

        It’s important to note that “maintenance calories” are the vast majority of the energy you use on a daily basis. Exercise is just a small portion of the calories you burn.

  • superkret@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Nice. When I’m at the top I can treat myself to a shot of alcohol-free beer!
    Or an M&M!

    • Pregnenolone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      For the purposes of nutrition guidance, a kilocalorie and a Calorie are the same unit. Yes. It’s confusing.

    • Annoyed_🦀 @lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      Apparently a kilocalorie(kcal) is equivalent of a thousand calorie, and because the actual calorie value is so small in terms of nutrition, the term basically used in the same way as kilocalorie.

  • hawgietonight@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    7 days ago

    A typical hamburger is about 500 kcal so you would have to go up those stairs 100 times to burn it off in theory.

    But science is now saying that burning off calories isn’t related to excersise… you burn the same amount doing or not doing physical activity. So I don’t know if this is relevant anymore.

    • hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      That’s very very simplified version of it.

      The more you do an exercise, the more efficient your body becomes for it.

      So a person who runs 10km every day still burns approximately the same amount of calories as a sofa potato running only to toilet and fridge.

      BUT if you do heavier exercises than your regular, you’re going to be burning more calories than your average daily ~1800-2000kcal

      • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        Unsurprisingly, fitness is always more complicated than it seems.

        You are certainly correct that runners don’t burn (much) more calories than a couch potato. But weightlifters do, vs a couch potato of the same weight.

        The thing about cardio is that the calories go directly into effort. The calories burned are roughly proportional to the effort (distance). But the moment you stop, the calories stop getting burned.

        If you are doing weightlifting, the calories spent at the time to lift a heavy object are minimal. But it instructs your body to add muscle to better handle all the heavy lifting you do. Once you have that muscle, you burn a ton of calories 24 hours per day just keeping it alive. It becomes part of your base metabolic rate. It burns nearly the same calories whether you’re at the gym, or sitting on the couch. And it will continue to burn those calories until your body decides you no longer need that extra muscle mass and it atrophies.

    • tissek@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      Last i saw on this is that there isn’t a 1:1 relation between increased calorie burn by increased exercise and total calorie burn. There are some but also the body diverts energy from one task to another. Still the best way to loose weight, maintaining a calorie deficit, is to eat less. Way easier said than done.

      • Carnelian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 days ago

        Yeah the body compensates for it to an extent.

        You know how lot of people report exercise makes them feel better? Releases dopamine, relaxes them. A result is that they actually fidget less, their heart rate slows, and other energy burning processes in their body relax.

        The buffer is relatively large in fact, like possibly over 200-400 calories per day depending on the person. I think of it as the body’s flywheel for keeping an energy balance.

        One should keep exercising, for the numerous benefits. There also is a point where you are burning calories that need to be made up (either through eating or weight loss), ask any endurance athlete. Just not likely to hit the threshold in 20 mins on the treadmill, which is what many people do for exercise

        • tissek@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 days ago

          Something I never really got from the summaries on the research is how much training increase they looked at. And what type. I bet going fron 0 to 30 minutes a day would look different than the span 0-120.

          Do you BTW have a link to the paper?

      • Benign@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 days ago

        I saw it on kurtzgesagt YouTube channel. “rethink exercise” was in the video title I think.

        • four@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          Didn’t they make a new version of that video, where they added like “some studies show that …”, “in some cases …”, “it’s complicated” all throughout the video?

  • samus12345@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Imma take the escalator out of spite now. You’re not the boss of me!