• mirshafie@europe.pub
    Aquileo | link
    Aquileo | fedilink
    Aquileo | arrow-up
    2
    Aquileo | arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    It’s not even close. When I went from 50:50 lab/office to 10:90 lab/office I gained like 12 kg and outgrew all of my pants in a year. Granted a bit of that was stress with my asshole bosses but I believe that just working on my feet a couple of hours versus being sedentary made a massive difference.

      • mirshafie@europe.pub
        Aquileo | link
        Aquileo | fedilink
        Aquileo | arrow-up
        3
        Aquileo | arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Nah, I got the meaning of your post. Standing at the desk, even with a treadmill, is not the same as natural movement. Taking breaks from a physically passive activity is not tge same as being constantly physically active.

        • edible_funk@sh.itjust.works
          Aquileo | link
          Aquileo | fedilink
          Aquileo | arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          You probably weren’t burning significantly more calories. What happened is you likely started eating or drinking more calories at your desk where before you were too busy. It’s like a thirty minute jog to work off an oreo, it’s unlikely you were actually burning that many more calories. But then most people still think exercise and metabolism have a lot of control over your weight when it’s almost exclusively how much you’re eating and drinking. Nobody is breaking the laws of thermodynamics.

          • mirshafie@europe.pub
            Aquileo | link
            Aquileo | fedilink
            Aquileo | arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            I absolutely did not eat at my desk. In fact I had way more sweets in the first role, the culture was different at the lab. I know about thermodynamics, but I don’t think it’s that simple. Moving around helps a ton with stress and digestion which affects your metabolism and insulin resistance. It’s not about moving to “burn off” fat, it’s about moving to not synthesize the fat around your organs in the first place.

            • edible_funk@sh.itjust.works
              Aquileo | link
              Aquileo | fedilink
              Aquileo | arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              I don’t think that’s how that works. It’s all calorie in calorie out, and once acclimated to a new routine most people within normal activity levels settle in burning around 2000kcal a day, that’s sedentary and active people. Metabolism has way less impact than most people think and outside of heavy labor or semipro athlete you’re probably settling in around that 2000kcal maintenance level. Unless you were doing strenuous labor or working out daily your maintenance level probably didn’t change that much.

                • edible_funk@sh.itjust.works
                  Aquileo | link
                  Aquileo | fedilink
                  Aquileo | arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  Yes but unless you’re a statistical outlier that still won’t make a significant difference to counting calories. When it comes to gaining or losing weight yes it is purely calorie in calorie out. The difference in caloric maintenance between an active lifestyle and a sedentary one is 4 to 6 hundred kcal. That’s a bowl of cereal. Your metabolism has little overall impact.

                  • mirshafie@europe.pub
                    Aquileo | link
                    Aquileo | fedilink
                    Aquileo | arrow-up
                    1
                    Aquileo | arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    4 days ago

                    Metabolic health has a tremendous impact on how we process calories, and I don’t really find it useful to discuss this further. There’s a tremendous body of evidence to support this, that you can do whatever you want with.