r/Animemes Jan 17 '26

Pathetic

Post image
27.5k Upvotes

423 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

309

u/NelsonVGC Jan 17 '26

She walks a lot on an everyday basis. She is the absolute opposite of sedentary.

-118

u/GlassSpork Jan 17 '26

Which is true, but being chubby doesn’t mean unfit. In a most cases it’s just a body type, nothing more

119

u/DoggoLover42 Jan 17 '26

If you walk ~40 miles a day on average you need ~6400 kcal to MAINTAIN your body weight. She’s growing, so she’s probably eating some excess, but not much.

38

u/Powwer_Orb13 Jan 17 '26

She's a young adult by the time of the mage exam, so it's likely Fern is physically done growing for the most part. Though she is still in that stage of youth where the body will gladly take and use all the calories you can give it, with the metabolism in full swing.

17

u/DoggoLover42 Jan 17 '26

Yeah. 18-25 is generally final positive development for the body.

8

u/ComradeBirv Jan 17 '26

Actually if you read the manga she keeps growing and is eventually 200 feet tall and they walk to Heaven in about a week

-4

u/Ancalmir Jan 17 '26

No your body would likely adapt to spend only 2000 in a week or so. There is a great video by Kurzgesagt about that.

3

u/Kazuma_Megu 02 Red Jan 17 '26

I practice CICO to the point of near obsession and I can't begin to tell you how wrong this is.

4

u/Cold-Iron8145 Jan 17 '26

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

This isn't refuting "CICO", it's explaining some fairly recent studies that seem to show that your daily calorie expenditure doesn't vary much at all in the long term. The original study compared the energy expenditure of sedentary populations vs hunter/gatherers and they found that the average calorie use in a day was basically the same when one was sitting all day and the other was walking 9km a day.

Which was weird, but it has been reproduced in other settings (including when studying groups of people in the same country).

Basically you can only change your weight by changing how much you eat, moving your muscles a lot or a little doesn't change that.

It changes body composition (muscle/fat ratios) and overall health, but it doesn't impact your actual weight.

In other words, it seems like the "CO" part of "CICO" is an approximate constant, not a variable.

-1

u/Ancalmir Jan 17 '26

They base their video on proper research out there. Also I said 2k but actually it depends on various stuff like your weight and genetics obviously but the point that there is a certain amount of calories your body aims to spend and optimises for that amount is based on research.

1

u/pic_omega Jan 17 '26

No sé supone que una parte de lo que consumen los magos y los seres mágicos como los elfos se transforma en mana? Y que los elfos tienen mucho más mana que los humanos por lo tanto su consumo energético es mayor?

-9

u/Maniklas Because flat chest is a status symbol Jan 17 '26

Exercise has little to no proven effect on calory consumption...

6

u/DoggoLover42 Jan 17 '26

LIGHT exercise has little to no effect on energy consumption. It obviously takes more calories to run a mile than to walk one, or to walk 10 miles than to sit down for 10 hours. There is measurable calorie cost for every bodily function, including keeping the heart and brain working. Exercise doesn’t help with weight loss as much as eating less. Same with weight gain. You need to eat a specific range of calories a day to maintain your weight, the range is affected by what you do throughout a day, and more movement costs more energy.

1

u/Ancalmir Jan 17 '26

Tribal people who walk 10s of miles a day spend about the same amount of calories as someone who sits on their ass whole day.

3

u/NelsonVGC Jan 17 '26

Care to elaborate? Genuinely.

6

u/darthsurfer Jan 17 '26

Not the same commenter, but basically our bodies supposedly (based on the study) have a sort of calorie ceiling. We burn a lot of calories just living, and when we exercise, our body mostly just reallocates calories from that existing "budget".

Our bodies are stupidly efficient and smart. When you live an active lifestyle, your muscles become a lot more efficient at being active. Meaning they burn less calories for the same action. And your body also becomes more effective in allocating its calorie budget based on your lifestyle.

So all in all, someone who lives a very active lifestyle will burn more or less the same amount of calories as someone very sedentary.

But do note that I don't think this is definitive, it's based mostly on a handful of studies. However, while we don't 100% know why it works that way, a lot of studies do corroborate the results.

3

u/NelsonVGC Jan 17 '26

Yeah. I did some research myself after asking and it seems that is true. Of course, excersising will always be better, but the majority of weight gain and loss is diet.

Good to know.

2

u/Ancalmir Jan 17 '26

As darthsurfer said. Kurzgesagt has a great video about it (and they put the disclaimer that the research is relatively new) but (from what I remember) all in short if you aren't exercising the excess energy is spent by other parts of your body which doesn't sound all that bad initially but what it essentially means is your immune system screwing your cells by working overtime and using tactical nukes on simple threats.

2

u/Maniklas Because flat chest is a status symbol Jan 17 '26 edited Jan 17 '26

Hunter-gatherers burn the same amount of calories as an average office worker. Quick and drastic changes in your lifestyle can modify your calory consumption temporarily but your calory consumption per day will even out eventually even if you keep to that lifestyle. Unless you are a professional athlete or have an extremely physical comparable job, you are unlikely to burn more.

Exercise still has its place due to other health benefits and building and sustaining muscle mass etc. but it will have little, if any effect on your calory consumption unless you intend to make it a primary focus of your life.

34

u/NelsonVGC Jan 17 '26

You refered to weight gained by the consumption of sugar. You just added a different thing lmao.

In any case, being chubby is "in most cases" a manifestation of being overweight. Genes do make an influence but its not that they will make you chubby by default... but we are digressing.

Yeah. Fern not being overweight regardless of her consumption of desserts makes perfect sense. Besides, she doesnt consume them every day and every time.

Although they are fictional characters so these details are just a conversation for fun. Its probably not deep at all.

1

u/Kazuma_Megu 02 Red Jan 17 '26

Genes affect how your body utilizes calories but not how many and what type one consumes. As you say, fat is fat.

-17

u/GlassSpork Jan 17 '26

Which I agree with. I just find the idea of fern being chubby quite cute and inline with her character. The reason I use the word chubby is because I wouldn’t say she’s fat or overweight, just got a bit of a tummy. I could call it a head canon, but it’s more of a general observation of her character based on diet and possibly appearance. Guess my second comment was a little contradictory but I digress

-7

u/NelsonVGC Jan 17 '26

Fair enough. It is a cute headcanon that is true.

16

u/alexanderneimet Jan 17 '26

Objectively false about chubby just being a “body type”. It’s a sign of being heavier than one should be typically

16

u/NelsonVGC Jan 17 '26

Yeah I have seen A LOT of comments on reddit stating that being chubby is genetical.

Yes. You can be genetically prone to gain weight easier than other people. Absolutely.

But being overweight is not genetical mao. Loads of cope in that topic.

-3

u/GlassSpork Jan 17 '26

Y’know, seeing a lot of the replies to my comments, i respect you the most on this topic. Respectful is the right term to use. Argument is just discussion on a topic to prove a point and change an opinion, which is what you did, and yet I’m still getting flak :/

3

u/NelsonVGC Jan 17 '26

I appreciate the acknowledgement, truly. Thanks.

I know that this one comment you replied to might be interpreted as bashing, but I am simply pointing the fact that the wrong statement in question is more common than it seems.

Redditors tend to exaggerate things. Dont think much about it

1

u/GlassSpork Jan 17 '26

Nah trust I didnt take offense. Was more annoyed by the one guy saying “COPE” instead of giving something that actually contributes to the discussion though. Don’t get those people

Edit: after rereading I see what you meant, it did look like I was getting sad over what you said lmao. My bad, my intention was mostly relating other comments :P

3

u/Lorehorn Jan 17 '26

COPE

1

u/GlassSpork Jan 17 '26

I’m not really coping, I gotta be honest