Stop eating M&Ms

Fuck off mate.

I can burn off a single M&M with a single fart. 3 calories. I think you fucking idiots are mistaking actual M&Ms with mcflurries.

t. Jaba the Hutt

t. twink faggot

You have an eating disorder.
Also unless that peanut butter is something raw and organic you have literally eaten nothing but junk food all day.

rune me a mile fatty

Do squats while you shitpost.

>running for exercise

You know how bad that is for numerous joints? Jogging at best.

>so far today I've had 1 hot pocket, half a gatorade, and a scoop of peanut butter
thank mr skeltal

It's not that bad if you do it on sand or soil though. Actually, it feels pretty comfy to walk on soil.

>skinny is aesthetic
user, are you a bottom gay?

you sound like an insufferable faggot rbh

He better be

A single M&M has 3 calories. An adult male generally consumes 2000 calories in a day. By their logic, you'd have to walk 38 miles each day to burn off whatever you've eaten that day.

Absolutely retarded.

> shit is scientifically wrong.
how the fuck is it wrong? food contributes a certain amount of energy to your body and exercise diffuses a certain amount out

Literally burning calories just sitting here.
Fix the rest of your diet and a handful of M & Ms won't mean shit.

the body burns 2k a day just by existing.

and more with exercise

How many 180lbs bench presses does it take to burn a single M&M?

Maybe 0.1 bench presses?

No it doesn't. 2k daily calories assumes you're doing things like mowing the lawn or walking places. Sitting around doing nothing doesn't burn nearly that amount.

depends on how big you are.

The amount of energy it takes to exercise goes up with your size, yeah, but no, your body can't burn through 2,000 calories just sitting on your ass "depending on how big you are." That's retarded, user.

closest i could get

>organic having anything to do with quality or nutrition
Retard

Vers actually.

What the fuck are you talking about?

>girls on Veeky Forums

Manlet detected

>Sitting around doing nothing doesn't burn nearly that amount.

Sitting down doing nothing burns the absolute majority of that amount, nearly all of it. That's where the calories go, heating to 37°, bodily functions etc.
By that logic people who just lie in bed would not need to eat.

Is that infographic saying that if I eat an M&M and don't walk the length of a football field, I will never burn off the calories from that M&M?

If I eat an M&M and then wait a few days before I walk the length of a football field, do the calories just hang around until I do? How do they know?

What a fuckin shite existence m8

You are not getting the nutrients you need from eating only a couple of high cal garbage meals a day. You have to eat balanced or you're going to end up with malnutrition,

Depending on your type the body either, or

-stores them as fat

-increases its body temperature by a tiny amount to burn excess calories.

It also when recognising constant rate of nutrition (by nature humans are prepared for long hunger periods between meals) reduce the amount of energy extracted from the food in digestion.

Mate say that to my face irl I will literally break ya with my bare hands and fold you into a paper aeroplane and fly you back to Auschwitz

>running
>bad for the joints

So sad this meme is perpetuated by idiots.

There are 3 primary reasons why running (or indeed any sport) leads to injuries.

-An existing irregularity, imbalance, or defect in your musculoskeletal system which. though not obvious or troubling in your everyday. sedentary. low-activity life becoming apparent when you physically train

-Poor or incorrect form which works against your musculoskeletal system and natural movements

-Not giving yourself adequate time to rest and recover or not bothering with recuperative activities e.g. cool downs, stretching, massaging

Paying attention to these things will greatly enhance your enjoyment of engaging physical exercise of many varying kinds and with minimal to no injury to oneself.

>b-but muh anecdotal evidence; muh science articles

Which are all either greatly lacking in controls and variables controlled for, and typically have a very narrow breadth of application or conclusion that can be drawn. There is sufficiently enough counter 'science articles' which are with counter to those or simply inconclusive.

You may as well make the observation that people who go outside are more likely to be run over that fatties who stay inside and watch TV all day. No shit - It still doesn't make watching TV 'healthy' or reason to not go outside unless you're a fragile snowflake with an exaggerated sense of fear.

by the end of the thread I was surprised to see the next thread because I thought I was on Veeky Forums. I checked my browser history, I just came from Veeky Forums, that's why.