How many laps around Walmart?
Replies
-
susan100df wrote: »_Terrapin_ wrote: »
Okay, presumably the toy aisle has two ends so you really only walked 6 laps and if you ate the donut had an excess of 175 calories so you'll gain weight. Either do not bring the kiddo or stop exercising at WALMART or stop eating donuts in the hopes you can walk enough to burn the calories. Your 209 calorie burn was probably from one of those hokey fitbit/garmin/donut measuring caloric burn devices. Throw it away. Done. Phew. . . .I need a donut.blkandwhite77 wrote: »Ok so I learned a valuable lesson... Our gym membership is a much cheaper way to exercise. Somehow our $2 donut burning expedition ended up being a $60 expedition. I also learned our 3 year old did not find it as fun to walk past the toy aisle a dozen plus times as we did.
I have failed the mission. I must admit I lost track of laps and I got bored so I started weaving in an out all of the aisles. I also realized that the elderly winter visitors do not care about me keeping my heart rate up and their mission was to sabotage our mission. I think they were covert spy's sent by the calorie force to make us fail.
However, I did burn 209 calories which is almost a full donut. Add that into calories spent pushing the evil cart from hell and laughing hysterically for a good ten minutes just plotting this mission and I'm going to savor every morsel of my maple donut.
Plus, going to the gym tonight just in case lol thank you all for your support and while I may have failed this one mission we will win the war!
What's wrong with measuring calories burned with a Fitbit? The calorie burn is an estimate so I don't eat those calories. The estimate is better than nothing.
Seeing the numbers rise (or not if I am sitting around) helps me move more. Nothing wrong with that.
Agreed. I am sorry your haha button is broken. Best of luck to you.
0 -
_Terrapin_ wrote: »susan100df wrote: »_Terrapin_ wrote: »
Okay, presumably the toy aisle has two ends so you really only walked 6 laps and if you ate the donut had an excess of 175 calories so you'll gain weight. Either do not bring the kiddo or stop exercising at WALMART or stop eating donuts in the hopes you can walk enough to burn the calories. Your 209 calorie burn was probably from one of those hokey fitbit/garmin/donut measuring caloric burn devices. Throw it away. Done. Phew. . . .I need a donut.blkandwhite77 wrote: »Ok so I learned a valuable lesson... Our gym membership is a much cheaper way to exercise. Somehow our $2 donut burning expedition ended up being a $60 expedition. I also learned our 3 year old did not find it as fun to walk past the toy aisle a dozen plus times as we did.
I have failed the mission. I must admit I lost track of laps and I got bored so I started weaving in an out all of the aisles. I also realized that the elderly winter visitors do not care about me keeping my heart rate up and their mission was to sabotage our mission. I think they were covert spy's sent by the calorie force to make us fail.
However, I did burn 209 calories which is almost a full donut. Add that into calories spent pushing the evil cart from hell and laughing hysterically for a good ten minutes just plotting this mission and I'm going to savor every morsel of my maple donut.
Plus, going to the gym tonight just in case lol thank you all for your support and while I may have failed this one mission we will win the war!
What's wrong with measuring calories burned with a Fitbit? The calorie burn is an estimate so I don't eat those calories. The estimate is better than nothing.
Seeing the numbers rise (or not if I am sitting around) helps me move more. Nothing wrong with that.
Agreed. I am sorry your haha button is broken. Best of luck to you.
Hahahahaha! Stealing that. Also in this funny thread, a few wah wah buttons set to ultra sensitive.
0 -
_Terrapin_ wrote: »
Okay, presumably the toy aisle has two ends so you really only walked 6 laps and if you ate the donut had an excess of 175 calories so you'll gain weight. Either do not bring the kiddo or stop exercising at WALMART or stop eating donuts in the hopes you can walk enough to burn the calories. Your 209 calorie burn was probably from one of those hokey fitbit/garmin/donut measuring caloric burn devices. Throw it away. Done. Phew. . . .I need a donut.blkandwhite77 wrote: »Ok so I learned a valuable lesson... Our gym membership is a much cheaper way to exercise. Somehow our $2 donut burning expedition ended up being a $60 expedition. I also learned our 3 year old did not find it as fun to walk past the toy aisle a dozen plus times as we did.
I have failed the mission. I must admit I lost track of laps and I got bored so I started weaving in an out all of the aisles. I also realized that the elderly winter visitors do not care about me keeping my heart rate up and their mission was to sabotage our mission. I think they were covert spy's sent by the calorie force to make us fail.
However, I did burn 209 calories which is almost a full donut. Add that into calories spent pushing the evil cart from hell and laughing hysterically for a good ten minutes just plotting this mission and I'm going to savor every morsel of my maple donut.
Plus, going to the gym tonight just in case lol thank you all for your support and while I may have failed this one mission we will win the war!
Ok then have a great day.0 -
blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »You can't out-exercise a bad diet. You have to walk at a very brisk pace to get your heart pumping, and then you'd still have to walk for well over an hour at that pace to earn that doughnut.
Ok spoil sport you can take a 5 minute time out. A singular as in One Donut is not a bad diet. A 2000 calorie day of donuts is a bad diet. If there was a world without maple bars I wouldn't want to exist on it. Btw I've lost 70 lbs so far so
No need for rudeness and name-calling, OP. The point is that you have to account for your calories. While it might have been a one-time thing that you were discussing, you are the one that brought up the point about walking being enough to make up for eating a doughnut. Anyone who just came in to actually find out about this needs to know that it's not a good idea to think they can lose weight by just taking a walk and eating things like doughnuts. As I pointed out in my initial post, anyone would have to walk at a pretty brisk pace for well over an hour to burn off enough calories to account for one single doughnut.
Now see I wasn't rude. There's always one spoil sport in a conversation online and today it was you. Reminds me of a song my mom used to sing when we were being grumpy. Now stop bringing down a perfectly happy and fun post by being miserable.
Every party has a pooper that's why we invited you. Party pooper party pooper.. Quite a catchy tune actually. Now smile and enjoy life. It's such an awesome thing to have. Good day
All names... name calling. That's a pretty rude way to treat someone who is simply trying to help based on your original post.And against terms of service I believe.
I can't roll my eyes enough. It's a kids song meant to be silly. Chill
I'm all for participating in good fun. But my post was meant in all earnestness, and you responded with name calling. In the more humorous posts, I'll join right in, but I hadn't done that here. And I'll say that even when joining in with the jokes, name calling is never an acceptable part of it. Save the children's songs for the kiddies.0 -
blkandwhite77 wrote: »...I have failed the mission. I must admit I lost track of laps and I got bored so I started weaving in an out all of the aisles. I also realized that the elderly winter visitors do not care about me keeping my heart rate up and their mission was to sabotage our mission. I think they were covert spy's sent by the calorie force to make us fail...
Anybody who wonders what the zombie apocalypse will be like needs to do nothing more than come to a warm weather town and go to a grocery store while the "snowbirds" are here. Wandering around aimlessly, stopping suddenly in the middle of aisles, standing there blocking entire aisles while they try to remember what they were shopping for the in the first place....agonizing. Every year I dread November and eagerly await April/May!0 -
blkandwhite77 wrote: »...I have failed the mission. I must admit I lost track of laps and I got bored so I started weaving in an out all of the aisles. I also realized that the elderly winter visitors do not care about me keeping my heart rate up and their mission was to sabotage our mission. I think they were covert spy's sent by the calorie force to make us fail...
Anybody who wonders what the zombie apocalypse will be like needs to do nothing more than come to a warm weather town and go to a grocery store while the "snowbirds" are here. Wandering around aimlessly, stopping suddenly in the middle of aisles, standing there blocking entire aisles while they try to remember what they were shopping for the in the first place....agonizing. Every year I dread November and eagerly await April/May!
I swear they come earlier every year! It used to be November but this year it started early October... WHY!!!!?????????
0 -
All done with the Benny Hill soundtrack going round my head (Youtube if you don't know)
OMG! MY GRANDFATHER LOVED THAT SHOW! (I think mostly for the scantily clad beauties.) That song will be stuck in my head now! Thank you, so much!
0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »
That's 10 minutes and Remedial Humor.
I don't care who you are. That there's funnnnnny!
0 -
blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »You can't out-exercise a bad diet. You have to walk at a very brisk pace to get your heart pumping, and then you'd still have to walk for well over an hour at that pace to earn that doughnut.
Ok spoil sport you can take a 5 minute time out. A singular as in One Donut is not a bad diet. A 2000 calorie day of donuts is a bad diet. If there was a world without maple bars I wouldn't want to exist on it. Btw I've lost 70 lbs so far so
No need for rudeness and name-calling, OP. The point is that you have to account for your calories. While it might have been a one-time thing that you were discussing, you are the one that brought up the point about walking being enough to make up for eating a doughnut. Anyone who just came in to actually find out about this needs to know that it's not a good idea to think they can lose weight by just taking a walk and eating things like doughnuts. As I pointed out in my initial post, anyone would have to walk at a pretty brisk pace for well over an hour to burn off enough calories to account for one single doughnut.
Now see I wasn't rude. There's always one spoil sport in a conversation online and today it was you. Reminds me of a song my mom used to sing when we were being grumpy. Now stop bringing down a perfectly happy and fun post by being miserable.
Every party has a pooper that's why we invited you. Party pooper party pooper.. Quite a catchy tune actually. Now smile and enjoy life. It's such an awesome thing to have. Good day
All names... name calling. That's a pretty rude way to treat someone who is simply trying to help based on your original post.And against terms of service I believe.
I can't roll my eyes enough. It's a kids song meant to be silly. Chill
I'm all for participating in good fun. But my post was meant in all earnestness, and you responded with name calling. In the more humorous posts, I'll join right in, but I hadn't done that here. And I'll say that even when joining in with the jokes, name calling is never an acceptable part of it. Save the children's songs for the kiddies.
If you are interjecting science, it has to be based on facts. Despite the obvious that the OP posted just for a laugh and most realized she didn't care if she burned enough calories for the donut, you posted "science" based on assumptions. Science works based on facts, not assumptions, and there were a number of lacking facts to interject anything other than simply a SWAG on the issue, even if the OP really cared.
Science also failed the lap count as well, even if the assumptions on matter were correct. Simple math is simple, and that example was a complete fail in the face of science as well.
OP, I think in the end you should have snuck in some time on an exercise machine. Much quicker due to lack of obstacles. Or used a bike. They work big muscles and you can easily outrun security on the way to the bakery section to do a drive by donut snatching!0 -
robertw486 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »You can't out-exercise a bad diet. You have to walk at a very brisk pace to get your heart pumping, and then you'd still have to walk for well over an hour at that pace to earn that doughnut.
Ok spoil sport you can take a 5 minute time out. A singular as in One Donut is not a bad diet. A 2000 calorie day of donuts is a bad diet. If there was a world without maple bars I wouldn't want to exist on it. Btw I've lost 70 lbs so far so
No need for rudeness and name-calling, OP. The point is that you have to account for your calories. While it might have been a one-time thing that you were discussing, you are the one that brought up the point about walking being enough to make up for eating a doughnut. Anyone who just came in to actually find out about this needs to know that it's not a good idea to think they can lose weight by just taking a walk and eating things like doughnuts. As I pointed out in my initial post, anyone would have to walk at a pretty brisk pace for well over an hour to burn off enough calories to account for one single doughnut.
Now see I wasn't rude. There's always one spoil sport in a conversation online and today it was you. Reminds me of a song my mom used to sing when we were being grumpy. Now stop bringing down a perfectly happy and fun post by being miserable.
Every party has a pooper that's why we invited you. Party pooper party pooper.. Quite a catchy tune actually. Now smile and enjoy life. It's such an awesome thing to have. Good day
All names... name calling. That's a pretty rude way to treat someone who is simply trying to help based on your original post.And against terms of service I believe.
I can't roll my eyes enough. It's a kids song meant to be silly. Chill
I'm all for participating in good fun. But my post was meant in all earnestness, and you responded with name calling. In the more humorous posts, I'll join right in, but I hadn't done that here. And I'll say that even when joining in with the jokes, name calling is never an acceptable part of it. Save the children's songs for the kiddies.
If you are interjecting science, it has to be based on facts. Despite the obvious that the OP posted just for a laugh and most realized she didn't care if she burned enough calories for the donut, you posted "science" based on assumptions. Science works based on facts, not assumptions, and there were a number of lacking facts to interject anything other than simply a SWAG on the issue, even if the OP really cared.
Science also failed the lap count as well, even if the assumptions on matter were correct. Simple math is simple, and that example was a complete fail in the face of science as well.
OP, I think in the end you should have snuck in some time on an exercise machine. Much quicker due to lack of obstacles. Or used a bike. They work big muscles and you can easily outrun security on the way to the bakery section to do a drive by donut snatching!
But then how would I have enjoyed playing with my daughter and teasing my hubby as I drill sergeanted through all of Walmart? I mean I only get to use my drill sergeant voice once Ina blue moon! And Ty for seeing the humor in my post. I always looked at almost everything in life with a sense of humor BUT dieting. So this time I decided my humor is going on my journey (not diet!) with me. Its much more fun this way
0 -
blkandwhite77 wrote: »Ok so I learned a valuable lesson... Our gym membership is a much cheaper way to exercise. Somehow our $2 donut burning expedition ended up being a $60 expedition. I also learned our 3 year old did not find it as fun to walk past the toy aisle a dozen plus times as we did.
I have failed the mission. I must admit I lost track of laps and I got bored so I started weaving in an out all of the aisles. I also realized that the elderly winter visitors do not care about me keeping my heart rate up and their mission was to sabotage our mission. I think they were covert spy's sent by the calorie force to make us fail.
However, I did burn 209 calories which is almost a full donut. Add that into calories spent pushing the evil cart from hell and laughing hysterically for a good ten minutes just plotting this mission and I'm going to savor every morsel of my maple donut.
Plus, going to the gym tonight just in case lol thank you all for your support and while I may have failed this one mission we will win the war!
I like you.0 -
blkandwhite77 wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »You can't out-exercise a bad diet. You have to walk at a very brisk pace to get your heart pumping, and then you'd still have to walk for well over an hour at that pace to earn that doughnut.
Ok spoil sport you can take a 5 minute time out. A singular as in One Donut is not a bad diet. A 2000 calorie day of donuts is a bad diet. If there was a world without maple bars I wouldn't want to exist on it. Btw I've lost 70 lbs so far so
No need for rudeness and name-calling, OP. The point is that you have to account for your calories. While it might have been a one-time thing that you were discussing, you are the one that brought up the point about walking being enough to make up for eating a doughnut. Anyone who just came in to actually find out about this needs to know that it's not a good idea to think they can lose weight by just taking a walk and eating things like doughnuts. As I pointed out in my initial post, anyone would have to walk at a pretty brisk pace for well over an hour to burn off enough calories to account for one single doughnut.
Now see I wasn't rude. There's always one spoil sport in a conversation online and today it was you. Reminds me of a song my mom used to sing when we were being grumpy. Now stop bringing down a perfectly happy and fun post by being miserable.
Every party has a pooper that's why we invited you. Party pooper party pooper.. Quite a catchy tune actually. Now smile and enjoy life. It's such an awesome thing to have. Good day
All names... name calling. That's a pretty rude way to treat someone who is simply trying to help based on your original post.And against terms of service I believe.
I can't roll my eyes enough. It's a kids song meant to be silly. Chill
I'm all for participating in good fun. But my post was meant in all earnestness, and you responded with name calling. In the more humorous posts, I'll join right in, but I hadn't done that here. And I'll say that even when joining in with the jokes, name calling is never an acceptable part of it. Save the children's songs for the kiddies.
If you are interjecting science, it has to be based on facts. Despite the obvious that the OP posted just for a laugh and most realized she didn't care if she burned enough calories for the donut, you posted "science" based on assumptions. Science works based on facts, not assumptions, and there were a number of lacking facts to interject anything other than simply a SWAG on the issue, even if the OP really cared.
Science also failed the lap count as well, even if the assumptions on matter were correct. Simple math is simple, and that example was a complete fail in the face of science as well.
OP, I think in the end you should have snuck in some time on an exercise machine. Much quicker due to lack of obstacles. Or used a bike. They work big muscles and you can easily outrun security on the way to the bakery section to do a drive by donut snatching!
But then how would I have enjoyed playing with my daughter and teasing my hubby as I drill sergeanted through all of Walmart? I mean I only get to use my drill sergeant voice once Ina blue moon! And Ty for seeing the humor in my post. I always looked at almost everything in life with a sense of humor BUT dieting. So this time I decided my humor is going on my journey (not diet!) with me. Its much more fun this way
It sounds like it was a fun challenge. And I like the thinking. I often go out and exercise hard on certain days to "earn" myself a pass to the food trucks and a couple cold beers.
I would post some hard nosed comment about the "science" involved and spit out a bunch of numbers in hopes that it would impress people. But then I'd have to face up to the fact that some simple math and making assumptions could kick my butt and leave me wondering why I ever put up some internet meme like I won an argument based on assumptions. And then I might get called out for interjecting Broscience as people know it here.
I think it's way easier to have a laugh, a bike ride, and a trip to the food truck with my beer. 0 -
Entertaining post of the day! Enjoyed reading it, Thanks!0
-
robertw486 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »You can't out-exercise a bad diet. You have to walk at a very brisk pace to get your heart pumping, and then you'd still have to walk for well over an hour at that pace to earn that doughnut.
Ok spoil sport you can take a 5 minute time out. A singular as in One Donut is not a bad diet. A 2000 calorie day of donuts is a bad diet. If there was a world without maple bars I wouldn't want to exist on it. Btw I've lost 70 lbs so far so
No need for rudeness and name-calling, OP. The point is that you have to account for your calories. While it might have been a one-time thing that you were discussing, you are the one that brought up the point about walking being enough to make up for eating a doughnut. Anyone who just came in to actually find out about this needs to know that it's not a good idea to think they can lose weight by just taking a walk and eating things like doughnuts. As I pointed out in my initial post, anyone would have to walk at a pretty brisk pace for well over an hour to burn off enough calories to account for one single doughnut.
Now see I wasn't rude. There's always one spoil sport in a conversation online and today it was you. Reminds me of a song my mom used to sing when we were being grumpy. Now stop bringing down a perfectly happy and fun post by being miserable.
Every party has a pooper that's why we invited you. Party pooper party pooper.. Quite a catchy tune actually. Now smile and enjoy life. It's such an awesome thing to have. Good day
All names... name calling. That's a pretty rude way to treat someone who is simply trying to help based on your original post.And against terms of service I believe.
I can't roll my eyes enough. It's a kids song meant to be silly. Chill
I'm all for participating in good fun. But my post was meant in all earnestness, and you responded with name calling. In the more humorous posts, I'll join right in, but I hadn't done that here. And I'll say that even when joining in with the jokes, name calling is never an acceptable part of it. Save the children's songs for the kiddies.
If you are interjecting science, it has to be based on facts. Despite the obvious that the OP posted just for a laugh and most realized she didn't care if she burned enough calories for the donut, you posted "science" based on assumptions. Science works based on facts, not assumptions, and there were a number of lacking facts to interject anything other than simply a SWAG on the issue, even if the OP really cared.
Science also failed the lap count as well, even if the assumptions on matter were correct. Simple math is simple, and that example was a complete fail in the face of science as well.
Sorry, I didn't. I didn't post anything based on laps, or anything like that. My post simply stated that the OP would have to walk at a pace quick enough to raise her heart rate, and that she would have to walk for more than an hour to burn off enough calories to earn that doughnut. Since the average doughnut is well over 250 calories (and she was talking about a maple something dougnut, which is likely well over 300), any average person at a walking pace, will have to walk for over an hour to burn that many calories. No assumptions there.
Regardless of the science involved, no post anywhere in the forums deserves name calling, joking or not.
0 -
robertw486 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »You can't out-exercise a bad diet. You have to walk at a very brisk pace to get your heart pumping, and then you'd still have to walk for well over an hour at that pace to earn that doughnut.
Ok spoil sport you can take a 5 minute time out. A singular as in One Donut is not a bad diet. A 2000 calorie day of donuts is a bad diet. If there was a world without maple bars I wouldn't want to exist on it. Btw I've lost 70 lbs so far so
No need for rudeness and name-calling, OP. The point is that you have to account for your calories. While it might have been a one-time thing that you were discussing, you are the one that brought up the point about walking being enough to make up for eating a doughnut. Anyone who just came in to actually find out about this needs to know that it's not a good idea to think they can lose weight by just taking a walk and eating things like doughnuts. As I pointed out in my initial post, anyone would have to walk at a pretty brisk pace for well over an hour to burn off enough calories to account for one single doughnut.
Now see I wasn't rude. There's always one spoil sport in a conversation online and today it was you. Reminds me of a song my mom used to sing when we were being grumpy. Now stop bringing down a perfectly happy and fun post by being miserable.
Every party has a pooper that's why we invited you. Party pooper party pooper.. Quite a catchy tune actually. Now smile and enjoy life. It's such an awesome thing to have. Good day
All names... name calling. That's a pretty rude way to treat someone who is simply trying to help based on your original post.And against terms of service I believe.
I can't roll my eyes enough. It's a kids song meant to be silly. Chill
I'm all for participating in good fun. But my post was meant in all earnestness, and you responded with name calling. In the more humorous posts, I'll join right in, but I hadn't done that here. And I'll say that even when joining in with the jokes, name calling is never an acceptable part of it. Save the children's songs for the kiddies.
If you are interjecting science, it has to be based on facts. Despite the obvious that the OP posted just for a laugh and most realized she didn't care if she burned enough calories for the donut, you posted "science" based on assumptions. Science works based on facts, not assumptions, and there were a number of lacking facts to interject anything other than simply a SWAG on the issue, even if the OP really cared.
Science also failed the lap count as well, even if the assumptions on matter were correct. Simple math is simple, and that example was a complete fail in the face of science as well.
OP, I think in the end you should have snuck in some time on an exercise machine. Much quicker due to lack of obstacles. Or used a bike. They work big muscles and you can easily outrun security on the way to the bakery section to do a drive by donut snatching!
But then how would I have enjoyed playing with my daughter and teasing my hubby as I drill sergeanted through all of Walmart? I mean I only get to use my drill sergeant voice once Ina blue moon! And Ty for seeing the humor in my post. I always looked at almost everything in life with a sense of humor BUT dieting. So this time I decided my humor is going on my journey (not diet!) with me. Its much more fun this way
It sounds like it was a fun challenge. And I like the thinking. I often go out and exercise hard on certain days to "earn" myself a pass to the food trucks and a couple cold beers.
I would post some hard nosed comment about the "science" involved and spit out a bunch of numbers in hopes that it would impress people. But then I'd have to face up to the fact that some simple math and making assumptions could kick my butt and leave me wondering why I ever put up some internet meme like I won an argument based on assumptions. And then I might get called out for interjecting Broscience as people know it here.
I think it's way easier to have a laugh, a bike ride, and a trip to the food truck with my beer.
Are you trying to make little backhanded stabs at me for my 30 second math and obvious joke I did earlier? Lol. I sure hope not.
0 -
ariana_eatsandlifts wrote: »I used to hate grocery shopping until I got a Fitbit and saw how many more steps it added to my day!
I have a Fitbit, and I still hate grocery shopping. Perhaps that's because I grocery shop five days a week for my job.0 -
robertw486 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »You can't out-exercise a bad diet. You have to walk at a very brisk pace to get your heart pumping, and then you'd still have to walk for well over an hour at that pace to earn that doughnut.
Ok spoil sport you can take a 5 minute time out. A singular as in One Donut is not a bad diet. A 2000 calorie day of donuts is a bad diet. If there was a world without maple bars I wouldn't want to exist on it. Btw I've lost 70 lbs so far so
No need for rudeness and name-calling, OP. The point is that you have to account for your calories. While it might have been a one-time thing that you were discussing, you are the one that brought up the point about walking being enough to make up for eating a doughnut. Anyone who just came in to actually find out about this needs to know that it's not a good idea to think they can lose weight by just taking a walk and eating things like doughnuts. As I pointed out in my initial post, anyone would have to walk at a pretty brisk pace for well over an hour to burn off enough calories to account for one single doughnut.
Now see I wasn't rude. There's always one spoil sport in a conversation online and today it was you. Reminds me of a song my mom used to sing when we were being grumpy. Now stop bringing down a perfectly happy and fun post by being miserable.
Every party has a pooper that's why we invited you. Party pooper party pooper.. Quite a catchy tune actually. Now smile and enjoy life. It's such an awesome thing to have. Good day
All names... name calling. That's a pretty rude way to treat someone who is simply trying to help based on your original post.And against terms of service I believe.
I can't roll my eyes enough. It's a kids song meant to be silly. Chill
I'm all for participating in good fun. But my post was meant in all earnestness, and you responded with name calling. In the more humorous posts, I'll join right in, but I hadn't done that here. And I'll say that even when joining in with the jokes, name calling is never an acceptable part of it. Save the children's songs for the kiddies.
If you are interjecting science, it has to be based on facts. Despite the obvious that the OP posted just for a laugh and most realized she didn't care if she burned enough calories for the donut, you posted "science" based on assumptions. Science works based on facts, not assumptions, and there were a number of lacking facts to interject anything other than simply a SWAG on the issue, even if the OP really cared.
Science also failed the lap count as well, even if the assumptions on matter were correct. Simple math is simple, and that example was a complete fail in the face of science as well.
Sorry, I didn't. I didn't post anything based on laps, or anything like that. My post simply stated that the OP would have to walk at a pace quick enough to raise her heart rate, and that she would have to walk for more than an hour to burn off enough calories to earn that doughnut. Since the average doughnut is well over 250 calories (and she was talking about a maple something dougnut, which is likely well over 300), any average person at a walking pace, will have to walk for over an hour to burn that many calories. No assumptions there.
Regardless of the science involved, no post anywhere in the forums deserves name calling, joking or not.
Actually the donut was 290 calories and I more than surpassed that in my exercise calories plus still had an additional 300 calories left over by the end of the night as my food intake for the day (including the 290 calorie donut) was less than my regular calories before the exercise.
As for the name calling well when my kids are being grumpy and bringing down the mood for the rest the family I call them that too and guess what. They laugh because it's just a silly word that to most people is taken in the light hearted way in which it was given which was obvious by the "time out" comment and everyone else seemed to catch that. If you couldn't see that I'm sorry it wasnt obvious to you. I had no clue someone could possibly miss the humor is such a silly post. I was personally grinning through out the entire post with every comment. Yes, even the math post (which so went over my head but still it was great to see people getting into the discussion).
0 -
Sorry, I didn't. I didn't post anything based on laps, or anything like that. My post simply stated that the OP would have to walk at a pace quick enough to raise her heart rate, and that she would have to walk for more than an hour to burn off enough calories to earn that doughnut. Since the average doughnut is well over 250 calories (and she was talking about a maple something dougnut, which is likely well over 300), any average person at a walking pace, will have to walk for over an hour to burn that many calories. No assumptions there.
Regardless of the science involved, no post anywhere in the forums deserves name calling, joking or not.
Reality shows that assumptions were still involved.You can't out-exercise a bad diet. You have to walk at a very brisk pace to get your heart pumping, and then you'd still have to walk for well over an hour at that pace to earn that doughnut.
Stating "well over an hour" assumes quite a few things. The OPs weight, the pace at which she walked, how fast her heart rate climbs, her basic cardiovascular health, her age, and the size and type of the donut which would determine the calories needed to break even on the event.
I generally agree with your statement of not being able to out exercise a bad diet. But we're talking about a single donut here. I often out exercise a trip to the food trucks with a couple beers involved. I can appreciate that you're one of the people that often brings up the valid point of weight loss being possible without exercise, as many overlook that as a potential choice. But in the terms of a single donut, even someone who doesn't exercise could fit that into their day.
Stated later in the post you said....Anyone who just came in to actually find out about this needs to know that it's not a good idea to think they can lose weight by just taking a walk and eating things like doughnuts.
Are you saying you never ate a donut or any other "junk food" snack the entire time period you couldn't exercise? Context is everything, and leaving out details leads to lack of complete context.
Are you trying to make little backhanded stabs at me for my 30 second math and obvious joke I did earlier? Lol. I sure hope not.
I thought it was a complete joke due to the twisted math, but when you posted the below I wasn't sure...
All I see there is a bunch of hoopla basically saying my math can't be proven wrong now...so it is in fact, the right answer. I knew I could do it...
And in either case some people seemed to think that there was actually at least some serious tone to the numbers, because they didn't do the math. That's why I simply pointed out that science fails when it includes assumptions.
0 -
robertw486 wrote: »
Sorry, I didn't. I didn't post anything based on laps, or anything like that. My post simply stated that the OP would have to walk at a pace quick enough to raise her heart rate, and that she would have to walk for more than an hour to burn off enough calories to earn that doughnut. Since the average doughnut is well over 250 calories (and she was talking about a maple something dougnut, which is likely well over 300), any average person at a walking pace, will have to walk for over an hour to burn that many calories. No assumptions there.
Regardless of the science involved, no post anywhere in the forums deserves name calling, joking or not.
Reality shows that assumptions were still involved.You can't out-exercise a bad diet. You have to walk at a very brisk pace to get your heart pumping, and then you'd still have to walk for well over an hour at that pace to earn that doughnut.
Stating "well over an hour" assumes quite a few things. The OPs weight, the pace at which she walked, how fast her heart rate climbs, her basic cardiovascular health, her age, and the size and type of the donut which would determine the calories needed to break even on the event.
I generally agree with your statement of not being able to out exercise a bad diet. But we're talking about a single donut here. I often out exercise a trip to the food trucks with a couple beers involved. I can appreciate that you're one of the people that often brings up the valid point of weight loss being possible without exercise, as many overlook that as a potential choice. But in the terms of a single donut, even someone who doesn't exercise could fit that into their day.
Stated later in the post you said....Anyone who just came in to actually find out about this needs to know that it's not a good idea to think they can lose weight by just taking a walk and eating things like doughnuts.
Are you saying you never ate a donut or any other "junk food" snack the entire time period you couldn't exercise? Context is everything, and leaving out details leads to lack of complete context.
Are you trying to make little backhanded stabs at me for my 30 second math and obvious joke I did earlier? Lol. I sure hope not.
I thought it was a complete joke due to the twisted math, but when you posted the below I wasn't sure...
All I see there is a bunch of hoopla basically saying my math can't be proven wrong now...so it is in fact, the right answer. I knew I could do it...
And in either case some people seemed to think that there was actually at least some serious tone to the numbers, because they didn't do the math. That's why I simply pointed out that science fails when it includes assumptions.
Well, you didn't "simply" point out anything. You used a condescending tone as if I actually took the time and was really trying to figure "this" out. The fact that you thought I was actually serious is laughable...and kinda sad all at the same time. I would like to simply point out that life is a lot more fun when the stick is removed.0 -
VintageFeline wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »The average Wal-Mart is 197000 square feet. Usually they are shaped in a rectangle so lets say 550'x358' to give us 197,000 square feet. So that would 1,816' around the building. I am going to subtract 25% as a guesstimate on aisle locations and what not. So 1,362'. Guessing that your steps are 24" apart roughly, that would be 681 steps to go around Wal-Mart once. If you really want those donuts, I will assume you are going to walk at a moderate 3.0mph pace. Doing that for one hour will burn about 250-275 calories (about the size of a donut), so you would walk 3 miles in that hour. That would be 15,840'. Taking the 681 steps to go around Wal-Mart, that would be about 23.26 laps. So....based on margin of error. My guess is 22-25 laps should do it...
What if you load up a cart and push that around the whole time? That should increase the calorie burn, right?
Bonus calorie burn too for crashing your cart into the cart of the idiot who parks his/her cart on one side of the aisle while meticulously researching each and every can of crushed tomatoes on the other side of the aisle.
What is the burn if I put an adult person in the cart and run quickly up and down aisles and jumping onto the back rung of the cart and yelling "Weeeeeee!" ?
Asking for a friend.
Depends on if you're drunk or not.
And how long it takes security to catch you and throw you out.
and whether or not the shopping cart is one of the few that has 4 properly working wheels. We all know that sticky front wheel will make those calorie burns around the corners skyrocket...
if all four wheels are broke and you go around the 24 laps at 6mph you will create a donut wormhole that will break the space donut continuum and then all donuts are zero calories.0 -
blkandwhite77 wrote: »Ok so I learned a valuable lesson... Our gym membership is a much cheaper way to exercise. Somehow our $2 donut burning expedition ended up being a $60 expedition. I also learned our 3 year old did not find it as fun to walk past the toy aisle a dozen plus times as we did.
I have failed the mission. I must admit I lost track of laps and I got bored so I started weaving in an out all of the aisles. I also realized that the elderly winter visitors do not care about me keeping my heart rate up and their mission was to sabotage our mission. I think they were covert spy's sent by the calorie force to make us fail.
However, I did burn 209 calories which is almost a full donut. Add that into calories spent pushing the evil cart from hell and laughing hysterically for a good ten minutes just plotting this mission and I'm going to savor every morsel of my maple donut.
Plus, going to the gym tonight just in case lol thank you all for your support and while I may have failed this one mission we will win the war!
All I see there is a bunch of hoopla basically saying my math can't be proven wrong now...so it is in fact, the right answer. I knew I could do it...
Reason #2 I like you. Reason # 1 will never change.
Ooh, ooh, I know this one! Pick me, pick me!
It's his winky monkey, right?
0 -
VintageFeline wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »juggernaut1974 wrote: »The average Wal-Mart is 197000 square feet. Usually they are shaped in a rectangle so lets say 550'x358' to give us 197,000 square feet. So that would 1,816' around the building. I am going to subtract 25% as a guesstimate on aisle locations and what not. So 1,362'. Guessing that your steps are 24" apart roughly, that would be 681 steps to go around Wal-Mart once. If you really want those donuts, I will assume you are going to walk at a moderate 3.0mph pace. Doing that for one hour will burn about 250-275 calories (about the size of a donut), so you would walk 3 miles in that hour. That would be 15,840'. Taking the 681 steps to go around Wal-Mart, that would be about 23.26 laps. So....based on margin of error. My guess is 22-25 laps should do it...
What if you load up a cart and push that around the whole time? That should increase the calorie burn, right?
Bonus calorie burn too for crashing your cart into the cart of the idiot who parks his/her cart on one side of the aisle while meticulously researching each and every can of crushed tomatoes on the other side of the aisle.
What is the burn if I put an adult person in the cart and run quickly up and down aisles and jumping onto the back rung of the cart and yelling "Weeeeeee!" ?
Asking for a friend.
Depends on if you're drunk or not.
And how long it takes security to catch you and throw you out.
and whether or not the shopping cart is one of the few that has 4 properly working wheels. We all know that sticky front wheel will make those calorie burns around the corners skyrocket...
if all four wheels are broke and you go around the 24 laps at 6mph you will create a donut wormhole that will break the space donut continuum and then all donuts are zero calories.
Not true! I disagree . I've tested this method many times ( because Walmart walking is so much more fun then actually going to the gym ) and I realized that only Boston crème , chocolate glazed and vanilla danish are calorie free.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »Ok so I learned a valuable lesson... Our gym membership is a much cheaper way to exercise. Somehow our $2 donut burning expedition ended up being a $60 expedition. I also learned our 3 year old did not find it as fun to walk past the toy aisle a dozen plus times as we did.
I have failed the mission. I must admit I lost track of laps and I got bored so I started weaving in an out all of the aisles. I also realized that the elderly winter visitors do not care about me keeping my heart rate up and their mission was to sabotage our mission. I think they were covert spy's sent by the calorie force to make us fail.
However, I did burn 209 calories which is almost a full donut. Add that into calories spent pushing the evil cart from hell and laughing hysterically for a good ten minutes just plotting this mission and I'm going to savor every morsel of my maple donut.
Plus, going to the gym tonight just in case lol thank you all for your support and while I may have failed this one mission we will win the war!
All I see there is a bunch of hoopla basically saying my math can't be proven wrong now...so it is in fact, the right answer. I knew I could do it...
Reason #2 I like you. Reason # 1 will never change.
Ooh, ooh, I know this one! Pick me, pick me!
It's his winky monkey, right?
But to be clear, it's a chimpanzee which is an ape...not a monkey. Didn't want you to get called out later...0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »blkandwhite77 wrote: »Ok so I learned a valuable lesson... Our gym membership is a much cheaper way to exercise. Somehow our $2 donut burning expedition ended up being a $60 expedition. I also learned our 3 year old did not find it as fun to walk past the toy aisle a dozen plus times as we did.
I have failed the mission. I must admit I lost track of laps and I got bored so I started weaving in an out all of the aisles. I also realized that the elderly winter visitors do not care about me keeping my heart rate up and their mission was to sabotage our mission. I think they were covert spy's sent by the calorie force to make us fail.
However, I did burn 209 calories which is almost a full donut. Add that into calories spent pushing the evil cart from hell and laughing hysterically for a good ten minutes just plotting this mission and I'm going to savor every morsel of my maple donut.
Plus, going to the gym tonight just in case lol thank you all for your support and while I may have failed this one mission we will win the war!
All I see there is a bunch of hoopla basically saying my math can't be proven wrong now...so it is in fact, the right answer. I knew I could do it...
Reason #2 I like you. Reason # 1 will never change.
Ooh, ooh, I know this one! Pick me, pick me!
It's his winky monkey, right?
But to be clear, it's a chimpanzee which is an ape...not a monkey. Didn't want you to get called out later...
Glad we've cleared that up. Whew0 -
robertw486 wrote: »
Sorry, I didn't. I didn't post anything based on laps, or anything like that. My post simply stated that the OP would have to walk at a pace quick enough to raise her heart rate, and that she would have to walk for more than an hour to burn off enough calories to earn that doughnut. Since the average doughnut is well over 250 calories (and she was talking about a maple something dougnut, which is likely well over 300), any average person at a walking pace, will have to walk for over an hour to burn that many calories. No assumptions there.
Regardless of the science involved, no post anywhere in the forums deserves name calling, joking or not.
Reality shows that assumptions were still involved.You can't out-exercise a bad diet. You have to walk at a very brisk pace to get your heart pumping, and then you'd still have to walk for well over an hour at that pace to earn that doughnut.
Stating "well over an hour" assumes quite a few things. The OPs weight, the pace at which she walked, how fast her heart rate climbs, her basic cardiovascular health, her age, and the size and type of the donut which would determine the calories needed to break even on the event.
I generally agree with your statement of not being able to out exercise a bad diet. But we're talking about a single donut here. I often out exercise a trip to the food trucks with a couple beers involved. I can appreciate that you're one of the people that often brings up the valid point of weight loss being possible without exercise, as many overlook that as a potential choice. But in the terms of a single donut, even someone who doesn't exercise could fit that into their day.
Stated later in the post you said....Anyone who just came in to actually find out about this needs to know that it's not a good idea to think they can lose weight by just taking a walk and eating things like doughnuts.
Are you saying you never ate a donut or any other "junk food" snack the entire time period you couldn't exercise? Context is everything, and leaving out details leads to lack of complete context.
Are you trying to make little backhanded stabs at me for my 30 second math and obvious joke I did earlier? Lol. I sure hope not.
I thought it was a complete joke due to the twisted math, but when you posted the below I wasn't sure...
All I see there is a bunch of hoopla basically saying my math can't be proven wrong now...so it is in fact, the right answer. I knew I could do it...
And in either case some people seemed to think that there was actually at least some serious tone to the numbers, because they didn't do the math. That's why I simply pointed out that science fails when it includes assumptions.
Well, you didn't "simply" point out anything. You used a condescending tone as if I actually took the time and was really trying to figure "this" out. The fact that you thought I was actually serious is laughable...and kinda sad all at the same time. I would like to simply point out that life is a lot more fun when the stick is removed.
I've explained it above. If you don't like my reasoning for my explanation, then you might want to intentionally take a condescending tone and pass judgement.
Sticks have fiber. Fiber is an important part of a proper diet. After logging yesterday I knew I was deficient for the day, and sticks were close at hand. I've lost 40 pounds this way, and no science can convince me it is wrong!
And to top that, I will consider myself a party pooper. I think this guy says it best though.... Jennifer poops at parties0 -
robertw486 wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »
Sorry, I didn't. I didn't post anything based on laps, or anything like that. My post simply stated that the OP would have to walk at a pace quick enough to raise her heart rate, and that she would have to walk for more than an hour to burn off enough calories to earn that doughnut. Since the average doughnut is well over 250 calories (and she was talking about a maple something dougnut, which is likely well over 300), any average person at a walking pace, will have to walk for over an hour to burn that many calories. No assumptions there.
Regardless of the science involved, no post anywhere in the forums deserves name calling, joking or not.
Reality shows that assumptions were still involved.You can't out-exercise a bad diet. You have to walk at a very brisk pace to get your heart pumping, and then you'd still have to walk for well over an hour at that pace to earn that doughnut.
Stating "well over an hour" assumes quite a few things. The OPs weight, the pace at which she walked, how fast her heart rate climbs, her basic cardiovascular health, her age, and the size and type of the donut which would determine the calories needed to break even on the event.
I generally agree with your statement of not being able to out exercise a bad diet. But we're talking about a single donut here. I often out exercise a trip to the food trucks with a couple beers involved. I can appreciate that you're one of the people that often brings up the valid point of weight loss being possible without exercise, as many overlook that as a potential choice. But in the terms of a single donut, even someone who doesn't exercise could fit that into their day.
Stated later in the post you said....Anyone who just came in to actually find out about this needs to know that it's not a good idea to think they can lose weight by just taking a walk and eating things like doughnuts.
Are you saying you never ate a donut or any other "junk food" snack the entire time period you couldn't exercise? Context is everything, and leaving out details leads to lack of complete context.
Are you trying to make little backhanded stabs at me for my 30 second math and obvious joke I did earlier? Lol. I sure hope not.
I thought it was a complete joke due to the twisted math, but when you posted the below I wasn't sure...
All I see there is a bunch of hoopla basically saying my math can't be proven wrong now...so it is in fact, the right answer. I knew I could do it...
And in either case some people seemed to think that there was actually at least some serious tone to the numbers, because they didn't do the math. That's why I simply pointed out that science fails when it includes assumptions.
Well, you didn't "simply" point out anything. You used a condescending tone as if I actually took the time and was really trying to figure "this" out. The fact that you thought I was actually serious is laughable...and kinda sad all at the same time. I would like to simply point out that life is a lot more fun when the stick is removed.
I've explained it above. If you don't like my reasoning for my explanation, then you might want to intentionally take a condescending tone and pass judgement.
Sticks have fiber. Fiber is an important part of a proper diet. After logging yesterday I knew I was deficient for the day, and sticks were close at hand. I've lost 40 pounds this way, and no science can convince me it is wrong!
And to top that, I will consider myself a party pooper. I think this guy says it best though.... Jennifer poops at parties
I have no idea what you are even trying to say. My issue was with your condescending tone... such as...I would post some hard nosed comment about the "science" involved and spit out a bunch of numbers in hopes that it would impress people. But then I'd have to face up to the fact that some simple math and making assumptions could kick my butt and leave me wondering why I ever put up some internet meme like I won an argument based on assumptions. And then I might get called out for interjecting Broscience as people know it here.
You obviously thought I was being serious, and decided to backhandedly call me out in a douchey tone. That's fine. Some people are just that way, but this is a thread about Wal-Mart laps....how anyone, including yourself, could possibly find that serious is beyond me. So no, you didn't just "simply" point out anything. You either A, made it a point to call me out in that tone, or B, just are that type of person. Either way, the stick removal process applies to both. If you need a scientific article on how to remove said stick, let me know.
0 -
My Fitbit says I burn 11 calories a minute at my "exercising" pace, so that should be good for a couple of maple donuts per hour. I don't claim to be average, though.0
-
<--- loves Winky Monkey Chimpy.
0 -
robertw486 wrote: »
Sorry, I didn't. I didn't post anything based on laps, or anything like that. My post simply stated that the OP would have to walk at a pace quick enough to raise her heart rate, and that she would have to walk for more than an hour to burn off enough calories to earn that doughnut. Since the average doughnut is well over 250 calories (and she was talking about a maple something dougnut, which is likely well over 300), any average person at a walking pace, will have to walk for over an hour to burn that many calories. No assumptions there.
Regardless of the science involved, no post anywhere in the forums deserves name calling, joking or not.
Reality shows that assumptions were still involved.You can't out-exercise a bad diet. You have to walk at a very brisk pace to get your heart pumping, and then you'd still have to walk for well over an hour at that pace to earn that doughnut.
Stating "well over an hour" assumes quite a few things. The OPs weight, the pace at which she walked, how fast her heart rate climbs, her basic cardiovascular health, her age, and the size and type of the donut which would determine the calories needed to break even on the event.
I generally agree with your statement of not being able to out exercise a bad diet. But we're talking about a single donut here. I often out exercise a trip to the food trucks with a couple beers involved. I can appreciate that you're one of the people that often brings up the valid point of weight loss being possible without exercise, as many overlook that as a potential choice. But in the terms of a single donut, even someone who doesn't exercise could fit that into their day.
Stated later in the post you said....Anyone who just came in to actually find out about this needs to know that it's not a good idea to think they can lose weight by just taking a walk and eating things like doughnuts.
Are you saying you never ate a donut or any other "junk food" snack the entire time period you couldn't exercise? Context is everything, and leaving out details leads to lack of complete context.
Nope. I actually don't exercise at all, and if I want a donut, I eat one, and account for it in my calorie goal for the day.
However, I was simply addressing the one-time scenario presented by the OP in her original post which was only this: walking around a store in order to burn enough calories to account for the calories in one doughnut. Period.
And science says that any person who wants to burn enough calories to eat the doughnut needs to elevate his or her heart rate, and the OP is a woman. Most women will need to walk for at least an hour to burn the nearly 300 calories in the doughnut.
Science.0 -
Still looking for a Target conversion chart. I boycotted Wally World when they changed their logo to that ridiculous asterisk looking thing.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions