Holy 3-6mg of caffeine per kg is a shit ton. That’s 2-4 cups of coffee for me!
That doesn’t seem a lot to me at all, and coffee seems to have health benefits up to doses exceeding that.
Thinking hard burns almost no calories but destroys your next workout
51–60 of 151 posts
Re: Thinking hard burns almost no calories but destroys your next workout
#52Is anyone here able to offer an explanation for why our brains are able to do really complex tasks without using much energy, at least compared to AI systems?
My thinking was that its sort of like an engine spinning at idle vs when the gear's engaged, in either case the engine is still spinning and using fuel, just more so when its engaged, as opposed to an electric motor.
I know the metaphor isn't exact, it's just how i thought of it.
Re: Thinking hard burns almost no calories but destroys your next workout
#53I've also been interested for some time in how metabolism works and wanted to debunk the popular myth for my friends that exercise burns a lot of calories, since I was under the impression that around 80% of energy we burn is just by "living" - breathing and thinking. Reading this article I'm a little confused by the author's conflation of brain energy and the energy expenditure of the body as a whole. In the beginni…
Chess lol. Playing a competitive arena FPS a the highest levels will get your brain cooking.
Don't know what's here to 'lol' about chess. Are you implying chess isn't cognition intensive?
Re: Thinking hard burns almost no calories but destroys your next workout
#54Re: Thinking hard burns almost no calories but destroys your next workout
#55I found the AI writing of this post to really detract from its message. Give your agent meaningful writing samples of your own work and use those as a ‘style transfer’ basis for blog posts to get something far more true to your own voice.
It's well-structured and the message is clear. Are we intentionally prompting LLM to write badly now? Do we have to manually write bad essays to avoid AI accusation?
It's just so cliche. The dramatic transitions which introduce things that aren't as important as the transition itself. The flow is very AI, short dramatic responses to a previous question that's also not "groundbreaking" enough to warrant such a style. It's just hard to unsee these things. Idk man, I guess if you like it, that's great but I cringe when I read this and I never finish reading because I assume the author put in minimal effort so why should I?
Re: Thinking hard burns almost no calories but destroys your next workout
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
Usually, I can easily tell bad AI slop, because it is just that - sloppy - the bullet points, the 'delving' and all that. But how can you tell this article was also AI-tainted? On a second skim, I can sort of sense some of it - the bulletpoint-enthusiasm, the idiosyncratic segues (?) that link sections/paragraphs of the text. But it didn't trigger for me immediately, or cause me concern..? I'm worrying that soon, I w…
Here's the part that really stood out for me. Not one thing but the other thing that isn't really noteworthy. (Also have a look at Wikipedia how to identify signs of ai writing.)
Passages like this one suggest that maybe it was an AI rewrite, rather than from scratch:
> I experienced this pattern without understanding it. My Tuesday evening interval sessions, scheduled after long workdays, consistently felt worse than my Saturday morning sessions. I blamed sleep, stress, hydration. Those all matter, but the research suggests the cognitive load itself was a primary culprit.
Re: Thinking hard burns almost no calories but destroys your next workout
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it sort of depends on how you look at it. If 800 is an hour of running - that's probably "a lot" for quite a few people. But 800 is also just a sandwich. Which isn't all that much. So if you view this from a time use perspective, just skipping that sandwich is way better than running for an hour. And many people can't spare an hour a day just to make up for a sandwich. Hence - "not a lot" - Its too expensive…
What kind of sandwiches are you eating? 800 calories is a ridiculously large sandwich. Even Tesco's bacon & egg triple is only 550 : https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/260422235 I'm struggling to find anything I'd describe as a sandwich come close to 800 calories.
Fair enough, but so is 800cal/h exercise. And I'd rather overestimate the intake.
Re: Thinking hard burns almost no calories but destroys your next workout
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's well-structured and the message is clear. Are we intentionally prompting LLM to write badly now? Do we have to manually write bad essays to avoid AI accusation?
It's just so cliche. The dramatic transitions which introduce things that aren't as important as the transition itself. The flow is very AI, short dramatic responses to a previous question that's also not "groundbreaking" enough to warrant such a style. It's just hard to unsee these things. Idk man, I guess if you like it, that's great but I cringe when I read this and I never finish reading because I assume the auth…
I mean... this is an ad for their app and the purpose is to make you click more articles on their blog. Even if it's written by a human it doesn't justify much more time reading it. If there are jobs deserving to be replaced by LLM, this kind of copywriting is on top of my list.
Re: Thinking hard burns almost no calories but destroys your next workout
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
> debunk the popular myth for my friends that exercise burns a lot of calories Can you expand on that please? Because I can tell you as a matter of fact that when I go for a run for an hour I burn well over 800 calories.
I think OP may be referring to the idea that the total number of calories burned in a day doesn't meaningfully change under a workout regime. Working out does burn calories, but after a few session your body starts to compensate by burning less calories in other areas (e.g. immune and reproductive system). The net result is close to zero, except in very demanding workout regimes. I don't have the background to fully…
So this is about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exercise_paradox
I seems like it's only part of the story. If you increase exercise but also increase calorific input to match then you won't lose weight. But, the laws of energy conservation being what they are, I don't think anyone disputes that if you very significantly increase exercise but also maintain calorific input then you will lose weight as the energy must come from somewhere and there are only so many optimisations your body can make. You could of course maintain exercise levels and reduce calorific input for a similar effect, ignoring health benefits of exercise. Take an extreme case, Michael Phelps. He used to eat 12,000 cal a day because of the hours he spent swimming. Certainly not a small guy but pretty lean! So I'm totally prepared to accept there are bounds to all these statements but I still think I couldn't finish an 800 cal sandwich for lunch hehehe.
By the way, I feel the Wikipedia page there uses a lot of words suggesting that the paradox isn't at all fully understood and that there could be compensating mechanisms we aren't aware of. But I'm not in a position to dig deeper.
Re: Thinking hard burns almost no calories but destroys your next workout
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it sort of depends on how you look at it. If 800 is an hour of running - that's probably "a lot" for quite a few people. But 800 is also just a sandwich. Which isn't all that much. So if you view this from a time use perspective, just skipping that sandwich is way better than running for an hour. And many people can't spare an hour a day just to make up for a sandwich. Hence - "not a lot" - Its too expensive…
That's a big sandwich :) Big Mac = 580 Cal. I'm going to eat lunch one way or another and for me it's going to be under 800. Skipping meals isn't really a good choice, imo, but ok.
You need to eat roughly somewhere between 1300 and 2000 Cal every day to maintain your weight even if you are doing to exercise at all.
If you want to lose weight, it's far easier to remove 800 Cal from your diet, at least time wise, then it is to exercise 800 Cal's worth every day.
Either way, if you're losing weight at any appreciable rate, you will feel hungry (at least if it's not chemically induced in some way, such as chemo or GLP-1 inhibitors or similar). That's just something you have to get used to if you want to lose weight.