3 ms·
It is snark. It isn't meant to be constructive or add value to the thread, it is meant to condescend by saying something true but using that truism in order to
by Someone1234 7y ago
It is snark. It isn't meant to be constructive or add value to the thread, it is meant to condescend by saying something true but using that truism in order to imply it is also easy (in spite of all of the evidence to the contrary).
To quote the site's guidelines:
> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
It is snarky. It isn't thoughtful or substantive.
- nobleach 7y agoI see. I would NEVER encourage someone to exercise from some ivory tower. It's hard. I get it. Given the choice, I'd rather hang out on my couch. I've also had a heck of a health scare this year, so I advocate quite heavily: If you can get out and walk, do it! If you can make better choices in your diet, do it! No snark at all... more of a plea.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- switchbak 7y agoIt is rather knee-jerk dismissive, true. Snarky? I'm not sure I have the evidence to claim that. They do have a good point, but the discussion is obviously more nuanced than that. People generally know that exercise is good for them, yet many/most people don't engage in it to a healthy degree. So some discussion of other approaches is appropriate. Let's not make "the perfect the enemy of the good" and all that. And we don't need to be either/or here. For individuals that have even a moderately elevated risk, doing both is probably a great idea (and of course this is already broadly recommended advice). Doing just one would still be better, and most people would choose a pill over exercise. Still a win in my book.