Anna o' Brien / Glitter + Lazers / GlitterandLazers - Fat, drunk, consoomer attention whore who would rather eat and drink herself to death than endure a single negative emotion

[Couses]

Hi everyone, long time lurker first time poster. I decided to make a guesstimate at Anna’s weight after reading this thread because I strongly suspect she is not truthful about her weight.

I used this screenshot of her fitness watch (posted by another member in this thread, which was from one of her Stories iirc).

So based on the above screenshot, we have sufficient info to figure out her weight. We know that she walked for 1.89 miles, for 53 mins 47 seconds, at a pace of 28’24” a mile, and burned 460(?) calories during this time.

So first, I used a walking pace converter to convert her 28’24” pace to either mph or kmph speed (as that is what we will need to reverse engineer an estimate of her weight):

Based on the calculator, her pace of 28’24” is a speed of 2.11mph or 3.40km/h. This checks out with the Fitbit data because she did walk for 53mins 47seconds and did just under 2 miles (1.89miles).

Next, I used a walking calorie calculator to reverse engineer her weight. (At first I used a running calorie calculator, but her walking speed was so slow that it was not in the drop down list of selections for speed.) How these calculators usually work is, you key in your age / height / weight / speed / length of workout, and it tells you how many calories you burned. Since we have all the other stats, and since we know Anna burned 460 calories in that workout, we can reverse engineer her weight.

So I keyed in Anna’s stats (age 35, height 5’10”, female), and her workout stats (speed of 2.5mph, and workout time of 54 mins). I was “kind” to her and rounded UP her speed, because the speed options were only 2.0mph or 2.5mph. I suppose it would have been more accurate to round it down from 2.1 to 2.0 rather than up from 2.1 to 2.5, but I didn’t bother because I figured at her weight it might not make much of a difference, and we only needed a good estimate, not the exact poundage. But this is just all to say, the weight might be a slight underestimation.

Anyway, I started off by keying in Anna’s weight as 400lb, because it’s a figure I often see in this thread:

Based on that calculator, she is WAY heavier than 400lbs. If she were 400lbs, she would only have burned 284 calories doing that workout - nowhere close to the 460 calories her screen showed.

So after playing around with various numbers, the one that came closest to 460 calories burned was 760 lbs. Screenshot below:

Based on the above, if she were 760 calories she would burn 454 calories, which is close enough to the 460 calories shown on her screen.

So TL;DR: Anna is nowhere near the 400lbs weight often quoted here. Based on reverse engineering her stats found on her fitness watch, she is closer to 760lbs.

Sorry if the format is weird, I am posting this on mobile. Hope the screenshots and all show up correctly.

 

[Pussyworth]

Hi everyone, long time lurker first time poster. I decided to make a guesstimate at Anna’s weight after reading this thread because I strongly suspect she is not truthful about her weight.

I used this screenshot of her fitness watch (posted by another member in this thread, which was from one of her Stories iirc).

View attachment 1592673

So based on the above screenshot, we have sufficient info to figure out her weight. We know that she walked for 1.89 miles, for 53 mins 47 seconds, at a pace of 28’24” a mile, and burned 460(?) calories during this time.

So first, I used a walking pace converter to convert her 28’24” pace to either mph or kmph speed (as that is what we will need to reverse engineer an estimate of her weight):

View attachment 1592676

Based on the calculator, her pace of 28’24” is a speed of 2.11mph or 3.40km/h. This checks out with the Fitbit data because she did walk for 53mins 47seconds and did just under 2 miles (1.89miles).

Next, I used a walking calorie calculator to reverse engineer her weight. (At first I used a running calorie calculator, but her walking speed was so slow that it was not in the drop down list of selections for speed.) How these calculators usually work is, you key in your age / height / weight / speed / length of workout, and it tells you how many calories you burned. Since we have all the other stats, and since we know Anna burned 460 calories in that workout, we can reverse engineer her weight.

So I keyed in Anna’s stats (age 35, height 5’10”, female), and her workout stats (speed of 2.5mph, and workout time of 54 mins). I was “kind” to her and rounded UP her speed, because the speed options were only 2.0mph or 2.5mph. I suppose it would have been more accurate to round it down from 2.1 to 2.0 rather than up from 2.1 to 2.5, but I didn’t bother because I figured at her weight it might not make much of a difference, and we only needed a good estimate, not the exact poundage. But this is just all to say, the weight might be a slight underestimation.

Anyway, I started off by keying in Anna’s weight as 400lb, because it’s a figure I often see in this thread:

View attachment 1592688

Based on that calculator, she is WAY heavier than 400lbs. If she were 400lbs, she would only have burned 284 calories doing that workout - nowhere close to the 460 calories her screen showed.

So after playing around with various numbers, the one that came closest to 460 calories burned was 760 lbs. Screenshot below:

View attachment 1592691

Based on the above, if she were 760 calories she would burn 454 calories, which is close enough to the 460 calories shown on her screen.

So TL;DR: Anna is nowhere near the 400lbs weight often quoted here. Based on reverse engineering her stats found on her fitness watch, she is closer to 760lbs.

Sorry if the format is weird, I am posting this on mobile. Hope the screenshots and all show up correctly.

760!!! Can a person even get out of bed and walk around at that weight??!!

 

[Couses]

760!!! Can a person even get out of bed and walk around at that weight??!!

I don’t know, the figure surprised me too, but it checks out. Unless I read the 460 calories burned figure wrongly on her fitness watch. (To be fair the figure was a bit blur but I’m pretty sure it’s 460).

I guess a large part of it is because she’s still fairly young, and maybe she has some baseline of fitness on account of her past interest in going to the gym before she got to this weight.

 

[LetThemEatCake]

There's no way she's nearly 800lb. Both visuallly and in terms of mobility, it's pretty obvious she's nowhere near that. It's more likely that like most fitness devices, it's actually rather bad at calculating calories burned. Why people rely on those things like they're offering up the word of God, I have no idea.

Yeah, she is big, ad definitely in the super morbidly obese category. But even at 5' 9" to 5'10 there's no way she'd be able to walk at all at that weight. 600lb people are generally bedbound or scooterbound and all have huge, hanging pannus issues.

 

[Jackisnotaname]

Hi everyone, long time lurker first time poster. I decided to make a guesstimate at Anna’s weight after reading this thread because I strongly suspect she is not truthful about her weight.

I used this screenshot of her fitness watch (posted by another member in this thread, which was from one of her Stories iirc).

View attachment 1592673

So based on the above screenshot, we have sufficient info to figure out her weight. We know that she walked for 1.89 miles, for 53 mins 47 seconds, at a pace of 28’24” a mile, and burned 460(?) calories during this time.

So first, I used a walking pace converter to convert her 28’24” pace to either mph or kmph speed (as that is what we will need to reverse engineer an estimate of her weight):

View attachment 1592676

Based on the calculator, her pace of 28’24” is a speed of 2.11mph or 3.40km/h. This checks out with the Fitbit data because she did walk for 53mins 47seconds and did just under 2 miles (1.89miles).

Next, I used a walking calorie calculator to reverse engineer her weight. (At first I used a running calorie calculator, but her walking speed was so slow that it was not in the drop down list of selections for speed.) How these calculators usually work is, you key in your age / height / weight / speed / length of workout, and it tells you how many calories you burned. Since we have all the other stats, and since we know Anna burned 460 calories in that workout, we can reverse engineer her weight.

So I keyed in Anna’s stats (age 35, height 5’10”, female), and her workout stats (speed of 2.5mph, and workout time of 54 mins). I was “kind” to her and rounded UP her speed, because the speed options were only 2.0mph or 2.5mph. I suppose it would have been more accurate to round it down from 2.1 to 2.0 rather than up from 2.1 to 2.5, but I didn’t bother because I figured at her weight it might not make much of a difference, and we only needed a good estimate, not the exact poundage. But this is just all to say, the weight might be a slight underestimation.

Anyway, I started off by keying in Anna’s weight as 400lb, because it’s a figure I often see in this thread:

View attachment 1592688

Based on that calculator, she is WAY heavier than 400lbs. If she were 400lbs, she would only have burned 284 calories doing that workout - nowhere close to the 460 calories her screen showed.

So after playing around with various numbers, the one that came closest to 460 calories burned was 760 lbs. Screenshot below:

View attachment 1592691

Based on the above, if she were 760 calories she would burn 454 calories, which is close enough to the 460 calories shown on her screen.

So TL;DR: Anna is nowhere near the 400lbs weight often quoted here. Based on reverse engineering her stats found on her fitness watch, she is closer to 760lbs.

Sorry if the format is weird, I am posting this on mobile. Hope the screenshots and all show up correctly.

This has got to be the most ridiculous thing ever posted on Kiwi Farms.

 

[Kitkatty]

This has got to be the most ridiculous thing ever posted on Kiwi Farms.

Right?? I'm pretty well convinced that a lot of the current forum users have never seen or touched a woman in real life. Momokun's section is similarly infected.

From personal experience, as in, I know a woman that is 5'10" and about the same proportions as Anna, she is about 400-425 lbs.

How the fuck does anyone think that 760lbs is anywhere close to a realistic number? Piss off with that shit!

 

[Couses]

Right?? I'm pretty well convinced that a lot of the current forum users have never seen or touched a woman in real life. Momokun's section is similarly infected.

Wow, I wasn’t expecting so much personally-directed vitriol for a post that was purely based on numbers and only talking about Anna and no other members here. I’m not attacking anyone here and I would like the same courtesy extended to me.

For what it’s worth, I’m a woman myself, so yes I am aware of what realistic weights and bodies look like. I’m also aware of how hard it can be to diet / excercise / lose weight, and how shitty people can be about women’s looks, and I am sympathetic to such struggles (although I disagree with the HAES “any weight is healthy” philosophy - it’s one thing to struggle with weight issues, it’s another thing to claim that being grossly over or under weight is healthy.)

I’m just sharing the figures as we can calculate them, based on Anna’s own watch. I’m not sure why the results are getting people so upset. Is it possible the app isn’t accurate? Possible. Is it possible that the “460” figure I am reading is so blurry that it isn’t actually 460? Am I surprised by the results saying Anna is more likely in the range of 760lbs? Definitely.

I think the most likely source of errors could come from the following:
1. Reading the screenshot wrongly (particularly the “460” number in the screenshot as that is important to the calculations)
2. Anna herself entering her own stats wrongly in the fitness apps settings. Usually such fitness apps usually also use your stated age / weight / gender / etc. in order to calculate calorie burn. So if Anna entered her own weight or height or age or gender wrongly in the app settings, that’s what it would use to calculate the calorie burn rate, and the results would be way off.

But otherwise, IF (and big if, I know) the figures I am reading off the screenshot are correct, then basically Anna is definitely more than 400lbs. I will agree that Anna doesn’t “look” 700lbs too, which is why the results surprised me too.

As for other comments on the fitness tracker apps being inaccurate - I use such apps myself, and I agree they’re not always accurate - especially for excercises where there is a large variance in calorie burn (e.g. a barre class could contain cardio elements and would burn more than a barre class that was more like yoga/Pilates, so a generic “barre” calorie count in an app would be a very rough estimate at best). But, in my experience, such apps are usually pretty accurate for running / walking / cycling activities, because these are distance and speed based and much more predictable to a much higher degree of accuracy, so if the inputs are correct (age, height, weight, speed, length of workout), the results should be pretty accurate. Just my $0.02 from using such apps, not looking for a fight.

 

[Free the Pedos]

Wow, I wasn’t expecting so much personally-directed vitriol for a post that was purely based on numbers and only talking about Anna and no other members here. I’m not attacking anyone here and I would like the same courtesy extended to me.

For what it’s worth, I’m a woman myself, so yes I am aware of what realistic weights and bodies look like. I’m also aware of how hard it can be to diet / excercise / lose weight, and how shitty people can be about women’s looks, and I am sympathetic to such struggles (although I disagree with the HAES “any weight is healthy” philosophy - it’s one thing to struggle with weight issues, it’s another thing to claim that being grossly over or under weight is healthy.)

I’m just sharing the figures as we can calculate them, based on Anna’s own watch. I’m not sure why the results are getting people so upset. Is it possible the app isn’t accurate? Possible. Is it possible that the “460” figure I am reading is so blurry that it isn’t actually 460? Am I surprised by the results saying Anna is more likely in the range of 760lbs? Definitely.

I think the most likely source of errors could come from the following:
1. Reading the screenshot wrongly (particularly the “460” number in the screenshot as that is important to the calculations)
2. Anna herself entering her own stats wrongly in the fitness apps settings. Usually such fitness apps usually also use your stated age / weight / gender / etc. in order to calculate calorie burn. So if Anna entered her own weight or height or age or gender wrongly in the app settings, that’s what it would use to calculate the calorie burn rate, and the results would be way off.

But otherwise, IF (and big if, I know) the figures I am reading off the screenshot are correct, then basically Anna is definitely more than 400lbs. I will agree that Anna doesn’t “look” 700lbs too, which is why the results surprised me too.

As for other comments on the fitness tracker apps being inaccurate - I use such apps myself, and I agree they’re not always accurate - especially for excercises where there is a large variance in calorie burn (e.g. a barre class could contain cardio elements and would burn more than a barre class that was more like yoga/Pilates, so a generic “barre” calorie count in an app would be a very rough estimate at best). But, in my experience, such apps are usually pretty accurate for running / walking / cycling activities, because these are distance and speed based and much more predictable to a much higher degree of accuracy, so if the inputs are correct (age, height, weight, speed, length of workout), the results should be pretty accurate. Just my $0.02 from using such apps, not looking for a fight.

I don’t agree with your findings, but it was still very respectable to make your first post a real attempt to dig up some concrete info on a lolcow.
If someone calls you re-tarded on the Farms, just let it roll off your back. It doesn’t matter.

 

[weaselhat]

View attachment 1579429She's really looking like a man in drag here

She reminds me of that comedy skit by that British comedian If he gained 150 pounds “ but I’m a lady!”

 

[AlabamaWhitman]

Right?? I'm pretty well convinced that a lot of the current forum users have never seen or touched a woman in real life. Momokun's section is similarly infected.

From personal experience, as in, I know a woman that is 5'10" and about the same proportions as Anna, she is about 400-425 lbs.

How the fuck does anyone think that 760lbs is anywhere close to a realistic number? Piss off with that shit!

To be fair, Anna also isn't even near 400-425lbs. Thats about where Chantal is at and she's nearly a foot shorter. Obviously they have very different fat distribution but Annas height is a huge factor to consider. I'd reckon the woman you know is lying about her weight if she really does have all the same proportions as Anna.

 

[GenociderSyo]

One thing that will skew anna's weight is the fatty lipodema. That tends to be heavier then normal fat and shes probly always gonna have freakishly large hips/thighs without surgery after all this time. I'm rather sure she is over 400 and I'd put her closer to 500, we already know her hip measurements and chest measurements due to her hauls. Over 70" for hips and about 55-60" for waist. We also know she can't fit into most 3x and some 4x.

That's actually something her story should show people. As she loses weight her hips if they truly WERE lipodema are going to be more and more noticable.

 

[thejackal]

To be fair, Anna also isn't even near 400-425lbs. Thats about where Chantal is at and she's nearly a foot shorter. Obviously they have very different fat distribution but Annas height is a huge factor to consider. I'd reckon the woman you know is lying about her weight if she really does have all the same proportions as Anna.

It's really not rocket science. use common sense. Anna is roughly 375-450. Probably close to 375 now as she has lost a little weight the last month. If you really want to look at different reported weights on different height women go to my body gallery.

This woman reported 5'9" 397lb, could easily be Anna although this woman has less candy juice in her legs and more in her gunt.

 

[GenociderSyo]

Ran across an example of an anorexic with lipodema:

 

[Treasure Champs]

Wow, I wasn’t expecting so much personally-directed vitriol for a post that was purely based on numbers and only talking about Anna and no other members here. I’m not attacking anyone here and I would like the same courtesy extended to me.

For what it’s worth, I’m a woman myself, so yes I am aware of what realistic weights and bodies look like. I’m also aware of how hard it can be to diet / excercise / lose weight, and how shitty people can be about women’s looks, and I am sympathetic to such struggles (although I disagree with the HAES “any weight is healthy” philosophy - it’s one thing to struggle with weight issues, it’s another thing to claim that being grossly over or under weight is healthy.)

I’m just sharing the figures as we can calculate them, based on Anna’s own watch. I’m not sure why the results are getting people so upset. Is it possible the app isn’t accurate? Possible. Is it possible that the “460” figure I am reading is so blurry that it isn’t actually 460? Am I surprised by the results saying Anna is more likely in the range of 760lbs? Definitely.

I think the most likely source of errors could come from the following:
1. Reading the screenshot wrongly (particularly the “460” number in the screenshot as that is important to the calculations)


But otherwise, IF (and big if, I know) the figures I am reading off the screenshot are correct, then basically Anna is definitely more than 400lbs. I will agree that Anna doesn’t “look” 700lbs too, which is why the results surprised me too.

It's the 460 number that is wrong. It's a ridiculous number for calories for a walk that took less than an hour. This is why so many people can't lose weight- they hopelessly overestimate how many calories are burned doing not-very-strenuous things. Either the fitness calculator is pedaling false hope, that number isn't 460, or that number is not calories burned but something else.

As for the 700+ number... yeah, obviously that can't be right. Common sense.

 

[Couses]

I don’t agree with your findings, but it was still very respectable to make your first post a real attempt to dig up some concrete info on a lolcow.
If someone calls you re-tarded on the Farms, just let it roll off your back. It doesn’t matter.

True! I should know this from the time spent lurking on the farms, so that’s on me. I was expecting more of a “are you sure that’s right, it seems way too high” than a “you’re obviously a man who doesn’t know what real women look like” sort of response. But yes, I do think 700+lbs is also surprisingly high a result. I am not exactly sure what to change to get them to be more accurate since I was using numbers pulled from the screenshot. I suppose the screenshot numbers aren’t accurate for whatever reason then. I’ll have to wait for the next screenshot if we ever get one again, lol.

One thing that will skew anna's weight is the fatty lipodema. That tends to be heavier then normal fat and shes probly always gonna have freakishly large hips/thighs without surgery after all this time. I'm rather sure she is over 400 and I'd put her closer to 500, we already know her hip measurements and chest measurements due to her hauls. Over 70" for hips and about 55-60" for waist. We also know she can't fit into most 3x and some 4x.

True, I had not considered the lipodema as a factor,but you’re right. She does seem to have quite a bit of it and it could certainly impact her weight (although maybe not to the tune of 700lbs). I personally believe that 700+lbs is a surprising result as well, and probably too high to be her actual weight, but I am also inclined to believe that she is likely more than 400lbs.. However I’m not sure how to adjust the numbers I got from my little experiment to make them more accurate, because they’re pulled directly from the screenshot.

It's the 460 number that is wrong. It's a ridiculous number for calories for a walk that took less than an hour. This is why so many people can't lose weight- they hopelessly overestimate how many calories are burned doing not-very-strenuous things. Either the fitness calculator is pedaling false hope, that number isn't 460, or that number is not calories burned but something else.

As for the 700+ number... yeah, obviously that can't be right. Common sense.

I agree with you about the 700+ number. It was surprisingly high (which is partly why I posted, seemed like a notable finding), and I do agree she probably isn’t that weight.

I also agree with the 460 cals - that’s actually what made me do the reverse engineering in the first place, because who the hell burns 400cals on a walk?! That’s what made me think that the 400lbs figure was a lie - I thought her weight was probably more if she was actually burning 460cals walking at such a slow pace (if she ran for most of the time it might be believable). But the results I got don’t seem too plausible either, I agree. I am not sure how to edit them to get a more plausible result though, because the source numbers are direct from the screenshot.

On a totally unrelated note to do with the screenshot, in addition to the 460cals, I also did a double take at the 132 average heart rate during the walk, because that also seems pretty high. I get that maybe walking uphill can be strenuous, but an average of 132bps is usually in the lower range of a cardio workout, and not exactly the bps rate you’d expect to get just by walking, unless she was going up an incline or something most of the time. Come to think of it, maybe the high heart rate could have triggered the app to increase the number of calories burned in her workout to the 460cals number, because her heart sure is getting one, even if her walking pace is slow. But if her heart rate was already that high during a slow walk, it can’t be a good sign for her general overall fitness.

Side note: I totally agree about fitness calculators sometimes being too optimistic about how many calories you burn with low impact activity. I’ve seen some apps be like “you did a 45 min yoga class, wow you burned 250 calories!” And I KNOW that with my height / weight / age / gender that’s NO WAY that’s the case (I wish, haha).

 

[GenociderSyo]

It's the 460 number that is wrong. It's a ridiculous number for calories for a walk that took less than an hour. This is why so many people can't lose weight- they hopelessly overestimate how many calories are burned doing not-very-strenuous things. Either the fitness calculator is pedaling false hope, that number isn't 460, or that number is not calories burned but something else.

As for the 700+ number... yeah, obviously that can't be right. Common sense.

I'm reading its possible to bank the "active calories" which is her red display over multiple workouts. That is probly why the number is what it is.

True, I had not considered the lipodema as a factor,but you’re right. She does seem to have quite a bit of it and it could certainly impact her weight (although maybe not to the tune of 700lbs). I personally believe that 700+lbs is a surprising result as well, and probably too high to be her actual weight, but I am also inclined to believe that she is likely more than 400lbs.. However I’m not sure how to adjust the numbers I got from my little experiment to make them more accurate, because they’re pulled directly from the screenshot.

Considering its probably a false active calories for that one workout there may be no way to know.

 

[Missanthrope101]

I respect your attempt but 760lbs is preposterous. I do, however, think she weighs closer to 500lbs than 400lbs given her above average height and obvious girth.

The general rule of thumb is that about 100 calories per mile are burned for a 180-pound person. Anna did 1.89 so I just rounded that up to 2 miles for easy math. So if a 180 lb person burns 200 cals on a 2 mile walk, and Anna burned 460 on a 2 mile walk, that would put her a bit over 500lb.

Hi everyone, long time lurker first time poster. I decided to make a guesstimate at Anna’s weight after reading this thread because I strongly suspect she is not truthful about her weight.

I used this screenshot of her fitness watch (posted by another member in this thread, which was from one of her Stories iirc).

View attachment 1592673

So based on the above screenshot, we have sufficient info to figure out her weight. We know that she walked for 1.89 miles, for 53 mins 47 seconds, at a pace of 28’24” a mile, and burned 460(?) calories during this time.

So first, I used a walking pace converter to convert her 28’24” pace to either mph or kmph speed (as that is what we will need to reverse engineer an estimate of her weight):

View attachment 1592676

Based on the calculator, her pace of 28’24” is a speed of 2.11mph or 3.40km/h. This checks out with the Fitbit data because she did walk for 53mins 47seconds and did just under 2 miles (1.89miles).

Next, I used a walking calorie calculator to reverse engineer her weight. (At first I used a running calorie calculator, but her walking speed was so slow that it was not in the drop down list of selections for speed.) How these calculators usually work is, you key in your age / height / weight / speed / length of workout, and it tells you how many calories you burned. Since we have all the other stats, and since we know Anna burned 460 calories in that workout, we can reverse engineer her weight.

So I keyed in Anna’s stats (age 35, height 5’10”, female), and her workout stats (speed of 2.5mph, and workout time of 54 mins). I was “kind” to her and rounded UP her speed, because the speed options were only 2.0mph or 2.5mph. I suppose it would have been more accurate to round it down from 2.1 to 2.0 rather than up from 2.1 to 2.5, but I didn’t bother because I figured at her weight it might not make much of a difference, and we only needed a good estimate, not the exact poundage. But this is just all to say, the weight might be a slight underestimation.

Anyway, I started off by keying in Anna’s weight as 400lb, because it’s a figure I often see in this thread:

View attachment 1592688

Based on that calculator, she is WAY heavier than 400lbs. If she were 400lbs, she would only have burned 284 calories doing that workout - nowhere close to the 460 calories her screen showed.

So after playing around with various numbers, the one that came closest to 460 calories burned was 760 lbs. Screenshot below:

View attachment 1592691

Based on the above, if she were 760 calories she would burn 454 calories, which is close enough to the 460 calories shown on her screen.

So TL;DR: Anna is nowhere near the 400lbs weight often quoted here. Based on reverse engineering her stats found on her fitness watch, she is closer to 760lbs.

Sorry if the format is weird, I am posting this on mobile. Hope the screenshots and all show up correctly.

 

[T0oCoolFool]

Ran across an example of an anorexic with lipodema:
View attachment 1593193

Maybe this is common knowledge in this thread, but I am horrified. After seeing this photo, I did some Googling about lipodema and was surprised to discover that anyone can get this (I thought this was something you get mostly due to being morbidly obese, but apparently that's Lymphedema), and there isn't shit you can do once you get it. Liposuction can help but even that isn't a cure

 

[Serial Grapist]

Anna’s latest IG videos:

 

[thejackal]

She gets asked about her interior design all the time guyz.