Walking considered strength training?
Replies
-
Not unless you're carrying a barbell while you do it.0
-
-
I understand why you think that because cardio can make you stronger. However cardio mostly improves your cardiovascular fitness, while building a small amount of lean muscle. (I used to be a runner) It also depends on what kind of cardio you do, I would do intervals to improve my speed. Strength training though specifically refers to lifting weights - or your own body weight (sometimes - eg: pushups) where you tear the muscle - work it to fatigue - so it then repairs itself by layering protein which is what builds your muscles and makes them bigger and stronger. Women shouldn't be scared of looking manly though because the hormones in our bodies prevent our muscles from "bulking". Walking is definitely on the cardio side, however it is also considered low impact cardio so after a while it needs to be sped up or added to with weights to continue improving your fitness.
Just know some of this stuff from experience and currently studying science.0 -
I was thinking about this last night (whilst walking uphill ).
If there is effort and resistance doesn't it build muscle? Like dancers, some of them have fab muscular legs...Or cyclists?0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »
In your experience.
The argument here was that poster said "all walkers and endurance runners are lean."
I'd agree that MANY are. But not all. Walking and running don't make you lean and there are plenty of people who are overweight and achieve great runs while still overeating and carrying extra weight.
No, I said that serious runners are usually very lean. That poster has disagreed because in his experience, serious runners are usually not very lean.
I have no intention of arguing with either answer. I'm just interested about his experience with these non-lean, but serious runners.
We all have different experiences.
Like you, my experience has been that when a person is a serious runner, they'll almost always have a very lean body.
Um....I'm a she.
No, I disgreed because serious runners are not always lean, they can be of normal weight and overweight, and I've seen some I would consider obese. I don't think weight has anything to do with seriousness/committment to running. I'd say when you're committed to running you are serious about it.
You are projecting your own stuff and making a sweepoing generalization obout certain runners.
Now, let me ask you- why do you believe that only serious runner are lean (or only lean runners are serious)?
If a person is over weight or obese, they sure ain't no serious runner, unless your perception of a serious runner is someone who runs occasionally and eats too much.
Righhttttttt.....
Sillustrated thing said yet.0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »
In your experience.
The argument here was that poster said "all walkers and endurance runners are lean."
I'd agree that MANY are. But not all. Walking and running don't make you lean and there are plenty of people who are overweight and achieve great runs while still overeating and carrying extra weight.
No, I said that serious runners are usually very lean. That poster has disagreed because in his experience, serious runners are usually not very lean.
I have no intention of arguing with either answer. I'm just interested about his experience with these non-lean, but serious runners.
We all have different experiences.
Like you, my experience has been that when a person is a serious runner, they'll almost always have a very lean body.
Um....I'm a she.
No, I disgreed because serious runners are not always lean, they can be of normal weight and overweight, and I've seen some I would consider obese. I don't think weight has anything to do with seriousness/committment to running. I'd say when you're committed to running you are serious about it.
You are projecting your own stuff and making a sweepoing generalization obout certain runners.
Now, let me ask you- why do you believe that only serious runner are lean (or only lean runners are serious)?
If a person is over weight or obese, they sure ain't no serious runner, unless your perception of a serious runner is someone who runs occasionally and eats too much.
Is the overweight runner who runs 3 times a week only considered serious when they then become lean0 -
Therealobi1 wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »
In your experience.
The argument here was that poster said "all walkers and endurance runners are lean."
I'd agree that MANY are. But not all. Walking and running don't make you lean and there are plenty of people who are overweight and achieve great runs while still overeating and carrying extra weight.
No, I said that serious runners are usually very lean. That poster has disagreed because in his experience, serious runners are usually not very lean.
I have no intention of arguing with either answer. I'm just interested about his experience with these non-lean, but serious runners.
We all have different experiences.
Like you, my experience has been that when a person is a serious runner, they'll almost always have a very lean body.
Um....I'm a she.
No, I disgreed because serious runners are not always lean, they can be of normal weight and overweight, and I've seen some I would consider obese. I don't think weight has anything to do with seriousness/committment to running. I'd say when you're committed to running you are serious about it.
You are projecting your own stuff and making a sweepoing generalization obout certain runners.
Now, let me ask you- why do you believe that only serious runner are lean (or only lean runners are serious)?
If a person is over weight or obese, they sure ain't no serious runner, unless your perception of a serious runner is someone who runs occasionally and eats too much.
Is the overweight runner who runs 3 times a week only considered serious when they then become lean
No. I was referring to someone who runs for hours every day and competes in marathons. Not someone who is using running to try to lose weight.
Sorry if you may have taken it the wrong way, and I did not mean it that way.0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »
In your experience.
The argument here was that poster said "all walkers and endurance runners are lean."
I'd agree that MANY are. But not all. Walking and running don't make you lean and there are plenty of people who are overweight and achieve great runs while still overeating and carrying extra weight.
No, I said that serious runners are usually very lean. That poster has disagreed because in his experience, serious runners are usually not very lean.
I have no intention of arguing with either answer. I'm just interested about his experience with these non-lean, but serious runners.
We all have different experiences.
Like you, my experience has been that when a person is a serious runner, they'll almost always have a very lean body.
Um....I'm a she.
No, I disgreed because serious runners are not always lean, they can be of normal weight and overweight, and I've seen some I would consider obese. I don't think weight has anything to do with seriousness/committment to running. I'd say when you're committed to running you are serious about it.
You are projecting your own stuff and making a sweepoing generalization obout certain runners.
Now, let me ask you- why do you believe that only serious runner are lean (or only lean runners are serious)?
If a person is over weight or obese, they sure ain't no serious runner, unless your perception of a serious runner is someone who runs occasionally and eats too much.
Righhttttttt.....
Sillustrated thing said yet.
Ya know, I see a lot of your posts telling people their wrong about this and their wrong about that. Its like the starting line in many of your posts.
Well guess what?
You're the one who is wrong.0 -
Can someone please answer this question? It's got me puzzled.I was just thinking the other day about when my cast was removed from my leg after being enclosed for 2 months. That leg had no muscle definition compared to the other. It looked scrawny, white, and hairy. haha. As soon as I began walking on it, the muscle quickly returned to the normal size. So.... ? Thoughts?
What's the question, exactly?
Well, since you couldn't work it out...
If strength exercises improve/build muscle, and walking isn't a strength exercise, how did @jodybo2's wasted leg get back to normal muscle size if she was just walking?
This is not difficult. Training results are adaptations to the specific training load being applied. The extent of training results depends on the specific demands of the training activity.
There are certain muscular demands to walking or performing any movement (even a cardio movement). If ones current muscle strength is insufficient to comfortably meet the demand, then performing the activity will result in the amount of increased muscle strength necessary to meet the demand of the activity. However once those demands are met, no further adaptation will occur.
A sedentary person starting a cardio activity, or someone starting a new activity will always experience an increase in the muscular "strength" necessary to perform that activity. That is not the same as "strength training". The amount of increase will be modest and will quickly plateau.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
I noticed some people saying that walking didn't help them at all, which I find strange. I am a pretty athletic person already but when I started walking regularly, my legs and butt were very noticeably more toned after just the first couple of weeks and the cellulite was gone too. And I already have a lot of muscle too.
And to answer your question, anything that is specifically working your muscles but not raising your heart rate particularly high is strength training. Cardio (even though it will work your muscles and tone you), is more for just raising your heart rate to burn more kcals but does not work any specific muscles.0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »
In your experience.
The argument here was that poster said "all walkers and endurance runners are lean."
I'd agree that MANY are. But not all. Walking and running don't make you lean and there are plenty of people who are overweight and achieve great runs while still overeating and carrying extra weight.
No, I said that serious runners are usually very lean. That poster has disagreed because in his experience, serious runners are usually not very lean.
I have no intention of arguing with either answer. I'm just interested about his experience with these non-lean, but serious runners.
We all have different experiences.
Like you, my experience has been that when a person is a serious runner, they'll almost always have a very lean body.
Um....I'm a she.
No, I disgreed because serious runners are not always lean, they can be of normal weight and overweight, and I've seen some I would consider obese. I don't think weight has anything to do with seriousness/committment to running. I'd say when you're committed to running you are serious about it.
You are projecting your own stuff and making a sweepoing generalization obout certain runners.
Now, let me ask you- why do you believe that only serious runner are lean (or only lean runners are serious)?
If a person is over weight or obese, they sure ain't no serious runner, unless your perception of a serious runner is someone who runs occasionally and eats too much.
Righhttttttt.....
Sillustrated thing said yet.
Ya know, I see a lot of your posts telling people their wrong about this and their wrong about that. Its like the starting line in many of your posts.
Well guess what?
You're the one who is wrong.
0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »
In your experience.
The argument here was that poster said "all walkers and endurance runners are lean."
I'd agree that MANY are. But not all. Walking and running don't make you lean and there are plenty of people who are overweight and achieve great runs while still overeating and carrying extra weight.
No, I said that serious runners are usually very lean. That poster has disagreed because in his experience, serious runners are usually not very lean.
I have no intention of arguing with either answer. I'm just interested about his experience with these non-lean, but serious runners.
We all have different experiences.
Like you, my experience has been that when a person is a serious runner, they'll almost always have a very lean body.
Um....I'm a she.
No, I disgreed because serious runners are not always lean, they can be of normal weight and overweight, and I've seen some I would consider obese. I don't think weight has anything to do with seriousness/committment to running. I'd say when you're committed to running you are serious about it.
You are projecting your own stuff and making a sweepoing generalization obout certain runners.
Now, let me ask you- why do you believe that only serious runner are lean (or only lean runners are serious)?
If a person is over weight or obese, they sure ain't no serious runner, unless your perception of a serious runner is someone who runs occasionally and eats too much.
Righhttttttt.....
Sillustrated thing said yet.
Ya know, I see a lot of your posts telling people their wrong about this and their wrong about that. Its like the starting line in many of your posts.
Well guess what?
You're the one who is wrong.
Please, tell me how one of the more experienced and knowledgeable people who constantly gives sound, helpful advice around these forums is wrong in your sound, science-based opinion? Apparently quite a few of us are curious. Because surely a 'runner' is 'anyone who practices running regularly' regardless of whether they run marathons or whether they run round their local estate?
*Edited for grammar0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »
In your experience.
The argument here was that poster said "all walkers and endurance runners are lean."
I'd agree that MANY are. But not all. Walking and running don't make you lean and there are plenty of people who are overweight and achieve great runs while still overeating and carrying extra weight.
No, I said that serious runners are usually very lean. That poster has disagreed because in his experience, serious runners are usually not very lean.
I have no intention of arguing with either answer. I'm just interested about his experience with these non-lean, but serious runners.
We all have different experiences.
Like you, my experience has been that when a person is a serious runner, they'll almost always have a very lean body.
Um....I'm a she.
No, I disgreed because serious runners are not always lean, they can be of normal weight and overweight, and I've seen some I would consider obese. I don't think weight has anything to do with seriousness/committment to running. I'd say when you're committed to running you are serious about it.
You are projecting your own stuff and making a sweepoing generalization obout certain runners.
Now, let me ask you- why do you believe that only serious runner are lean (or only lean runners are serious)?
If a person is over weight or obese, they sure ain't no serious runner, unless your perception of a serious runner is someone who runs occasionally and eats too much.
Righhttttttt.....
Sillustrated thing said yet.
Ya know, I see a lot of your posts telling people their wrong about this and their wrong about that. Its like the starting line in many of your posts.
Well guess what?
You're the one who is wrong.
So, you really believe overweight or obese runners are not serious runners? Seriously? You really know overweight and obese runners' level of committment to running? From your statement, I take this to mean you are referring to ALL overweight or obese runners?0 -
I noticed some people saying that walking didn't help them at all, which I find strange. I am a pretty athletic person already but when I started walking regularly, my legs and butt were very noticeably more toned after just the first couple of weeks and the cellulite was gone too. And I already have a lot of muscle too.
And to answer your question, anything that is specifically working your muscles but not raising your heart rate particularly high is strength training. Cardio (even though it will work your muscles and tone you), is more for just raising your heart rate to burn more kcals but does not work any specific muscles.
Strength training is working the muscles against an external resistance. Increased strength means the muscle can generate more force. Heart rate has nothing to do with it--whether high or low.
0 -
No. Just, no.0
-
christinev297 wrote: »
In your experience.
The argument here was that poster said "all walkers and endurance runners are lean."
I'd agree that MANY are. But not all. Walking and running don't make you lean and there are plenty of people who are overweight and achieve great runs while still overeating and carrying extra weight.
No, I said that serious runners are usually very lean. That poster has disagreed because in his experience, serious runners are usually not very lean.
I have no intention of arguing with either answer. I'm just interested about his experience with these non-lean, but serious runners.
We all have different experiences.
Like you, my experience has been that when a person is a serious runner, they'll almost always have a very lean body.
Um....I'm a she.
No, I disgreed because serious runners are not always lean, they can be of normal weight and overweight, and I've seen some I would consider obese. I don't think weight has anything to do with seriousness/committment to running. I'd say when you're committed to running you are serious about it.
You are projecting your own stuff and making a sweepoing generalization obout certain runners.
Now, let me ask you- why do you believe that only serious runner are lean (or only lean runners are serious)?
Previous poster said "usually".
How does that turn into "believe that only"?
Well, for goodness sake, serious runners are not even "usually lean".
Size has nothing to do with whether a runner is serious, and seriousness has nothing to do with a lean runner.
Maybe we should change the word "serious" for "professional" ...
She clarified what she meant, and it wasn't professional.
I would agree that professional runners (and elite runners) are very lean.
Still doesn't make walking strength training, though. ;-)0 -
I noticed some people saying that walking didn't help them at all, which I find strange. I am a pretty athletic person already but when I started walking regularly, my legs and butt were very noticeably more toned after just the first couple of weeks and the cellulite was gone too. And I already have a lot of muscle too.
And to answer your question, anything that is specifically working your muscles but not raising your heart rate particularly high is strength training. Cardio (even though it will work your muscles and tone you), is more for just raising your heart rate to burn more kcals but does not work any specific muscles.
Strength training is working the muscles against an external resistance. Increased strength means the muscle can generate more force. Heart rate has nothing to do with it--whether high or low.
That's pretty much what I meant, but thank you for using fancier words than me. I guess I didn't think to put the keywords "external resistance" in there *rolls eyes*. And actually heart rate does matter. Although you can train lower-intensity cardio as well, generally speaking, while doing cardio your heart rate is going to be much more elevated than during strength training. That's why cardio burns a lot more kcals than strength training, and thus, burns a lot more fat in a shorter amount of time.
Honestly, this topic is too complex to be getting this detailed into it in a forum where someone didn't know if walking was strength training of cardio. I mean, you could argue this down all the way to cellular respiration and all the catabolic and anabolic chemical reactions that take place but, really, let's try to keep this more simple and not nitpick EVERY little detail like everyone in this forum is doing. Take a deep breath people and let it go, it's not that big of a deal.0 -
I noticed some people saying that walking didn't help them at all, which I find strange. I am a pretty athletic person already but when I started walking regularly, my legs and butt were very noticeably more toned after just the first couple of weeks and the cellulite was gone too. And I already have a lot of muscle too.
And to answer your question, anything that is specifically working your muscles but not raising your heart rate particularly high is strength training. Cardio (even though it will work your muscles and tone you), is more for just raising your heart rate to burn more kcals but does not work any specific muscles.
Strength training is working the muscles against an external resistance. Increased strength means the muscle can generate more force. Heart rate has nothing to do with it--whether high or low.
That's pretty much what I meant, but thank you for using fancier words than me. I guess I didn't think to put the keywords "external resistance" in there *rolls eyes*. And actually heart rate does matter. Although you can train lower-intensity cardio as well, generally speaking, while doing cardio your heart rate is going to be much more elevated than during strength training. That's why cardio burns a lot more kcals than strength training, and thus, burns a lot more fat in a shorter amount of time.
Nope--that's not it at all. That's why I tried to explain.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I noticed some people saying that walking didn't help them at all, which I find strange. I am a pretty athletic person already but when I started walking regularly, my legs and butt were very noticeably more toned after just the first couple of weeks and the cellulite was gone too. And I already have a lot of muscle too.
And to answer your question, anything that is specifically working your muscles but not raising your heart rate particularly high is strength training. Cardio (even though it will work your muscles and tone you), is more for just raising your heart rate to burn more kcals but does not work any specific muscles.
Strength training is working the muscles against an external resistance. Increased strength means the muscle can generate more force. Heart rate has nothing to do with it--whether high or low.
That's pretty much what I meant, but thank you for using fancier words than me. I guess I didn't think to put the keywords "external resistance" in there *rolls eyes*. And actually heart rate does matter. Although you can train lower-intensity cardio as well, generally speaking, while doing cardio your heart rate is going to be much more elevated than during strength training. That's why cardio burns a lot more kcals than strength training, and thus, burns a lot more fat in a shorter amount of time.
Nope--that's not it at all. That's why I tried to explain.
What isn't it at all? That's kind of vague, I don't think you're explaining well.
0 -
It all depends
If you are walking ...away from a cheesecake it is "strength"
When you walk away from your mother in law it is "endurance"
For me, shutting my mouth and walking away takes serious strength.
Continuously walking away from food takes endurance.
Maybe I'm that special snowflake!0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »
In your experience.
The argument here was that poster said "all walkers and endurance runners are lean."
I'd agree that MANY are. But not all. Walking and running don't make you lean and there are plenty of people who are overweight and achieve great runs while still overeating and carrying extra weight.
No, I said that serious runners are usually very lean. That poster has disagreed because in his experience, serious runners are usually not very lean.
I have no intention of arguing with either answer. I'm just interested about his experience with these non-lean, but serious runners.
We all have different experiences.
Like you, my experience has been that when a person is a serious runner, they'll almost always have a very lean body.
Um....I'm a she.
No, I disgreed because serious runners are not always lean, they can be of normal weight and overweight, and I've seen some I would consider obese. I don't think weight has anything to do with seriousness/committment to running. I'd say when you're committed to running you are serious about it.
You are projecting your own stuff and making a sweepoing generalization obout certain runners.
Now, let me ask you- why do you believe that only serious runner are lean (or only lean runners are serious)?
If a person is over weight or obese, they sure ain't no serious runner, unless your perception of a serious runner is someone who runs occasionally and eats too much.
Righhttttttt.....
Sillustrated thing said yet.
Ya know, I see a lot of your posts telling people their wrong about this and their wrong about that. Its like the starting line in many of your posts.
Well guess what?
You're the one who is wrong.
So, you really believe overweight or obese runners are not serious runners? Seriously? You really know overweight and obese runners' level of committment to running? From your statement, I take this to mean you are referring to ALL overweight or obese runners?
Now you are just reversing it so you can again appear to be right.
You said serious runners can be overweight and/or obese. Now you are trying to make it look like you said overweight or obese people who run are not serious about running to lose weight.
What I am saying is it would be very highly unlikely for a serious runner (someone who runs pretty much for a living) to be overweight, let alone obese.
I would consider a serious runner to be someone who runs for hours every single day and has been doing it for years. In running you have to be very careful about impact injuries even being at a healthy weight. I could not imagine an overweight person NOT having some degree of impact injuries from running, and in an obese person the potential for serious impact injuries is extremely likely.
I would highly recommend overweight and obese people to walk until they get to a healthy weight before they start running.
But hey... from the vibes I get from some of the people in this forum, I guess I'm probably wrong about that too.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
A serious runner is someone who runs for a living?
Yeah. No. That's a professional runner. An elite runner.
That's not even the definition the poster used who started this whole judgmental mess. I believe she said someone who runs regularly, signs up and runs races is a serious runner. People who do that are serious runners. They are committed to the act of running. Those people come in all shapes, sizes and abilities.
I started running when I was technically obese. I am now what people would probably consider lean. Is that because of running. Not really. It's because I consistently ate at a deficit. Am I a better, more efficient runner now? Yes, but that isn't the topic at hand. I was a serious, committed runner in both cases.
I said "pretty much for a living" meaning every day for hours, 100% dedicated to running. Not "runs for a living' as in professional.
Don't know why you took it the wrong way. Maybe I just suck at wording things.0 -
bcalvanese wrote: »
In your experience.
The argument here was that poster said "all walkers and endurance runners are lean."
I'd agree that MANY are. But not all. Walking and running don't make you lean and there are plenty of people who are overweight and achieve great runs while still overeating and carrying extra weight.
No, I said that serious runners are usually very lean. That poster has disagreed because in his experience, serious runners are usually not very lean.
I have no intention of arguing with either answer. I'm just interested about his experience with these non-lean, but serious runners.
We all have different experiences.
Like you, my experience has been that when a person is a serious runner, they'll almost always have a very lean body.
Um....I'm a she.
No, I disgreed because serious runners are not always lean, they can be of normal weight and overweight, and I've seen some I would consider obese. I don't think weight has anything to do with seriousness/committment to running. I'd say when you're committed to running you are serious about it.
You are projecting your own stuff and making a sweepoing generalization obout certain runners.
Now, let me ask you- why do you believe that only serious runner are lean (or only lean runners are serious)?
If a person is over weight or obese, they sure ain't no serious runner, unless your perception of a serious runner is someone who runs occasionally and eats too much.
I think this, very specifically, was where things degenerated into a seriously judgmental, horrific mess. I'm now running away from this horrible thread.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
UltimateRBF wrote: »Blueseraphchaos wrote: »bcalvanese wrote: »
In your experience.
The argument here was that poster said "all walkers and endurance runners are lean."
I'd agree that MANY are. But not all. Walking and running don't make you lean and there are plenty of people who are overweight and achieve great runs while still overeating and carrying extra weight.
No, I said that serious runners are usually very lean. That poster has disagreed because in his experience, serious runners are usually not very lean.
I have no intention of arguing with either answer. I'm just interested about his experience with these non-lean, but serious runners.
We all have different experiences.
Like you, my experience has been that when a person is a serious runner, they'll almost always have a very lean body.
Um....I'm a she.
No, I disgreed because serious runners are not always lean, they can be of normal weight and overweight, and I've seen some I would consider obese. I don't think weight has anything to do with seriousness/committment to running. I'd say when you're committed to running you are serious about it.
You are projecting your own stuff and making a sweepoing generalization obout certain runners.
Now, let me ask you- why do you believe that only serious runner are lean (or only lean runners are serious)?
If a person is over weight or obese, they sure ain't no serious runner, unless your perception of a serious runner is someone who runs occasionally and eats too much.
I think this, very specifically, was where things degenerated into a seriously judgmental, horrific mess. I'm now running away from this horrible thread.
But are you seriously running?
Well, my knee was injured by a u-haul earlier this week, and i have been unable to seriously run since last October when my acl and lcl got torn...(same knee just keeps getting reinjured) so i guess I'm not seriously running.
I'm just serious WHILE i run.
Who am i kidding, i haven't done anything more than run around my block since last October, and i probably shouldn't have even done that
WHY SO SERIOUS0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K 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
- 426 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