Speed/time/incline on the treadmill?

emilycat214

Background: I am a newcomer to MFP and to regular formal exercise. I want to lose weight and get fitter for health reasons (I have Type 2 diabetes, which was uncontrolled for several years.) I'm female, late 50s, work a sedentary desk job. I need to lose at least 30-40 pounds. I am using MFP to track my calories.

After my old treadmill died a little over a month ago, I joined the local Y. I'm still finding out what works for me. I usually do 15 minutes on a recumbent bike at 7 mph on a resistance setting of 4 (on a scale of 1-20), then get on a treadmill. These are fancy treadmills which can be programmed with a variety of settings. I do 30 minutes, and set the incline for random "hills". On level 5, the highest hill is a 4.3% incline, but there are also lower ones and a fair amount of flat walking.

I started out at 2.5 mph, and spent a few weeks at level 4, then moved to 2.7 mph and level 5. That felt like a good, brisk walk to me. When I started using MFP 5 days ago, I discovered that walking at 2.5 mph is considered "leisurely", and that 3.0 is "moderate". I upped my speed to 3.0, and found it difficult, not so much because of extra demand on heart & lungs, but because of the extra strain on my legs. At 3.0, I feel twinges in my hamstrings and I have trouble maintaining the pace. I reduced the level to 2, but 3 mph is still awkward at best. (Maybe my legs are too short? I'm 5'4") I can't even imagine going 3.5 mph, which is what MFP considers "brisk", and at 4.0 ("very brisk") I'd probably fall off the treadmill.

I'm trying to decide what is the best speed/time/incline for me. I wouldn't want to spend more than 45 minutes on the treadmill. I'm not ambitious about exercise--I don't aspire to being a marathon runner, or any kind of runner. I want to be healthy, and I have a vague dream of being able to go on a walking tour in some scenic foreign place.

Can anyone suggest the best way for me to progress on the treadmill? And should I use the machine's estimate of calories burned? If I'm doing 2.7 mph, I feel cheated if I enter 2.5 into MFP, especially if I've got some inclines in my workout.

L_Master

Leg length has very little bearing on walking/running speed. If this was the case tall people would all be the fastest runners, but in general running and sprinting has been largely filled with people shorter than average.

Best way would be to just build up gradually. Throw in some periods going 3mph, say 5 mins, with a period of walking slower at 2mph for 3 minutes. Then progress the length of those 3mph portions until you're more comfortable with it.

Logging wise, if you're walk has some elevation in it you're more than fine to round up to the next highest speed (i.e. if you walk 2.7mph on a 3% average that definitely burns more calories than MFP 3mph flat)

LKArgh

emilycat214 wrote: »

Background: I am a newcomer to MFP and to regular formal exercise. I want to lose weight and get fitter for health reasons (I have Type 2 diabetes, which was uncontrolled for several years.) I'm female, late 50s, work a sedentary desk job. I need to lose at least 30-40 pounds. I am using MFP to track my calories.

After my old treadmill died a little over a month ago, I joined the local Y. I'm still finding out what works for me. I usually do 15 minutes on a recumbent bike at 7 mph on a resistance setting of 4 (on a scale of 1-20), then get on a treadmill. These are fancy treadmills which can be programmed with a variety of settings. I do 30 minutes, and set the incline for random "hills". On level 5, the highest hill is a 4.3% incline, but there are also lower ones and a fair amount of flat walking.

I started out at 2.5 mph, and spent a few weeks at level 4, then moved to 2.7 mph and level 5. That felt like a good, brisk walk to me. When I started using MFP 5 days ago, I discovered that walking at 2.5 mph is considered "leisurely", and that 3.0 is "moderate". I upped my speed to 3.0, and found it difficult, not so much because of extra demand on heart & lungs, but because of the extra strain on my legs. At 3.0, I feel twinges in my hamstrings and I have trouble maintaining the pace. I reduced the level to 2, but 3 mph is still awkward at best. (Maybe my legs are too short? I'm 5'4") I can't even imagine going 3.5 mph, which is what MFP considers "brisk", and at 4.0 ("very brisk") I'd probably fall off the treadmill.

I'm trying to decide what is the best speed/time/incline for me. I wouldn't want to spend more than 45 minutes on the treadmill. I'm not ambitious about exercise--I don't aspire to being a marathon runner, or any kind of runner. I want to be healthy, and I have a vague dream of being able to go on a walking tour in some scenic foreign place.

Can anyone suggest the best way for me to progress on the treadmill? And should I use the machine's estimate of calories burned? If I'm doing 2.7 mph, I feel cheated if I enter 2.5 into MFP, especially if I've got some inclines in my workout.

Better in what way?
If the goal is to burn more calories, basically this will happen by covering a longer distance. Whether this happens by increasing speed or time, it is up to you. Small incline differences are not really going to make a big difference to logging, so just ignore them and save yourself the trouble of accounting for them. 20 or 40 calories more or less really will not affect you one way or another. If you want to be accurate with your logging, just google a walking calories calculator. As a rule you will need the total distance covered, your weight and maybe the total duration.
If the goal is to increase your ability to walk, again this happens by walking more and more, no other way to go about it. If you want e.g. to feel comfortable walking for 3 hours, then walk your way up to this.

emilycat214

L_Master wrote: »

Best way would be to just build up gradually. Throw in some periods going 3mph, say 5 mins, with a period of walking slower at 2mph for 3 minutes. Then progress the length of those 3mph portions until you're more comfortable with it.

That sounds doable. I didn't try it today because I used up all my excess energy with 5 minutes on the elliptical trainer.

Logging wise, if you're walk has some elevation in it you're more than fine to round up to the next highest speed (i.e. if you walk 2.7mph on a 3% average that definitely burns more calories than MFP 3mph flat)

I've decided that I will use the calorie estimates on the machines, which seem to be slighter lower than MFP. Since I do eat back some of my exercise calories, that's safer, and lets me avoid a headache trying to figure out how to log a treadmill workout with different speeds and levels.

Thanks for the reply!

emilycat214

aggelikik wrote: »

Better in what way?
If the goal is to burn more calories, basically this will happen by covering a longer distance. Whether this happens by increasing speed or time, it is up to you. Small incline differences are not really going to make a big difference to logging, so just ignore them and save yourself the trouble of accounting for them. 20 or 40 calories more or less really will not affect you one way or another. If you want to be accurate with your logging, just google a walking calories calculator. As a rule you will need the total distance covered, your weight and maybe the total duration.
If the goal is to increase your ability to walk, again this happens by walking more and more, no other way to go about it. If you want e.g. to feel comfortable walking for 3 hours, then walk your way up to this.

My goal is to burn calories and increase stamina. Long ago, when I was younger and fitter, I used to do some long day-hikes in local state parks. I may resume that in the spring.

I've decided to solve the logging problem by entering the total calories reported by the treadmill, which seems reasonable, and is slightly lower than MFP's estimate. Also, it has occurred to me that perhaps I'm overthinking this--which is a bad habit of mine.

Thanks for the suggestions.

Azdak

If you don't feel comfortable walking at a faster speed, but feel like the overall workload is becoming easier, just increase the incline. That will boost the intensity, improve fitness, and burn more calories.

In time, your overall conditioning and ability will increase, so many of these "challenges" will become less so.

If you don't hold on to the handrails, and the treadmill allows you to enter weight, then the calorie readings from the machine will be fine and fairly accurate. (Only true for treadmills)

emilycat214

Azdak wrote: »

If you don't feel comfortable walking at a faster speed, but feel like the overall workload is becoming easier, just increase the incline. That will boost the intensity, improve fitness, and burn more calories.

In time, your overall conditioning and ability will increase, so many of these "challenges" will become less so.

If you don't hold on to the handrails, and the treadmill allows you to enter weight, then the calorie readings from the machine will be fine and fairly accurate. (Only true for treadmills)

One of my co-workers (a very fit 75-year-old) says that she walks at 3 MPH, and that I should not expect to be able to do everything at the beginning.

I have created an exercise called 'treadmill' in MFP, and I use the calorie count from the console. I do not normally hold onto the rails. I have also created an exercise called 'recumbent bike', as I vary the speed and resistance on it. Is that not likely to be accurate? I do enter my weight.