2 mile walk 2 mile jog

chellebelle272
chellebelle272 Posts: 42 Member
edited December 4 in Health and Weight Loss
ok so yesterday I jogged 2 miles in the morning and I do roughly a 13 - 14 min mile and burned 250 on my vivio active hr watch and last night I walked 2 miles and it took about 10 mins more but I burned the same amount of calories what gives and if its the same amount which one is better

Replies

  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    edited September 2016
    The greater the distance, the bigger the difference will be...in regards to better, that's really relative...exercise and fitness isn't all about how many calories you burn...that's just a bi-product...walking and jogging are both good forms of exercise, but walking is going to have a lower ceiling in terms of your actual cardiovascular fitness.

    Ultimately running burns more calories as well...the faster you're going and further you're going will determine how much of a difference there is.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    edited September 2016
    chellebelle272 wrote: »
    ok so yesterday I jogged 2 miles in the morning and I do roughly a 13 - 14 min mile and burned 250 on my vivio active hr watch and last night I walked 2 miles and it took about 10 mins more but I burned the same amount of calories what gives and if its the same amount which one is better

    Well if you jog or run it takes less time so there is that benefit assuming time is of value to you. Jogging a 14 minute mile is probably not that different than walking is like a 20 minute mile. Maybe over more distance you'd see more of a difference between the two.

    Running/jogging is going to burn more calories per minute but you did it for less minutes hence it not being that different. If you flat out run then you will probably burn more over the same distance but for jogging its not going to be that different, will save you time though.

    People seem to have the mistaken opinion that walking somehow doesn't burn calories, it most certainly does. I burn about 1500 calories daily from walking.
  • RuNaRoUnDaFiEld
    RuNaRoUnDaFiEld Posts: 5,864 Member
    Your calculating it wrong, running burns more calories.
  • RoxieDawn
    RoxieDawn Posts: 15,488 Member
    edited September 2016
    Unless your walking stride and running stride are the exact same, you applied the exact same intensity to your running and walking these should be different calorie burns. I do believe that your Garmin may have misspoken.. perhaps the way you have it setup?
  • BrianSharpe
    BrianSharpe Posts: 9,248 Member
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Running/jogging is going to burn more calories per minute but you did it for less minutes hence it not being that different. If you flat out run then you will probably burn more over the same distance but for jogging its not going to be that different, will save you time though.

    People seem to have the mistaken opinion that walking somehow doesn't burn calories, it most certainly does. I burn about 1500 calories daily from walking.

    There is running (both feet off the ground even momentarily) and walking (one foot constantly in contact with the ground) Running burns roughly double the number of calories as walking does over the same distance (unless you're race walking)

    How many miles a day are you walking to burn 1500 cal ( a 200lb person would have to walk about 25 miles per day to acheive that unless you're in very hilly terrain)

  • BusyRaeNOTBusty
    BusyRaeNOTBusty Posts: 7,166 Member
    Right now I don't jog much faster than I walk, so yeah, I wouldn't expect it to burn that many more calories. It uses my muscles in different ways that they aren't used to, so it's harder.
  • mitch16
    mitch16 Posts: 2,113 Member
    Allow me to link one of my favorite articles: http://www.runnersworld.com/peak-performance/running-v-walking-how-many-calories-will-you-burn

    There's really not a huge difference if you're moving at a very average pace.

  • BrianSharpe
    BrianSharpe Posts: 9,248 Member
    edited September 2016
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »


    Running is better for cardio, running saves you time...if you can run and even enjoy running then by all means run....but I think people undervalue or underestimate the amount you actually burn walking.

    So, how many mile a day are you walking to burn 1500 cal?

  • safully1
    safully1 Posts: 13 Member
    This is an old debate and one that seems simple. Regardless if you walk or run a mile, you should burn the same amount of calories. It is simply not true. You burn roughly 2.3x's the amount of calories per minute running that walking (a bunch of caveats go into this, namely "average weight" and physical conditioning, etc). Over the course of a mile, the average person burns roughly 135 calories while the average walker burns a little over 100. Not a big difference, until you start doing multiple miles of work...plus I hate cardio, so the faster I get it over with the better!!! Here is a medical journal article if you like to read the science behind it (I'm a nerd, so it appeals to me) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22446673

    There is nothing wrong with doing intermittent running/jogging/walking cycles. In fact, interval training is very good at burning calories and increasing cardiovascular fitness.
  • lissmayer
    lissmayer Posts: 86 Member
    safully1 wrote: »
    This is an old debate and one that seems simple. Regardless if you walk or run a mile, you should burn the same amount of calories. It is simply not true. You burn roughly 2.3x's the amount of calories per minute running that walking (a bunch of caveats go into this, namely "average weight" and physical conditioning, etc). Over the course of a mile, the average person burns roughly 135 calories while the average walker burns a little over 100. Not a big difference, until you start doing multiple miles of work...plus I hate cardio, so the faster I get it over with the better!!! Here is a medical journal article if you like to read the science behind it (I'm a nerd, so it appeals to me) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22446673

    There is nothing wrong with doing intermittent running/jogging/walking cycles. In fact, interval training is very good at burning calories and increasing cardiovascular fitness.

    If you read the abstract you posted, you'll note the large difference in rates for walking and running in the study. As stated a bunch of times, the meaningful calorie difference is only there if that rate differential is there- and the OP does not run much faster than she walks.
  • CoffeeNCardio
    CoffeeNCardio Posts: 1,847 Member
    edited September 2016
    I would also note OP that for me, working out in the evening burns way more calories than working out in the morning seems to. I have the Charge 2 (with HR monitoring) and before I had the Charge Hr (both fitbit) and without variance, working out in the evening over the past full year I've been doing this has caused a higher calorie burn. Now this is two identical work outs mind you, walking x miles in the morning and walking another x miles in the late evening after my kid goes to sleep, but I wonder if there's not something to that in your situation.

    For a year. Without Fail. And I very infrequently stall and eat back many of my exercise calories so obviously the fitbit isn't lying to me.

    ETA: sorry had to go look at fitbit app data, How much is "way more"? Apparently, on average over the past week, 1-3 more calories per minute average in the evening work out compared to the morning work out. My heart rate goes up 6-10 bpm higher in the evening work out as well. Could be because in the morning I hardly eat anything and so I'm not as intense (as evidenced by the bpm change) could also be that working out after a relatively active day to begin with after being fueled by a good dinner increases intensity more than I imagined it would. You'd think, just common sense wise, that working out in the evening after a full day is going to be naturally harder.

    I'd check your heart rate readings for the differences to see if this may be the case for you.
  • safully1
    safully1 Posts: 13 Member
    Of course there are differences in the standard deviation for EE, especially with a small sample size, that is to be expected. The point is that the median EE for each exercise clearly favored the running group.

    I would disagree that there difference is not meaningful. A person that is not used to jogging and running is going to expend much more exertion and EE by running/jogging than walking and still burn more calories. Further, she's going to build her cardio up over time. Just differences of opinion. I'm bigger fan of high intensity cardio than walking because I just don't have the time to get my calories from walking.
  • safully1
    safully1 Posts: 13 Member
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    BrianSharpe wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »


    Running is better for cardio, running saves you time...if you can run and even enjoy running then by all means run....but I think people undervalue or underestimate the amount you actually burn walking.

    So, how many mile a day are you walking to burn 1500 cal?

    It varies but ~15 miles. 3 of those are just day to day walking, 12 are get from A to B longer walks at about a 15 minute mile. I walk very briskly so that adds, but my feet aren't ever both off the ground. Over that distance there are of course some hills in there but nothing that steep.

    yesterday was 17 miles and I got 1650 calories from that from my fitbit. Is that accurate? That could be argued of course.

    If I put "15 minute mile walking pace for 255 minutes" (17 miles) into MFP it says "1623 calories" so almost the same.

    Impressive. I wish I had the time to do that much walking.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    Bottom line for me. Running and jogging does burn more calories than walking, but not the amount more people seem to think. My point is that walking the same distance as running will burn less but not the half as much or a third as much that people seem to think with "common sense". The idea that you should burn significantly more calories jogging a 14 minute mile for 2 miles versus walking it I think is based on that belief that walking doesn't burn that much.
  • meritage4
    meritage4 Posts: 1,441 Member
    which is better? Depends what you want. Jogging gives you more burn per minute. Walking is easier on your joints. Continue doing both as both help with overall fitness and support weightloss.
  • chellebelle272
    chellebelle272 Posts: 42 Member
    my garmin vivo active hr calculates my calorie burn based on heart rate not me or apps or websites
  • StaciMarie1974
    StaciMarie1974 Posts: 4,138 Member
    One one hand, is it better to burn 250 calories in 14 minutes or 250 calories in 24 minutes? I guess it depends on how much time you have, and which activity you prefer.
    chellebelle272 wrote: »
    ok so yesterday I jogged 2 miles in the morning and I do roughly a 13 - 14 min mile and burned 250 on my vivio active hr watch and last night I walked 2 miles and it took about 10 mins more but I burned the same amount of calories what gives and if its the same amount which one is better

  • MeanderingMammal
    MeanderingMammal Posts: 7,866 Member
    BrianSharpe wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »


    Running is better for cardio, running saves you time...if you can run and even enjoy running then by all means run....but I think people undervalue or underestimate the amount you actually burn walking.

    So, how many mile a day are you walking to burn 1500 cal?

    For me walking off 1500 cals would be about 25-30 miles, that's a lot of walking in your average day.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    MeanderingMammal wrote: »
    BrianSharpe wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »


    Running is better for cardio, running saves you time...if you can run and even enjoy running then by all means run....but I think people undervalue or underestimate the amount you actually burn walking.

    So, how many mile a day are you walking to burn 1500 cal?

    For me walking off 1500 cals would be about 25-30 miles, that's a lot of walking in your average day.

    Yeah I fully admit I am an outlier here. I walk a lot, much more than most...I think on the fitbit site I was like 99th percentile. I also have a pretty brisk pace and a long stride so I'm covering that distance quickly. As a 6' tall man I assume I also probably burn more for activity than average. I lose about 1.3 pounds a week eating about 2500 calories a day and almost all my exercise in terms of calories is walking. Was not at all meaning to imply that people should expect to be burning 1000+ calories walking, just that walking is a viable form of exercise.

    Just for fun though since I got my fitbit back in July the largest burn I got just from walking (not hiking, just walking in a city) was 3,500 calories (that is on top of my NEAT). But that day I walked pretty much all day on a weekend where I had no other plans and I think I went about 35 miles.

    From that data I seem to get about 100 calories a mile basically.
  • maxit
    maxit Posts: 880 Member
    For what it's worth, as a 65 yo female weighing ~154 lbs @ 5'6" ( but short legs) I burn ~75 calories a mile at a 3.5 pace.
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    I think the biggest difference between running and walking is that you reach your destination quicker when running :wink:

    I'm similar to Aaron when it comes to walking and reading my phone. I very rarely use my laptop, because I'd rather walk while I'm reading (especially those epic 10+ page threads), than sit on my butt. It kills 2 birds with one stone.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories