Walking as Exercise

juliewatkin

I love to walk. I consider it exercise that is relaxing and low impact that doesn't negatively affect the sport I compete in. It increases my energy and improves my state of mind. It's a wonderful way to get into fitness for those who are new to it; kind of thin edge of the wedge type of thing.

It really depends upon what you are hoping to achieve.

KANGOOJUMPS

YES, your moving, ITS EXERCISE!

pinuplove

spartan_d wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

fascha wrote: »

... was curious to know if you consider walking "exercise"?

For me, walking is a way to burn calories, but it's not a way to increase fitness.

fascha wrote: »

I don't see how someone who barely broke 3500 steps and went from an office job to the sofa can't increase their fitness by now walking 10K steps (which if you have an office job and sedentary lifestyle takes a bit of conscious effort). This doesn't seem logical.

I don't know what your fitness level or exercise history are. But I didn't say you can't increase your fitness by walking, that would be silly. You asked if other people consider walking to be exercise, and "exercise" has different meanings to different people, so I gave you my answer for me.

I completely agree with this. For some people, it would certainly increase their fitness levels. Not so much for someone who is at least moderately active, though.

Whenever this subject comes up, there is usually a slew of people who chime in with "Oh, walking is fantastic exercise!" or words to that effect. In reality though, while walking has certain benefits (being easy and low-impact, for example), it's also one of the least efficient forms of exercise. It does provide some benefits, but they are fairly modest, especially since most people walk at a leisurely pace.

We should remember that physicians and fitness magazines are exaggerating when they say that walking is excellent exercise. They say this sort of thing because it's just about the only thing that many Americans are willing to do. They figure that it's better for people to be underexercising than doing nothing at all.

For the person more accustomed to the motorized scooter at Wal Mart, it's exercise.
For the person who rarely makes it past the end of their driveway, it's exercise.
For the person who really pumps up the pace and incline on their treadmill or is attacking some killer hills and/or hauling a pack, it's exercise.

And the term 'Anything is better than nothing' comes to mind. It's all relative.

heybales

If exercise is that which causes some improvement to the body in some way - for most walking can easily become NOT an exercise at some point.

And if you lose weight while doing only that and in exactly the same manner - it'll become less of an exercise to the point the body can lose improvements (because of moving less mass).

Does it burn more calories than sleeping, sitting, or standing - sure.

But is merely burning more calories than something else really what makes an exercise?

Compared to sleeping, being awake burns more calories - is it an exercise?

For me - if I stopped what I currently do and only walked, say in order to win some challenges, I'd lose fitness - aerobic capacity and muscle mass.
Until such time that only walking maintained that fitness level.
Then I could experience the fun of stairs feeling like a huge workout!

CSARdiver

I used to think like this - that you had to really sweat to burn fat and maintain/lose weight.

Learning about CICO was a great revelation and just made perfect sense - especially when you consider people with medical issues or even in the most extreme cases such as paralysis and comatose where they cannot exercise. The posts on here about people who have lost 100+ pounds through logging and walking prove that anyone can be successful in this.

While it may not be efficient, it is a great stepping stone in a better direction. Many people start with walking will find this as a launching point to something else.

whatlunasaid

I consider walking to be light exercise. It doesn't get my heart rate up by much or seriously strengthen my muscles. But it helps with maintenance when I don't have the energy for a serious workout, and it's a nice warm up and cool down for more strenuous exercise.

Unless you're talking about moderate to strenuous hiking, or power walking, which are both different than just walking.

spartan_d

pinuplove wrote: »

spartan_d wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

fascha wrote: »

... was curious to know if you consider walking "exercise"?

For me, walking is a way to burn calories, but it's not a way to increase fitness.

fascha wrote: »

I don't see how someone who barely broke 3500 steps and went from an office job to the sofa can't increase their fitness by now walking 10K steps (which if you have an office job and sedentary lifestyle takes a bit of conscious effort). This doesn't seem logical.

I don't know what your fitness level or exercise history are. But I didn't say you can't increase your fitness by walking, that would be silly. You asked if other people consider walking to be exercise, and "exercise" has different meanings to different people, so I gave you my answer for me.

I completely agree with this. For some people, it would certainly increase their fitness levels. Not so much for someone who is at least moderately active, though.

Whenever this subject comes up, there is usually a slew of people who chime in with "Oh, walking is fantastic exercise!" or words to that effect. In reality though, while walking has certain benefits (being easy and low-impact, for example), it's also one of the least efficient forms of exercise. It does provide some benefits, but they are fairly modest, especially since most people walk at a leisurely pace.

We should remember that physicians and fitness magazines are exaggerating when they say that walking is excellent exercise. They say this sort of thing because it's just about the only thing that many Americans are willing to do. They figure that it's better for people to be underexercising than doing nothing at all.

For the person more accustomed to the motorized scooter at Wal Mart, it's exercise.
For the person who rarely makes it past the end of their driveway, it's exercise.
For the person who really pumps up the pace and incline on their treadmill or is attacking some killer hills and/or hauling a pack, it's exercise.

And the term 'Anything is better than nothing' comes to mind. It's all relative.

I'm not contesting any of that. Did I not describe it as exercise? And did I not say that would certainly increase the fitness level of inactive people?

My point is that many people describe it as "fantastic exercise" or words to that effect. This is a huge exaggeration, though. It's beneficial, and for certain people, it might even be the best option available -- but its effects on physical fitness are very modest at best.

pinuplove

spartan_d wrote: »

pinuplove wrote: »

spartan_d wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

fascha wrote: »

... was curious to know if you consider walking "exercise"?

For me, walking is a way to burn calories, but it's not a way to increase fitness.

fascha wrote: »

I don't see how someone who barely broke 3500 steps and went from an office job to the sofa can't increase their fitness by now walking 10K steps (which if you have an office job and sedentary lifestyle takes a bit of conscious effort). This doesn't seem logical.

I don't know what your fitness level or exercise history are. But I didn't say you can't increase your fitness by walking, that would be silly. You asked if other people consider walking to be exercise, and "exercise" has different meanings to different people, so I gave you my answer for me.

I completely agree with this. For some people, it would certainly increase their fitness levels. Not so much for someone who is at least moderately active, though.

Whenever this subject comes up, there is usually a slew of people who chime in with "Oh, walking is fantastic exercise!" or words to that effect. In reality though, while walking has certain benefits (being easy and low-impact, for example), it's also one of the least efficient forms of exercise. It does provide some benefits, but they are fairly modest, especially since most people walk at a leisurely pace.

We should remember that physicians and fitness magazines are exaggerating when they say that walking is excellent exercise. They say this sort of thing because it's just about the only thing that many Americans are willing to do. They figure that it's better for people to be underexercising than doing nothing at all.

For the person more accustomed to the motorized scooter at Wal Mart, it's exercise.
For the person who rarely makes it past the end of their driveway, it's exercise.
For the person who really pumps up the pace and incline on their treadmill or is attacking some killer hills and/or hauling a pack, it's exercise.

And the term 'Anything is better than nothing' comes to mind. It's all relative.

I'm not contesting any of that. Did I not describe it as exercise? And did I not say that would certainly increase the fitness level of inactive people?

My point is that many people describe it as "fantastic exercise" or words to that effect. This is a huge exaggeration, though. It's beneficial, and for certain people, it might even be the best option available -- but its effects on physical fitness are very modest at best.

I didn't think your were contesting that, apologies if my post wasn't clear. I do believe it's the best choice for many people, particularly in the beginning. They might be completely turned off or intimidated by other forms of exercise but walking is accessible to just about everyone. Honestly, my doctor was just thrilled with my 12-lb loss (I'm still 30lb away from a 'normal' BMI) and walking. It's more than she sees from most patients, she said.