Whoa.. what? WALKING burns more fat than running?

Options
MissLaurenR88
MissLaurenR88 Posts: 36
in Health and Weight Loss
Is it true that WALKING burns more fat than running? Someone on MFP had told me "walking" wasn't even a real form of cardio exercise and that i'd get no where with walking. I recently just bought a treadmill since I am a mom and busy after work, I was speed walking at 4.6 for the first week and started running at 5.7.

What is more effective? Have any of you lost weight while WALKING?





Article:

" In a strict scientific sense, these claims are true because working at a lower intensity requires less quick energy and a higher percentage of fat is burned. But you'll also burn fewer calories than you would if, for the same amount of time, you work out at a harder intensity (running versus walking). If you're trying to lose weight, even though a higher percentage of fat is being used, a lower total amount of fat is lost.

Whether increased fat burning will result in actual weight loss is dependent upon several variables, including the total calories burned (which include both fat and carbohydrate calories) and the total fat calories burned. If you do work at a low intensity, you need to increase the time spent exercising to burn more calories. What matters most is the total number of calories burned. If you burned 250 calories every day from a short, fast jog, you'd see a bigger difference in weight and fat loss than if you walked everyday for the same amount of time. The number of fat calories you burn isn't that important, because even if you burn a lot of carb calories, these need to be replaced both by the carbs you eat in your diet and also within your body. Your fat stores will be broken down and transformed into carbohydrates when you need fuel. Even if you're burning lots of carb calories and less fat calories through exercise, your fat still inevitably gets used. "
«134567…14

Replies

  • deadstarsunburn
    deadstarsunburn Posts: 1,337 Member
    Options
    You burn more calories running
  • Topsking2010
    Topsking2010 Posts: 2,245 Member
    Options
    Running without a question!!!!!
  • tkcasta
    tkcasta Posts: 405 Member
    Options
    I've heard this too, I think what you need to look at is how many calories you're burning. I would think that if say you are power walking at an incline that you'd burn more than running flat, but it's all relative. Burn calories, burn fat.
  • ishax24
    ishax24 Posts: 51 Member
    Options
    Walking on a high incline will burn close to the same amount of calories as running.. But general walking will not burn more than running
  • TheKitsune6
    TheKitsune6 Posts: 5,798 Member
    Options
    Percentage-wise you burn more FAT walking - but you still burn more fat overall running. 60% of 100 calories is still less than 40% of 200 calories. (60<80)
  • MissLaurenR88
    MissLaurenR88 Posts: 36
    Options
    but doesn't walking keep your hate rate during "fat burning zone?"
  • melissaeich20
    melissaeich20 Posts: 12 Member
    Options
    Walking is in no way a waste of time. It is burning energy which in turn will burn calories. But if you are looking for ways to burn more calories in a smaller time frame then running would be a better option.
  • JoolieW68
    JoolieW68 Posts: 1,879 Member
    Options
    It depends how fast you walk. I can power walk 4.5-5mph at an incline and according to my HRM will burn more calories than running at 6mph. Not a ton - maybe 25-30 more cals per mile.
  • n_unocero
    n_unocero Posts: 445 Member
    Options
    Percentage-wise you burn more FAT walking - but you still burn more fat overall running. 60% of 100 calories is still less than 40% of 200 calories. (60<80)

    this.
  • d2footballJRC
    d2footballJRC Posts: 2,684 Member
    Options
    It's all about the fat burning zone. Walking keeps you there longer but lower calories but more of those calories are fat. Running your heart rate is higher and you burn more calories but a % of those calories are fat is lower. That is why HIIT spurts is far superior than running or walking.
  • britexmom
    britexmom Posts: 145
    Options
    running burns more and you can cover more distance in the same time as you could by walking.
  • ElizabethRoad
    ElizabethRoad Posts: 5,138 Member
    Options
    but doesn't walking keep your hate rate during "fat burning zone?"
    Freudian slip?
  • africal2
    africal2 Posts: 2
    Options
    Same number of calories per mile whether you walk or run. But here's the thing. You can probably walk 2 miles in 30 minutes and run 3 or even more. So for 30 minutes of effort, you will burn more by running.
  • melissaeich20
    melissaeich20 Posts: 12 Member
    Options
    I've heard if you walk/run at intervals of 3 minutes each...this will burn quicker.
  • anima_gemella
    anima_gemella Posts: 243 Member
    Options
    http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-242-304-311-8402-0,00.html
  • JoolieW68
    JoolieW68 Posts: 1,879 Member
    Options
    but doesn't walking keep your hate rate during "fat burning zone?"
    Freudian slip?

    Heh.....love it. So using hate rate from now on.
  • kdeaux1959
    kdeaux1959 Posts: 2,675 Member
    Options
    The incline does help a lot. Anything that causes work will burn calories... 4.6 is not bad... I burn a lot of calories at 3.5-4.0 with an incline on a treadmill.
  • Tzippy7
    Tzippy7 Posts: 344 Member
    Options
    is "fat burning zone" a real thing? It always seems like the weight loss programs on cardio machines are way easier than anything else. Doest it make you burn more fat to do a hard workout? I dont understand
  • Kimmer2011
    Kimmer2011 Posts: 569 Member
    Options
    I make no claims as to which is more effective, but I can say that my weight loss is from walking (& eating better, of course). I never run, but I love to walk and do it as often as possible.
  • mello
    mello Posts: 817 Member
    Options
    My weight loss on my ticker is all from walking. Some jogging more recently, but 99% of this loss has been from walking.

Categories