Is running better for burning calories than walking?
Options
Replies
-
OK so maybe some of my numbers were off. But I did read this online I think on runner's world that fast walking is tougher than slow running. at the same speed.0
-
Interval.
Also, work your way in to it so you don't burn out and/or get discouraged.0 -
Thank you all very much!0
-
I just tried it on my treadmill. It is impossible for me to walk 10 mph.
:laugh: :laugh: that literally made me almost spit water!
Me too- I'd say anything over 4.5 is getting tough to walk at. :noway: :noway: :noway:0 -
I call Shenanigans. You can't walk 10MPH.0
-
For now, I would walk. Running at 200 lbs will put enormous strain on your knees and ankles, and start causing constant knee and foot pain. Running will eventually burn more calories per minute, but walk (or do another low impact exercise) until you're down to 165 lbs.0
-
For now, I would walk. Running at 200 lbs will put enormous strain on your knees and ankles, and start causing constant knee and foot pain. Running will eventually burn more calories per minute, but walk (or do another low impact exercise) until you're down to 165 lbs.
what about 168? Should I wait until I lose another 3 pounds?
I call BS- I can run just fine at 195 pounds.0 -
What about sitting? Does sitting burn more calories than walking?0
-
Doesn't matter. Losing fat is a result of having a caloric deficit.
But if you burn more calories while running than you do while walking you would therefore have a bigger caloric deficit with running would you not?????0 -
Walking and running the same distance burn roughly the same amount of calories. NOTE, you're doing the same distance! So it'd take you a lot longer to walk the distance. But if you only have say 30 minutes to work out, then run, it will burn more.0
-
not sure if that is true ickle star. it is not a linear scale where distance is equivalent to calories. to answer the question, running without question will burn more calories. also, running will use more muscle groups0
-
Exercise is better than no exercise. Walking takes longer to burn the same amount of calories as running. But, for health benefits, it is preferred that one does aerobic exercise. Therefore, running is better.0
-
Delete please, double post.0
-
For now, I would walk. Running at 200 lbs will put enormous strain on your knees and ankles, and start causing constant knee and foot pain. Running will eventually burn more calories per minute, but walk (or do another low impact exercise) until you're down to 165 lbs.
I could run a Half Marathon at 200 lbs without injury !0 -
I call Shenanigans. You can't walk 10MPH.0
-
You know I got so caught up with wanting to run. But for me, I was just too unfit and heavy. I was getting crazy out of breath and just hurting everywhere.
So I gave up. Now I walk as fast as I can (which is still only around 3.5 mph with my little legs) for as long as I can. I am almost up to 5 miles, 4 times a week. I burn around 500 calories for that. And in my humble opinion, 500 calorie burn is great for something where I only get up a slight sweat and can actually enjoy (especially walking around a pretty park).
And although my legs ache after it and the next day, my joints don't kill me like when I tried running.
I might try jogging again after about another 20lbs gone0 -
Running may burn more calories in the same time, but a person just learning will be hard presses to run sufficient distance for that to matter. You could walk far further and more frequently and burn many more calories in the first month or 2 than running alone.
If you want to learn to run I think it is an awesome experience and as a byproduct a great weight maintenance tool, but to learn to run because it is the best way to lose weight, I don't agree.0 -
here is some information that is not just opinion.
http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/running-v-walking-how-many-calories-will-you-burn
Thank you! I get so tired of people saying one mile burns the same amount regardless of speed. It's just not true (as evidenced by this article, my HRM, and well, common sense!)0 -
In general when it comes to cardiovascular exercise the more effort the activity requires the more effective it is, even if you don't do it for as long.0
-
To the OP, running is definitely better for burning calories. It's also harder. A LOT harder. I started out walking, and started running about 5 months later to get a better burn.
If you're concerned about it being too hard (I personally don't think 200 lbs. is too large for running - just get the RIGHT shoes, fitted at a specialty running store) look into the Galloway method. It's a run/walk interval program that greatly reduces injury. I do this program after having hip injury issues.
www.jeffgalloway.com0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 399 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 979 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions