Does walking count as exercise!

Options
124678

Replies

  • Kagemori
    Kagemori Posts: 88 Member
    Options
    walking is deffently exercise I walk all the time, its one of my favorite past times.
  • mockchoc
    mockchoc Posts: 6,573 Member
    Options
    Studies have shown that men who stare at boobs for an extended period of time will have better heart health and live longer. Any activity that increases blood flow is beneficial.

    Thanks for that info. I'm off to flash my boobs at hubby. I'd love him around longer!
  • whitebalance
    whitebalance Posts: 1,654 Member
    Options
    Yes, but I roll my eyes when people log stuff like "burned 30 calories dusting the house."
    With a 50-pound feather duster. Like a BOSS. #CleanHeavy
  • emilylanham917
    emilylanham917 Posts: 19 Member
    Options
    I can't believe this was even a question asked. Why the heck would walking not count as exercise? I try to walk for at least an hour a day just to get my heart going and to burn off some of those extra calories. I also use an online calculator when I walk, I don't trust the calc on a treadmill, they are set standard for a 150 pound man. A lot of us burn a lot more calories than that when walking. I also use a pedometer when I walk outside, but I try to walk at a 3mph pace at the least.
  • 7opoundsin16weeks
    7opoundsin16weeks Posts: 211 Member
    Options
    if you are unfit then yes. personally if my heart rate is below 150 i don't count it as exercise. while walking my heart rate is usually 90-100. that's too low for me to count.
  • MinimalistShoeAddict
    MinimalistShoeAddict Posts: 1,946 Member
    Options
    Hi guys!!

    Well Someday's I run for about an hour and sometimes I go for long walks generally a couple of hours! But does walking count as exercise or not? Cause generally the days I'm walking I don't run!
    Anyone??

    Thanks

    Yes! walking is exercise and is great cross training (along with swimming or cycling) when you need a break from running.
  • KevDaniel
    KevDaniel Posts: 449 Member
    Options
    technically moderate standard walking is not exercise according to most text books. It is classified as physical activity, still great for you and certainly worth doing and hear healthy.
  • CrazyTrackLady
    CrazyTrackLady Posts: 1,337 Member
    Options
    Once I got my Fitbit and started wearing it to work, I found out I've been averaging two miles on my feet every day, five days a week. Calculated over the amount of weeks I spend teaching, I average 360 miles per school year. And ever since I got the Fitbit, I've had 120 calories logged into MFP at the end of each day just by walking on my job. I'm totally counting that.
  • phjorg1
    phjorg1 Posts: 642 Member
    Options
    sandy_gee burned 857 calories doing 80 minutes of Walking Kayden with HRM

    Yes. It most definitely counts.
    Thats a higher burn than marathon runners and tour de france riders burn going full out..

    your actual calorie burn in that time is closer to 150 calories. Maybe 200ish if you were power walking.

    I don't know where you getting your information from but an 80 min casual or about 2 mph walk would burn around 400 calories whereas a 4 mph walk would be about 700ish. I also weigh over 200 lbs so I know that I get extra burn for that.
    metabolic chamber data.

    you're also forgetting the 2-3cal/min from BMR.

    So your 80min of 400 calories is actually 160 prob once you subtract your BMR data. which is about 2cal/min as I said.

    edit: actually that would still be high. 2cal would be more for the 4mph walking. Regardless, 400cal burned from exercise from a 80min 2mph walk is way too high. Simply not possible.

    Thanks for your ever so welcomed input. I however am going to continue to refer to my HRM which has all my stats inputted into it, and knows what it's dealing with. I'm also going to continue believing it's more accurate than your random stats due to the 22lbs I've lost since I started adding it to my daily activities a month and a half ago.
    I'm not sure where you got 2mph from, or how you seem to believe you know if I was walking on a flat surface or going up and down valley trails, but as I said, I'm going to stick with my HRM.
    Kthx.
    Your HRM is wrong. If you want to continue believing in the fairy tale that your calorie burns are that high, thats not my problem. I'm simply saying 16cal/min is about the upwards level of calorie burn possible by a male human all out. This is tested data. You're claiming around than that from walking. It's simply impossible. Like impossible you're burning that much.

    http://www.bicycling.co.za/race-news/tour-de-france/tour-features/eating-for-the-tour-de-france/
    "Most riders burn 600 to 900 calories an hour, says Ketchall"

    you're claiming you're exercising at a higher intensity than tour de france riders basically. so lets think about this logically. Are you really going at an intensity far higher than any human has been tested at, or do you think maybe you effed up your HRM.
  • phjorg1
    phjorg1 Posts: 642 Member
    Options
    Some of these calorie estimates are way off the mark if all you're doing is casual walking. Intense power walking perhaps but definitely wrong estimates for your casual walking speed.

    Curious where you all got your degree in superior calorie burning knowledge.
    Things like this.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respirometry

    Which can in turn be used for things like this

    http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/diet-and-fitness/scientific-method-to-weight-loss-20110722-1hryb.html

    HRM's are wildly inaccurate. Metabolic chambers are by the second accurate. So what they say is fact, is indeed fact. And I have yet to see one go higher than 16cal/min for someone doing cardio, and that was from a elite level athlete, which most everyone here is not, so their calorie burn will be far less. (not saying it can't happen, just haven't seen it yet)

    so when you sit here and try and claim similar calorie burn to elite level cardio athletes from going for a walk, well, insert whatever word you want for it. but accurate is not one of them.
  • DalekBrittany
    DalekBrittany Posts: 1,748 Member
    Options
    Funny how the experts have only been here for ten days! I wish I could learn all that infinite knowledge about strangers' calorie burns in ten days!!! :sad:

    330ci6s.gif

    2h4w45x.gif
  • beyondjupiter
    beyondjupiter Posts: 247 Member
    Options
    Funny how the experts have only been here for ten days! I wish I could learn all that infinite knowledge about strangers' calorie burns in ten days!!! :sad:

    :laugh:

    tumblr_mdvb10Ibkn1r5j928o1_400.gif
  • Mock_Turtle
    Mock_Turtle Posts: 354 Member
    Options
    I guess we're arguing about semantics, whether we call it exercise or NEAT, the bottom line is that walking burns calories which increases your TDEE.



    But I do agree that someone claiming close to 900 calories burned in 80 minutes of walking seems highly dubious unless you're doing something insane like carrying a 50 lb pack through the mountains and stopping and doing some air squats every 10 minutes.

    edit - maybe it's close if you're like 300+ lbs and pushing at least a 4mph pace .... and if you're able to pull that off then kudos
  • dtimedwards
    dtimedwards Posts: 319 Member
    Options

    But I do agree that someone claiming close to 900 calories burned in 80 minutes of walking seems highly dubious unless you're doing something insane like carrying a 50 lb pack through the mountains and stopping and doing some air squats every 10 minutes.

    edit - maybe it's close if you're like 300+ lbs and pushing at least a 4mph pace .... and if you're able to pull that off then kudos

    I actually do all of that... except for the mountain portion of your example I replaced the "air squats" with "knee or waist deep snow", and my pace for "regular" walking was closer to 3MPH, but I was also on ice so even with my YakTrax my strides were inefficient.

    and the more weight I lose, the heavier I make my pack for my hikes.
  • pinkraynedropjacki
    pinkraynedropjacki Posts: 3,027 Member
    Options
    The same amount of energy is expended (calories burned) whether you walk for run the same distance. The difference is running is a lot faster but does more damage due to the shock of falling/landing. Running is always better than sitting on the couch but it can land many of us with knees and hips that need to be replaced and even issues of incontinence, saggy skin and breasts. Walking is great...people who seem to have to walk everywhere like in Europe are generally thinner and a lot of them never 'go to the gym' or do any kind of structured exercise.


    Huh? I burn 600+ cals in 50 mins running 10km, if I walk 10km I burn about 400 cals. How is that burning the same amount? As for damage...... not if you run right. I have 2 bad knees & one slight bad hip as well as a major back injury, all I repeat ALL of my parts are better because I run rather than walk. When I run I'm ok the next day, if I walk I'm so sore it takes me 2 hours to move properly. Nothing to do with shock of falling....whatever that is. If you run the natural way you run then you cause no more injury than walking at a very fast pace.

    As for saggy boobs...hahaha serious? That's NOT due to running at all, that's just due to less fat being in the skin there than there was before. Plus a little gravity...it's all going towards the earth..... everything. Incontinence is an issue even walking seems to have trouble with, even people who don't run have trouble.


    Don't underestimate the value of running over walking, I'd run anyway & everywhere if I could. If I could with 20kg of shopping on my back & in my hands I would.
  • pinkraynedropjacki
    pinkraynedropjacki Posts: 3,027 Member
    Options
    if you are unfit then yes. personally if my heart rate is below 150 i don't count it as exercise. while walking my heart rate is usually 90-100. that's too low for me to count.

    Crap I'm in trouble. My HR stays at about 130-140 when I'm walking normal... yep normal. Yet that' not exercise. I'm hardly unfit.... quite the opposite in fact. Wow under 150 & it's not exercise? Over 150 for walking or most working out & you are kinda unfit more than I could be. Or you are just not walking fast. Average HR should get to about 120 while walking.
  • ozigal
    ozigal Posts: 173 Member
    Options
    What can i say? Umm... I lost most of my weight from walking. I think that pretty much says it all.
  • phjorg1
    phjorg1 Posts: 642 Member
    Options
    Funny how the experts have only been here for ten days! I wish I could learn all that infinite knowledge about strangers' calorie burns in ten days!!! :sad:
    Ah yes, cause obviously the truth of linked facts don't become real facts until a set number of days pass on a weight loss website..
  • phjorg1
    phjorg1 Posts: 642 Member
    Options
    What can i say? Umm... I lost most of my weight from walking. I think that pretty much says it all.
    you lost it from eating less calories than you burned...

    walking, not walking, doesn't matter. create calorie deficit and you'll see the same end result.
  • pcastagner
    pcastagner Posts: 1,606 Member
    Options
    Let's not shoot the messenger folks! It takes someone who actually cares about others to say something unpopular that is actually helpful if you listen.l

    Walking increases your tdee which means on the same food you will lose more weight.

    But heart rate monitors are not good at estimating calorie burns from low intensity activities, and as stated above it is the calorie deficit that results in weight loss, not the activities you do.

    One of the best things you can do for yourself is intense exercise, and for most of us walking simply does not qualify. You will lose weight as long as you run a calorie deficit, but to get fit you really need intense exercise. Can't run? Swim, jump rope, cycle, do circuits, whatever! Just get that heart rate up!

Categories