Is walking a legitimate exercise?

Alright, so here's one with walking included. It still shows a pretty linear correlation.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4005766/

The big article in your first linked post also mentions a linear correlation in moderately intense exercise - I agree that it only works for steady-state cardio and not day to day living. The debate is whether walking can count as steady-state cardio for some of us (me). From what my HRM tells me, it absolutely is just as much as hopping on an exercise bike. I breathe hard, I sweat, and my pulse sits in the 150s at 4.0mph rate. To be fair, since this specifically came up with regards to an at-home video, it's light aerobics thrown in with a brisk walking pace. I have to read that whole thing before I respond to it in detail, along with the other ones (if they include additional research) and I'll ask/debate points about them when I do that. Thanks for passing them along.

My original post way back when also stated that I think the benefits will diminish without increasing the effort in some way over time, so we agree there too.

It can indeed if you've gotten over the initial starting exercise hump, where anyone's HR is going to be very elevated for the level of effort, and in 4 weeks could do the exact same workout same weight and HR would be a lot lower.

For me, walking level or slight incline 4 mph is barely touching what is considered the HR-Flex point of change from below exercise to exercise - which studies have found to be about 90 bpm.
That's the point below which HR supplying enough oxygen is way off what is needed. So the formula for say a HRM is invalid for correlating HR with calorie burn below that point. Above that point to your anaerobic line is about a straight line function for calorie burn and HR.

If you have HRM and treadmill access - you can actually come up with your best personal calorie burn formula based on current fitness level.
And then see how it changes. Based on those studies that showed the walking calc is within 4% of lab tested.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/heybales/view/getting-your-personalized-calorie-burn-formula-663625

So the ACSM calculator actually gives me the same number that my HRM did. 30 minutes, 4.0 mph, flat grade, 170 lbs = 190 calories. Do you think that's just a fluke of numbers....? I haven't tried the other methods yet.... I just thought it was interesting that it gave the exact same number there. Wonder if we're quibbling about six of one / half a dozen of another.

I'll have to test the HRM again in six weeks or so and see if there's suddenly a discrepancy. For (personal) science.

ETA: Also, for what it's worth, I don't use a Polar app/watch. I have a Polar HRM, but I use it with Digifit on my phone because it has greater customization/calibration potential and more data. I like data. I don't actually know how they calculate calories from the HR data, specifically. They might do something completely different than what Polar does, and they might very well just use a formula like the ACSM one for slower speeds anyway. I should look into that.

So the ACSM calculator actually gives me the same number that my HRM did. 30 minutes, 4.0 mph, flat grade, 170 lbs = 190 calories. Do you think that's just a fluke of numbers....? I haven't tried the other methods yet.... I just thought it was interesting that it gave the exact same number there. Wonder if we're quibbling about six of one / half a dozen of another.

I'll have to test the HRM again in six weeks or so and see if there's suddenly a discrepancy. For (personal) science.

ETA: Also, for what it's worth, I don't use a Polar app/watch. I have a Polar HRM, but I use it with Digifit on my phone because it has greater customization/calibration potential and more data. I like data. I don't actually know how they calculate calories from the HR data, specifically. They might do something completely different than what Polar does, and they might very well just use a formula like the ACSM one for slower speeds anyway. I should look into that.

Digifit is like the expensive Polar, so not surprised. Well, perhaps that it's so exact, that's pretty good. I recently looked at a hilly run for an hour, and using correct grade, it was within 15 cal between the two.

But like Garmin, they may indeed take the actual walk/run speed as part of the factor to make it more accurate.

If smart, they work backwards a known walk stats and come up with a VO2max, much like that personal calorie burn formula does. I just didn't get in to attempting to figure VO2 from the data - but you can, pretty well too.

But I know they have VO2max, and I believe self-test for it too.

Also, you indicate you've been doing this for awhile, not like the posting above that I think started this side topic - someone started walking and was up around 170 for a not fast speed.

Excellent point the walking haters miss

The hate seems to be for the "Walking has little exercise benefit to me" group.

And that is because many in that group (not you in particular, you see the difference) have denigrated walking as exercise. Just because it is not an efficient form of exercise for you (the generic "you") doesn't mean that it is not good exercise and walkers get a bit testy when they are told by people with a superior attitude that they are not doing enough or a "legitimate" exercise.

http://gubernatrix.co.uk/2010/09/benefits-of-walking/

http://longevity.about.com/od/lifelongfitness/a/walking-aging.htm

http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/fitness/weight-loss/understanding-weight-loss-how-to-lose-20-pounds-by-walking.html#b


http://www.fitnessmagazine.com/workout/cardio/walking/lose-weight-walking/

I would say walking has numerous benefits. It's easy on your joints, it's aerobic, it helps with the anti aging process and its free. I have lost (and sadly, regained and lost again) lots of weight through walking...the key is to progress your pace (you want to progress to a 14 minute mile...I'm at between 18-20 minutes because I get shin splints easily) as you continue to walk. However, walking burns the same calories as jogging...it just takes longer. You can burn the same amount of calories for an hour walk at a brisk pace as you can at a half hour jog, and it's easier on your knees. ANY activity is preferable to none, and exercise, technically, is any extra activity that requires physical effort carried out to sustain or improve health and fitness.

Don't let anyone put you down for your efforts. Every little bit adds up, whether its calories in or calories out. For those who tell you that it isn't exercise, assume that means it isn't exercise for THEM. You do what works for YOU and let the naysayers do their own thing. When you hit goal and people ask you how, you can tell them that you ate well and walked...the proof is in the non fat skim milk no sugar pudding!

If it burns calories I count it as exercise....just like yard work, sex, water gun fights....granted it doesn't burn as many calories as jogging/running, or doing cardio, but people gotta do what they can do...gotta start somewhere!

So, because I'm a giant nerd, I have honestly been searching for any evidence to support this claim you've made of HR/calorie burn not being correlated. I can't find any.... but I did find this.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15966347

"Based on these results, we conclude that it is possible to estimate physical activity energy expenditure from heart rate in a group of individuals with a great deal of accuracy, after adjusting for age, gender, body mass and fitness."

r=0.857 without VO2 max accounted for
r=0.913 with VO2 max accounted for

That's some pretty strong correlation.

Wish there was a like button!
I think ANYTHING that gets you up and moving, especially outside in the fresh air, is good for you. It may not however, be the caloric burn or provide the results you are looking for. I walked for many years, miles everyday, and lost very little. When I started running I started slowly, walk a few blocks run a block and increased the running amount over time. Then I started losing weight. But - my heart rate is normally very low and I needed to elevate it to begin to lose. Not my conjecture but what my doctor recommended.
Note I hated running before I started and wondered if I could ever keep it up. Now 3 years later I run 5 days a week and go on a really long walk with a friend and our dogs one day a week.

I'm aiming for 75,000 steps today. That is an average of 5555 steps per hour in the time frame I want it. 12 hours I have to do just over 62,000 steps.


I would say that is legit exercise. No treadmill so I am using my own body for this. Whoever said walking is not legit never saw this 59kg (129lb) 5'4" woman going full pelt to this goal. It's Winter, it's cold inside & I am dripping with sweat.


Meh... not exercise huh? Tell that to my thighs, my *kitten* & my feet. Tell that to my core that's lifting the legs. Tell that to my pedometer that is going WTF woman slow down before you pass out.

I walked over 53km yesterday, 65500 steps in 11 hours. Nah not exercise at all. I stopped at 65k cause my stomach was aching kinda badly and that was the only thing that stopped me. Totally not exercise at all. I walked more than a marathon in 11 hours the whole time with sweat dripping from me. Sweat is no indication of a workout I know that cause I sweat in my sleep, but it was kinda freezing outside & I did not have the heater on in the house at all.... so I was kinda going for it. Totally not exercise.

My *kitten* feels like it's been doing squats for 24 hours, my legs are impressively not sore at all...my body feels great, even my core knows I got it working as well. Totally not exercise though. I just beat my own personal record of 60k in less time than it took me a year ago.

But it's totally not exercise........ to some. To those who could not do it. To those who would do ONE workout a day or every 2nd day and then nothing more.

I do this daily. I do half this every single day, when sick, when injured & without a rest day. For fun, for the ability to move & because it IS exercise. Would you rather people sit on the couch so YOU can feel better about it?

IMO walking is perfectly fine for exercise. It burns calories so obviously will help you to lose weight and it benefits your health in many ways. It's good for the mind too which is so important. I would pair it with strength training though!

Not everyone can do strength training. Not everyone can do what walkers do.

Walked for 4 hours today. Definitely got a workout.