Does running add a significant amount of calories?
Options
BootsDBA
Posts: 11 Member
I started C25k and I'm on week 3. So I'm not running a lot, just like 9 minutes of running total 3 days of the week. Not much, but my Fitbit has basically no difference between C25k days and normal days. All days I get at least 10k steps which include the running, and all days average the same amount of steps pretty much, which is why I thought there might be a small difference on running days.
So my question is, this is pretty accurate, right? I shouldn't see more of a burn anyway because A) it's not that much running and B ) I probably don't burn that much more at my painfully slow (3.7mph) jog than I do walking, right?
So my question is, this is pretty accurate, right? I shouldn't see more of a burn anyway because A) it's not that much running and B ) I probably don't burn that much more at my painfully slow (3.7mph) jog than I do walking, right?
0
Replies
-
Way I see it, walking and running a mile burn the same amount of Cal. However, walking that mile takes 1 hour and running it takes 20 min. So 10000 steps, whether you walk or run those 10000 steps, will always burn the same amount, one way is just faster.0
-
Depends on how much mass you are moving, at what pace, and for how long.
Use the Gross option for total calories during the time for comparison to anything else, use Net option on MFP for logging and eat back as to what you burned above resting calorie burn.
Compare walking and jogging. For the workout - just average the whole thing and that'll be close enough.
http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/WalkRunMETs.html
What the Fitbit is likely showing you is that when you do the workout, you are taking time away from something that was already decently active - so not a great addition of steps/calories.
Or you are more sedentary after the workout and totally balance out the calorie burn.
But exercise is for heart health and body improvements.
Diet is for weight loss.
Though the exercise can make you burn more daily, and therefore the diet might be high enough in calories that you'll adhere better, and make those body improvements.0 -
Thank you both! I think I was wishfully thinking because I felt like working harder that 30min deserved more food, but I'm glad I asked because clearly it doesn't, haha.0
-
Way I see it, walking and running a mile burn the same amount of Cal. However, walking that mile takes 1 hour and running it takes 20 min. So 10000 steps, whether you walk or run those 10000 steps, will always burn the same amount, one way is just faster.
That's incorrect, you burn more the faster you move. Energy equals mass times velocity squared.
0 -
Way I see it, walking and running a mile burn the same amount of Cal. However, walking that mile takes 1 hour and running it takes 20 min. So 10000 steps, whether you walk or run those 10000 steps, will always burn the same amount, one way is just faster.
Quick example, using me and mfp:
I walk for 30 minutes, I burn 141 calories
I run for 30 minutes, I burn 381 calories
Running is awesome for calorie burning. It's also awesome for increasing hunger past the point of compensating those calories, so strict logging is even more important.0 -
Thank you both! I think I was wishfully thinking because I felt like working harder that 30min deserved more food, but I'm glad I asked because clearly it doesn't, haha.
It doesn't much, but if you keep going and get to the point where you can run easily, you'll be able to do more and burn loads of calories. Running burns loads of calories when you get fit enough to do plenty of it (and it will eventually feel like less effort too
) 0 -
-
Way I see it, walking and running a mile burn the same amount of Cal. However, walking that mile takes 1 hour and running it takes 20 min. So 10000 steps, whether you walk or run those 10000 steps, will always burn the same amount, one way is just faster.
Sorry, no. Walking a mile burns about half of running per mile*.
It has to do with gait. Running is a series of one-legged hops with periods of having no foot on the ground. Walking is a smooth transition from one foot to the other, no hops. The hops make all the difference (energy to push to leave the ground, energy to land).
*Exception for speed-walking. Walking is inefficient at high speeds. It is equal in calorie burn to running for the same distance once you reach 12:30 min/mi and will burn more than running per mile at faster speeds.0 -
My understanding is that running is about the most efficient method for burning calories, short of cross-country skiing.0
-
Way I see it, walking and running a mile burn the same amount of Cal. However, walking that mile takes 1 hour and running it takes 20 min. So 10000 steps, whether you walk or run those 10000 steps, will always burn the same amount, one way is just faster.
Wrong, walking burns less than half the calories that running does (30 cal per mile per 100lbs of body weight vs 63 cal per mile per 100lbs of body weight) unless you're race walking at more than 5mph.0 -
The last I knew, you had to have an increased activity level for 10 min straight to get extra credit in Fitbit. Since c25k breaks up the intense periods, you won't see the increased cals for awhile. Good work on the running! I'm starting c25k as soon as I ditch this nasty cold!0
-
I doesn't burn as much as you think it might - my weekly parkrun of 5km (3 miles) which I can do in under 30 mins, burns around 300 cal.0
-
Thank you both! I think I was wishfully thinking because I felt like working harder that 30min deserved more food, but I'm glad I asked because clearly it doesn't, haha.
It doesn't much, but if you keep going and get to the point where you can run easily, you'll be able to do more and burn loads of calories. Running burns loads of calories when you get fit enough to do plenty of it (and it will eventually feel like less effort too )
I think this is the most helpful response. Yes running burns more, but the difference isn't staggering. If you can walk for an hour but run only for a half hour, you're burning about the same. The good burn from running comes when you can do a lot of it. Keep at it!0 -
Way I see it, walking and running a mile burn the same amount of Cal. However, walking that mile takes 1 hour and running it takes 20 min. So 10000 steps, whether you walk or run those 10000 steps, will always burn the same amount, one way is just faster.
Quick example, using me and mfp:
I walk for 30 minutes, I burn 141 calories
I run for 30 minutes, I burn 381 calories
Running is awesome for calorie burning. It's also awesome for increasing hunger past the point of compensating those calories, so strict logging is even more important.
Even with this example though, "running" is relative to the person. 3.7 MPH is what I would consider a walk, but if OP puts it in as running it may be overstating the burn.
Totally agree that running makes me WAY more hungry.0 -
I'mWay I see it, walking and running a mile burn the same amount of Cal. However, walking that mile takes 1 hour and running it takes 20 min. So 10000 steps, whether you walk or run those 10000 steps, will always burn the same amount, one way is just faster.
Sorry, no. Walking a mile burns about half of running per mile*.
It has to do with gait. Running is a series of one-legged hops with periods of having no foot on the ground. Walking is a smooth transition from one foot to the other, no hops. The hops make all the difference (energy to push to leave the ground, energy to land).
*Exception for speed-walking. Walking is inefficient at high speeds. It is equal in calorie burn to running for the same distance once you reach 12:30 min/mi and will burn more than running per mile at faster speeds.
Hi
I have a question. I've been running my 5k at a certain speed for a couple of years, and my race pace is 600cals per hour.
I'm easing back in from injury and wondering if I burn the same amount of calories on a 21 minute 5k as I do on a 27minute one?
The hopping thing is interesting. I always wondered if walking the same distance burned the same calories. I had walking down at 200 cals an hour, not taking any risks to overestimate.
0 -
Springfield1970 wrote: »I'mWay I see it, walking and running a mile burn the same amount of Cal. However, walking that mile takes 1 hour and running it takes 20 min. So 10000 steps, whether you walk or run those 10000 steps, will always burn the same amount, one way is just faster.
Sorry, no. Walking a mile burns about half of running per mile*.
It has to do with gait. Running is a series of one-legged hops with periods of having no foot on the ground. Walking is a smooth transition from one foot to the other, no hops. The hops make all the difference (energy to push to leave the ground, energy to land).
*Exception for speed-walking. Walking is inefficient at high speeds. It is equal in calorie burn to running for the same distance once you reach 12:30 min/mi and will burn more than running per mile at faster speeds.
Hi
I have a question. I've been running my 5k at a certain speed for a couple of years, and my race pace is 600cals per hour.
I'm easing back in from injury and wondering if I burn the same amount of calories on a 21 minute 5k as I do on a 27minute one?
The hopping thing is interesting. I always wondered if walking the same distance burned the same calories. I had walking down at 200 cals an hour, not taking any risks to overestimate.
The difference is probably so small that it isn't worth noting or caring about.0 -
Springfield1970 wrote: »I'mWay I see it, walking and running a mile burn the same amount of Cal. However, walking that mile takes 1 hour and running it takes 20 min. So 10000 steps, whether you walk or run those 10000 steps, will always burn the same amount, one way is just faster.
Sorry, no. Walking a mile burns about half of running per mile*.
It has to do with gait. Running is a series of one-legged hops with periods of having no foot on the ground. Walking is a smooth transition from one foot to the other, no hops. The hops make all the difference (energy to push to leave the ground, energy to land).
*Exception for speed-walking. Walking is inefficient at high speeds. It is equal in calorie burn to running for the same distance once you reach 12:30 min/mi and will burn more than running per mile at faster speeds.
Hi
I have a question. I've been running my 5k at a certain speed for a couple of years, and my race pace is 600cals per hour.
I'm easing back in from injury and wondering if I burn the same amount of calories on a 21 minute 5k as I do on a 27minute one?
The hopping thing is interesting. I always wondered if walking the same distance burned the same calories. I had walking down at 200 cals an hour, not taking any risks to overestimate.
Generally, you do tend to burn the same amount no matter how fast your run, assuming you are running aerobically. However, if you're running anaerobically (an all-out sprint), it takes far more glucose to produce the same amount of ATP, so you would be burning more, but the question is...how much?
A study of men running 3k races showed that they were about 14% anaerobic, but women were only 6% anaerobic. for so you can increase your cal burn by about that much...but it doesn't make that much of a difference.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/161949760 -
I started C25k and I'm on week 3. So I'm not running a lot, just like 9 minutes of running total 3 days of the week. Not much, but my Fitbit has basically no difference between C25k days and normal days. All days I get at least 10k steps which include the running, and all days average the same amount of steps pretty much, which is why I thought there might be a small difference on running days.
So my question is, this is pretty accurate, right? I shouldn't see more of a burn anyway because A) it's not that much running and B ) I probably don't burn that much more at my painfully slow (3.7mph) jog than I do walking, right?
If you're in week 3, I think you'll get to really start seeing the differences in in weeks 4 and 5 when you start to have 5 and 8 minute running intervals. You'll feel it !!!0 -
Everyone already answered but I WISH. I run 3 miles about 3x a week, and I don't get to eat nearly as much as I feel like I deserve from it.
0 -
Way I see it, walking and running a mile burn the same amount of Cal. However, walking that mile takes 1 hour and running it takes 20 min. So 10000 steps, whether you walk or run those 10000 steps, will always burn the same amount, one way is just faster.
Sorry, no. Walking a mile burns about half of running per mile*.
It has to do with gait. Running is a series of one-legged hops with periods of having no foot on the ground. Walking is a smooth transition from one foot to the other, no hops. The hops make all the difference (energy to push to leave the ground, energy to land).
*Exception for speed-walking. Walking is inefficient at high speeds. It is equal in calorie burn to running for the same distance once you reach 12:30 min/mi and will burn more than running per mile at faster speeds.
I need to take up speed walking then...0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 925 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions