Does running give you quicker weight loss?

Givemewings
Givemewings Posts: 864 Member
edited September 2024 in Fitness and Exercise
Just interested to know whether I should try the C25K running program. Not at all a runner but if it means the lbs will come off more quickly.....Anybody any first hand experience?
«1

Replies

  • Atlantique
    Atlantique Posts: 2,484 Member
    Running isn't necessarily better than any other cardio exercise in terms of losing weight. Its advantages are that it's inexpensive (you only need a good pair of shoes every 6 months or so), you can do it absolutely anywhere or any time, and that it's a normal daily activity for your body.
  • jeff261159
    jeff261159 Posts: 385
    Any cardio workout , including running, will promote fat burn. The amount and speed of fat burn will ddepend on your your heart rate at rest, compared to your heart rate at work. The optimum is said to be around +125% , ie my HR at rest is 60, my optimum HR for fat burn is 135.

    Hope this helps
  • JennieAL
    JennieAL Posts: 1,726 Member
    Genetically... running only makes sense in shorter intervals. We weren't built on running marathons.
  • Elleinnz
    Elleinnz Posts: 1,661 Member
    Even if you dont lose the weight faster it will mean that you will be fitter - so a win / win - weigh less - and be fit as well!!
  • TheGoktor
    TheGoktor Posts: 1,138 Member
    I've just finished Week 6 of C25K, and it certainly hasn't speeded up my weight loss....but it has made me much fitter and helped me burn fat. :bigsmile:

    My thigh muscles are more defined now (although there is still an amount of fat there), and I have lost 29.5" all over. I don't think I'd have lost so many inches without the running! However, in terms of actual pounds lost, I'm still averaging about 1lb a week, which is fine. In terms of other benefits though (fitness, fewer headaches, better skin, more toned body etc.), running has been an absolute boon to me.

    And of course, there's the sense of achievement because believe me, when I first started this, I struggled to run for 60 seconds. In fact, it was zombie shambling! Now I am running 25 minutes non-stop and not being out of breath!

    It's also given me new goals - I want to run the London Marathon in two years....just before my 50th birthday, but before then I want to run charity 5Ks, 10Ks, and half-marathons. I cannot imagine not running now - it's really become part of my life!

    I really hope that if you do do it, you love it as much as I do! Do make sure you get fitted for proper running shoes though, or else you risk injury. Good running stores will do this for free for you.
  • BerryH
    BerryH Posts: 4,698 Member
    Genetically... running only makes sense in shorter intervals. We weren't built on running marathons.
    Some schools of thought think the opposite - that we were built to jog slowly for hours - if not days - at a time. In "Survival of the Fittest" by Arctic explorer Mike Stroud, he argues that our ancestors would have chased down big prey - like the mammoth - over the course of days, gradually slowing it down with spear injuries until eventually they could kill it then drag the meat home, again over the course of days.
  • lisab42
    lisab42 Posts: 98 Member
    Running is great for weight loss and I highly recommend it. But remember the goal is long term. Your workout should be something you enjoy not dread. That way you're sure to stick with it. Don't want those lost pounds finding their way back. Do what you enjoy for cardio.
  • Garae
    Garae Posts: 116 Member
    I see faster results when I switch up my cardio-
    one day i'll do 45 min of the elliptical and another day i'll do 30 min running and 30 min elliptical.
  • BerryH
    BerryH Posts: 4,698 Member
    Echoing what Goktor said, any cardio will only work for you if that's what you enjoy. If you don't like running, you won't do it and it won't work for you! Find something you can do easily, readily and regularly, with as few barriers to do it - complicated equipment, needing a friend to be free, for instance - as possible. On top of that, shake it up by adding resistance training and other cardio whenever you feel like it. No only will it stave off boredom, it will also reward your body by challenging it in new ways.
  • Schwiggity
    Schwiggity Posts: 1,449 Member
    Genetically... running only makes sense in shorter intervals. We weren't built on running marathons.

    From my understanding being bipedal actually makes us more advantageous in running endurance as opposed to the speed of quadrupeds.
  • koosdel
    koosdel Posts: 3,317 Member
    Ann Trason, Scott Jurek, Matt Carpenter. These are the megastars of ultra-distance running, athletes who pound out not just marathons, but dozens of them back-to-back, over Rocky Mountain passes and across the scorching floor of Death Valley. If their names are unfamiliar, it’s probably because this type of extreme running is almost universally seen as a fringe sport, the habit of the superhumanly fit, the masochistic, the slightly deranged.
    But a handful of scientists think that these ultra-marathoners are using their bodies just as our hominid forbears once did, a theory known as the endurance running hypothesis (ER). ER proponents believe that being able to run for extended lengths of time is an adapted trait, most likely for obtaining food, and was the catalyst that forced Homo erectus to evolve from its apelike ancestors. Over time, the survival of the swift-footed shaped the anatomy of modern humans, giving us a body that is difficult to explain absent a marathoning past.
    Our toes, for instance, are shorter and stubbier than those of nearly all other primates, including chimpanzees, a trait that has long been attributed to our committed bipedalism. But a study published in the March 1 issue of the Journal of Experimental Biology, by anthropologists Daniel Lieberman and Campbell Rolian, provides evidence that short toes make human feet exquisitely suited to substantial amounts of running. In tests where 15 subjects ran and walked on pressure-sensitive treadmills, Lieberman and Rolian found that toe length had no effect on walking. Yet when the subjects were running, an increase in toe length of just 20 percent doubled the amount of mechanical work, meaning that the longer-toed subjects required more metabolic energy, and each footfall produced more shock.
    “If you have very long toes, the moment of force acting on the foot’s metatarsal phalangeal joint becomes problematic when running,” explains Lieberman. Our hominid ancestors, Australopithecus, of which Lucy is the most famous specimen, had significantly longer toes than humans. “Lucy could have walked just fine with her long toes,” says Lieberman. “But if she wanted to run a marathon, or even a half-marathon, she’d have had trouble.”
    The March study is the first attempt to assess the ER hypothesis using an experimental approach, but the idea that humans have a marathoning past first surfaced more than two decades ago, when David Carrier, a runner and grad student in the lab of evolutionary biologist Dennis Bramble, convinced his mentor that running ability might explain a number of unique human features. Over the years, Bramble’s team at the University of Utah and Lieberman’s team at Harvard have amassed a small ream of physiological and morphological evidence that they believe points to a distance-running legacy. In 2004 the groups copublished a list of 26 such markers on the human body, including short toes, a hefty gluteus maximus and Achilles tendon, springy tendon-loaded legs, and the little-known nuchal ligament that stabilizes the head when it’s in rapid motion.
    The paper earned the cover of Nature and generated quite a stir within bio/anthro circles. But it did nothing to answer a fundamental question: What good would endurance running have been to primitive man? On an evolutionary battleground — where the struggle is to eat or be eaten — speed, and not endurance, should be the prized trait. If a tiger in high gear could outpace Homo erectus within 10 seconds and a deer in 20, being able to run at a modest pace for hours at a time does not seem like an evolutionary advantage.
    shoothead via Flickr
    Christopher McDougall came up against this very conundrum in his spirited book Born to Run (Knopf, May 2009). McDougall, neither anthropologist nor biologist, is a journalist originally given an assignment for Runner’s World that morphed into a consuming fascination with feats of high mileage, particularly with that of the Mexican Tarahumara Indians, reclusive canyon dwellers reputed to be the best endurance athletes on earth. Wearing shoes fashioned from tire strips to cushion their feet, the Tarahumara cover up to 400 miles in festive, multiday events drawing runners and spectators from multiple villages. They are also the picture of health, enjoying almost total immunity to cancer and the diseases that plague modern society. For McDougall, the Tarahumara seem to confirm what Lieberman has been arguing all along, that humans are built for running. To find out why, McDougall inevitably found his way to the Harvard researcher, who shared with him an intriguing theory.
    We know that roughly 2 million years ago, Australopithecus, with its tiny brain, hefty jaw and diet of rough, fibrous plants, evolved into Homo erectus, our slim, long-legged ancestor with a big brain and small teeth suited for tearing into animal and fruit flesh. Such a transformation almost certainly involved a reliable supply of calorie-laden meat, yet according to the fossil record, spear points have been in use for 200,000 years at most, and the bow and arrow for only 50,000 years, leaving an enormous stretch of time when early humans were consuming meat without the use of tools. Lieberman believes they ran their prey to death, often called “persistence hunting.”



    http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/the_running_man_revisited/
  • JennieAL
    JennieAL Posts: 1,726 Member
    Genetically... running only makes sense in shorter intervals. We weren't built on running marathons.

    From my understanding being bipedal actually makes us more advantageous in running endurance as opposed to the speed of quadrupeds.

    And please explain, shwig. It's known that wild cats run way faster than biped humans.
  • JennieAL
    JennieAL Posts: 1,726 Member
    endurance? ok. i still wouldnt sign up for a race with a lion.
  • JennieAL
    JennieAL Posts: 1,726 Member
    Genetically... running only makes sense in shorter intervals. We weren't built on running marathons.
    Some schools of thought think the opposite - that we were built to jog slowly for hours - if not days - at a time. In "Survival of the Fittest" by Arctic explorer Mike Stroud, he argues that our ancestors would have chased down big prey - like the mammoth - over the course of days, gradually slowing it down with spear injuries until eventually they could kill it then drag the meat home, again over the course of days.

    Grok didn't run for days.. and if he did his family died out. Grok ran short intense runs and he trudged along diligently. He did so because it fed him and his family.
  • Fattack
    Fattack Posts: 666 Member
    i still wouldnt sign up for a race with a lion.

    QFT.
  • coming from someone who started that program and made it through a half a week - if you dont like running, you won't stick with it. i LOATHE running but i LOVE the cardio machines at the gym...its all relative. the pounds will only come off if you stick with exercise you enjoy.
  • JennieAL
    JennieAL Posts: 1,726 Member
    what's QFT?? :)
  • JennieAL
    JennieAL Posts: 1,726 Member
    It must be Quality ****ing Trauma...
  • Fattack
    Fattack Posts: 666 Member
    what's QFT?? :)

    Quoted for truth!
  • I don't think it necessarily makes you lose weight faster but it really helped me because I immediately fell in love with it and wanted to keep doing it. Everytime I run a marathon, I swear I will never do another one. I've done three and the day after my 3rd one last weekend I already picked out my 4th! :smile:
  • JennieAL
    JennieAL Posts: 1,726 Member
    I Love QFT now :) I'm going to keep doing it!
  • mir7x
    mir7x Posts: 11
    Hi,
    it would give you a little bit quicker fat loss if you do fasted cardio ie first thing in the morning before breakfast, gentle jogging at about 50%, max 60-70% of your maximum heart rate, which is normally quite slow, for about 20-30 minutes, ideally you would take a bcaa supplement to help burn fat, that's what athletes and bodybuilders do for fat loss and it's a great way to start your day.
    marc
  • mynameisnutz
    mynameisnutz Posts: 123
    Genetically... running only makes sense in shorter intervals. We weren't built on running marathons.

    You should read Born To Run by Chris McDougal. Humans are in fact the only animal that can run long distances. How do you think hunter/gatherers hunted before they invented tools and weapons?
  • runlorirun
    runlorirun Posts: 389
    Genetically... running only makes sense in shorter intervals. We weren't built on running marathons.

    Don't tell the Kenyans, oh, wait maybe we should then then other countries could win a race or two....
  • yanicka
    yanicka Posts: 1,004 Member
    It didn't make me lose faster but it really helped my legs, I never liked my legs, think of 2 cylinders on top of each others.... not sexy. With running, they are getting better and better, I even wear skirts or dress now.
  • JennieAL
    JennieAL Posts: 1,726 Member
    i'm grateful for your op.
  • mom23nuts
    mom23nuts Posts: 636 Member
    I was told that if you mix anything cardio up with shorter bursts of intensity it will get your heart rate up there and you will see some good results.

    So if you walk at 4 mph for 4 minutes then do 30sec to 1 min at 5mph or 5.5 and then go back to a walk for 4 min again. Or if you do the bike for 30 min do 10 minutes of that spaced out and in smaller chunks of time with all out speed and effort.

    I think the trainer at my gym said that getting your heart rate up there for a bit before going back to target heart rate gets things moving on any acitivity you do.
  • JennieAL
    JennieAL Posts: 1,726 Member
    best physical report i've heard yet!
  • kumarprabhat
    kumarprabhat Posts: 116
    I've just finished Week 6 of C25K, and it certainly hasn't speeded up my weight loss....but it has made me much fitter and helped me burn fat. :bigsmile:

    My thigh muscles are more defined now (although there is still an amount of fat there), and I have lost 29.5" all over. I don't think I'd have lost so many inches without the running! However, in terms of actual pounds lost, I'm still averaging about 1lb a week, which is fine. In terms of other benefits though (fitness, fewer headaches, better skin, more toned body etc.), running has been an absolute boon to me.

    And of course, there's the sense of achievement because believe me, when I first started this, I struggled to run for 60 seconds. In fact, it was zombie shambling! Now I am running 25 minutes non-stop and not being out of breath!

    It's also given me new goals - I want to run the London Marathon in two years....just before my 50th birthday, but before then I want to run charity 5Ks, 10Ks, and half-marathons. I cannot imagine not running now - it's really become part of my life!

    I really hope that if you do do it, you love it as much as I do! Do make sure you get fitted for proper running shoes though, or else you risk injury. Good running stores will do this for free for you.

    Exactly my experience...and I am cool with it...I am going for long term permanent fitness with balanced lifestyle rather than a short term loss which will come back.
This discussion has been closed.