Walking different paces
timsconwayjr
Posts: 3 Member
When I walk at a faster pace say 18:45 minutes a mile I burn 550 calories, but when I walked 19:45 minutes a mile I burned 830. Does anyone know why?
0
Replies
-
Both the same distances which was 3.5 miles0
-
When my times are that different, it usually means I am walking flat versus hills. Is that the case?
What told you these different numbers?0 -
timsconwayjr wrote: »Both the same distances which was 3.5 miles
On relatively flat ground, calories burned walking ~= 1/3 your body weight in pounds, per mile.
So to make the numbers easy, if you weighted 300 pounds, walking 3.5 miles would burn 350 calories.1 -
How are you estimating?
They are dreadfully high estimates by way the which suggests you aren't using a suitable method or tool.
For walking the energy expended is predominantly mass X distance and pace only makes a significant difference at extremes of pace which you clearly aren't doing.2 -
If your HR is higher, your fitbit may be telling you you burned more calories. Since heat or stress can cause your HR to rise, it isn't necessarily accurate.2
-
But then what’s the point in striving for target heart rate?0
-
fit19gramma wrote: »But then what’s the point in striving for target heart rate?
Unless you are training for a specific sport, there is no point in striving for a target heart rate.5 -
fit19gramma wrote: »But then what’s the point in striving for target heart rate?
You do that so when you don't see the results the magazine promised, you buy the companion book for more money. Authors/publishers win 2x.5 -
fit19gramma wrote: »But then what’s the point in striving for target heart rate?
Striving for a certain heart rate is a cardio workout to exercise you heart for greater endurance/effectiveness. Walking without concern to heart will burn calories to help with your deficit. Covering a distance will burn a number of calories regardless of your speed. The difference between running and walking is that in running you get air borne, in walking one foot, or the other, is always on the ground. A walker doing 15 minute miles will burn less calories than a runner doing 15 minute miles. A walk of 1 mile will burn 1/3 you weight (in pounds) in calories regardless of your speed.0 -
fit19gramma wrote: »But then what’s the point in striving for target heart rate?
Greater aerobic fitness and endurance. Burning additional calories with exercise is a nice bonus, but exercise has many benefits outside of that. Your heart rate can be used as a proxy for effort by a HRM to give you some kind of estimate...but that's all it really is. And the further outside of average your HR is (either direction) the less accurate that estimate is.
For example, if someone is very unfit, their HR is most likely going to be higher than someone who exercises regularly for the same activity...but that isn't really a reliable indicator of effort...it's an indicator that the individual is untrained and thus a HRM would overestimate energy expenditure. When I first started out years ago, I would go on a walk and my HR would get to between 120-130 BPM...I can walk the same route and distance now and my HR won't go above 90 or so...but I'm burning the same number of calories give or take. I cycle a lot now and my HR hovers around 135 BPM on a ride with an average speed of around 18 MPH...seven years ago I would have felt like my heart was going to explode out of my chest.2 -
fit19gramma wrote: »But then what’s the point in striving for target heart rate?
They're right about the training effects (and the lack of calorie insight involved in heart rate: only endurance athletes need to care about the "fat burning zone"**, pretty much.)
But the right answer to "why strive for a target heart rate" IMO is still "for fun".
** Because if you're in a calorie deficit, the deficit will be made up, mostly from fat, sooner or later. It doesn't matter much what fuel mix (carbs, fats) you're burning during the exercise, from a weight management perspective. It only matters (materially) how many calories you consume, and how many you burn, overall. Heck, we burn fat when we're asleep, doing nothing at all.1 -
Thank you for all the comments! I've been walking in sweats and it's hot out. & I've been getting the calories burned counted by an under armour app to answer a few questions. Was kinda thinking the app might be on the fritz. I'm also way out of shape0
-
A lot of apps "vanity size" calories.4
-
All that walking in sweats will do is make you sweat more. Then when you go home and drink water you will regain the water you sweat out. You don't lose more fat. It's a very very temporary weight loss.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions