is walking fast just as effective as jogging

Destiny424
Destiny424 Posts: 52 Member
edited November 11 in Fitness and Exercise
running and jogging has increased my thighs by half an inch.. i hate it! i want to slim them down.. and my profile picture is me 3 months ago, not now.. which i am trying to get back too.. has walking fast been effective for anyone to lose weight

Replies

  • seekingstrengthX2
    seekingstrengthX2 Posts: 771
    I would say not... your heart rate doesn't get nearly as high which means you won't be burning as many calories. Can you do something else? Elliptical, bike, zumba, etc.?
  • carlypreiss
    carlypreiss Posts: 91
    I find it super hard to believe that running has made your thighs BIGGER. I always see runners with little insect legs?
  • rugbyphreak
    rugbyphreak Posts: 509 Member
    walking, jogging, or running, a mile is a mile. you only burn a few more calories running than you do walking. that being said, each of those work different muscles, so you need to learn what works for you.
  • seekingstrengthX2
    seekingstrengthX2 Posts: 771
    That's absolutely not true. A person who RUNS 5 miles and a person who WALKS 5 miles will burn a drastically different amount of calories.
  • tataliciousd89
    tataliciousd89 Posts: 465
    I burn about 250 (with a 50 lb back pack on) walking for about 30 minutes at 4 mph. At night when I run I burn about 250 in 20 min obviously without the extra 50 lbs on my back, but I'm a very slow runner and just starting out so that probably doesn't mean much.
  • b0t23
    b0t23 Posts: 260 Member
    if you are only jogging or walking for a short distance then it is about the same.

    once you get up to about 20 minutes, there is a huge difference in calories burned.

    but, you should be able to walk fast for longer than you can jog so I would just set up a goal on calories burned and go for that.
  • AmyRhubarb
    AmyRhubarb Posts: 6,890 Member
    They definitely work different muscles (walking vs running), but I'm a very fast walker and can get and keep my heart rate up in the 140s with a brisk walk. So if you move fast enough it will still be beneficial, especially if you are combining it with some other form of cardio or strength training at home or at the gym.
  • Huffdogg
    Huffdogg Posts: 1,934 Member
    for burning fat...yes.
  • timhart84
    timhart84 Posts: 1 Member
    As a 27 year runner, if I ran shorter distances (average 3 or less miles per outing) at a faster clip my thigh muscle size increased. At higher mileage and lower pace, less so. Over the past year walking 35 to 40 miles per week at 4.5 miles per hour has taken a couple of inches off each thigh. I personally believe that is you lose weight without excessive resistance training you will keep the same shape, just less of it.
  • Shellitz
    Shellitz Posts: 188
    ABSOLUTELY. I have a track around my house that I can do in 40 mins if I jog and walk, and around 60 mins if I just briskly walk (around 140 average bpm) and I burn near enough to the same cals, measured with my HRM. Same on the treadmill, I always go for a distance goal rather than a time goal and I get a similar calorie burn.

    Generall speaking, I choose to run over walk if I am short on time. And given that the injury risk is lower for walking than for running, it is just as effective in the long run (given recovery time requirements etc).

    I AM NOT ANTI RUNNING - these are just my observations of my own activites measured with my HRM.
  • NicoWoodruff
    NicoWoodruff Posts: 369 Member
    Yes! You just have to do a bit more of it time-wise.
  • raleighgoodwins
    raleighgoodwins Posts: 68 Member
    I think you would burn more calories jogging than running. But you could find out by putting both into the exercise tracking thing here on MFP and see the difference in the number of calories burned.
  • hexrei
    hexrei Posts: 163
    You have to walk pretty fast to make it anwhere near the same level of efficiency. However, I've read that because of the differences in the two motions, a really fast walk (I'd have to google for the actual speeds in MPH) can be a better burner than a slow run.
  • hexrei
    hexrei Posts: 163
    However, I prefer to run, myself.
  • SusanMcAvoy
    SusanMcAvoy Posts: 445 Member
    I do Leslie Sansone Walking DVD's and have lost almost 47 pounds. I burn a lot of calories with Leslie.
  • lauehorn
    lauehorn Posts: 183
    Start strength or resistance training. That will tone the muscles, cut any extra fat and ensure that you are as lean as your body can be. Also, make sure your goals are realistic. Running burns more calories in less time than walking, so burn for burn, it comes down to time. Running doesn't make your legs bigger than walking. It's likely that your muscles are retaining water in response to a tough workout, but your body will shed that - it's cyclical. This is how your body repairs itself and isn't a reason to give up exercise that gets your heart rate up and keeps your cardiovascular fitness up. How long since you started running did you mark the increase? And how long since you discovered the increase? Many bodies respond this way to new activity, so it's probably normal and not permanent.
  • meshashesha2012
    meshashesha2012 Posts: 8,329 Member
    i think it depends.on the treadmill, my walk/jog threshold is 4.7 at that speed it's harder for me to walk than it is to jog. walking 20 minutes at that speed burns more calories for me than jogging at that speed. i think because i'm fighting against my body to just run
  • 3laine75
    3laine75 Posts: 3,069 Member
    allegedly both running and fast walking burn more calories than jogging. read this somewhere ages ago, may have been disproven by now tho.
  • dancingincircles84
    dancingincircles84 Posts: 53
    What's wrong with bigger thighs?
    I've been doing lots of leg strength training and jogging lately and I'm happy to see my legs increase in muscle! It means my work is making me stronger.
  • neverstray
    neverstray Posts: 3,845 Member
    Google it. There is actual evidence that walking and running are not the same at all. It's an old worn out theory that no longer holds up. It used to be that walking 5 miles and running 5 miles take the same energy to go 5 miles whether you walk, jog, or run. Not so, per the latest research.
  • hexrei
    hexrei Posts: 163
    What's wrong with bigger thighs?
    I've been doing lots of leg strength training and jogging lately and I'm happy to see my legs increase in muscle! It means my work is making me stronger.

    I love having ripped thighs.
  • BrianSharpe
    BrianSharpe Posts: 9,248 Member
    walking, jogging, or running, a mile is a mile. you only burn a few more calories running than you do walking. that being said, each of those work different muscles, so you need to learn what works for you.

    160lb person walking 4 mph burns approx 91 cal per mile, running at 6mph it goes to 121 cal/mile which is about a 32% difference. If you only go a couple of miles a week it's a trivial difference but if you were doing 20 miles per week that's a pound a year (not to mention the enhanced cardio improvement)
  • mowink55
    mowink55 Posts: 10
    I think you're right.......
    .....according to an article I just read, the crossover point is around 5mph for most people, depending on their gait:
    http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2580/exercise-does-running-burn-more-calories-than-walking
  • rrichichi
    rrichichi Posts: 11 Member
    Either way IMHO the bottom line is calories burned is based upon your weight, your motion (mph) & your time (minutes) !! If a 175 lb person walks for 30 min. @ 5 mph (very fast pace) it would be equivalent (calories burned) to a 175 lb. person jogging @ 5 mph for 30 min. So my answer is .... walking fast is just as effective as jogging slow but .... :)
This discussion has been closed.

Categories