Dumb question

SnazzyTraveller
SnazzyTraveller Posts: 457 Member
edited December 18 in Fitness and Exercise
This probably has an obvious answer, but are there many advantages to burning 600 cals over 70 mins of walking rather than running for say 45 and burning the same? Sure, I'm done in more time when I run, but on my lazy days when I walk I feel I didn't even "work out". I guess what I'm asking is it better for your heart to run over walk or ....any advantages?

Replies

  • Jacwhite22
    Jacwhite22 Posts: 7,010 Member
    There are cardiovascular advantages to working out at a higher intensity. There will be negligible difference in net calories though.
  • Emili03
    Emili03 Posts: 164 Member
    Advantages in running would be building up your lung capacity and the increased heart rate would help fight against the chance of ever having Heart Disease. In addition, getting your heart rate up helps speed up your metabolism.
  • fitby38
    fitby38 Posts: 307 Member
    if your heart rate is up then ... walking or running ... doesnt matter
  • atjays
    atjays Posts: 797 Member
    There are cardiovascular advantages to working out at a higher intensity. There will be negligible difference in net calories though.

    This sums it up. You're not going to "progress" your overall fitness level merely by walking, sure it burns calories and you'll lose weight the same, but you're not strengthening your heart, muscles or body by doing so.
  • SnazzyTraveller
    SnazzyTraveller Posts: 457 Member
    Advantages in running would be building up your lung capacity and the increased heart rate would help fight against the chance of ever having Heart Disease. In addition, getting your heart rate up helps speed up your metabolism.

    Could be wrong but feels like my heart rate hardly budges. Tonight I was lazy and just went on the treadmill and watched my favourite show. After I was like... really? That's IT??:noway:
  • fitby38
    fitby38 Posts: 307 Member
    Advantages in running would be building up your lung capacity and the increased heart rate would help fight against the chance of ever having Heart Disease. In addition, getting your heart rate up helps speed up your metabolism.

    Could be wrong but feels like my heart rate hardly budges. Tonight I was lazy and just went on the treadmill and watched my favourite show. After I was like... really? That's IT??:noway:

    i have a HRM so whether i am walking or running ... i try to stay within my targeted heartrate ... otherwise for ME PERSONALLY it is a waste of time.
  • SnazzyTraveller
    SnazzyTraveller Posts: 457 Member
    Advantages in running would be building up your lung capacity and the increased heart rate would help fight against the chance of ever having Heart Disease. In addition, getting your heart rate up helps speed up your metabolism.

    Could be wrong but feels like my heart rate hardly budges. Tonight I was lazy and just went on the treadmill and watched my favourite show. After I was like... really? That's IT??:noway:

    i have a HRM so wheater i am walking or running ... i try to stay within my targeted heartrate ... otherwise for ME PERSONALLY it is a waste of time.

    makes sense! i did feel i was doing nothing, but i thought it was better than skipping out altogether on "exercise". who knows... hoping i hve more energy to run tomrrow. today was boring :D
  • dancinmami
    dancinmami Posts: 11
    Lazy days hit us all sometimes. Exercise that gets your heart rate up and sustains that rate for a time is the important thing. Sometimes motivation = change. If a run seems unpleasant, change up for another cardio workout, one that you can enjoy
  • love22step
    love22step Posts: 1,103 Member
    I agree with the other posts, but if you're walking very fast, you can get your heart rate up and burn a lot of calories. In my younger days, I walked 10 min. miles (6 mph) and, according to the charts, I burned more calories walking 10 min. miles than running 10 min. miles. Ten min. miles definitely elevated my heart rate and made me tired. My lower body was in great shape.

    Excerpt from a Runners World article:

    In fact, I had read years ago that fast walking burns more calories than running at the same speed. Now was the time to test this hypothesis. Wearing a heart-rate monitor, I ran on a treadmill for two minutes at 3.0 mph (20 minutes per mile), and at 3.5, 4.0, 4.5, 5.0, and 5.5 mph (10:55 per mile). After a 10-minute rest to allow my heart rate to return to normal, I repeated the same thing walking. Here's my running vs. walking heart rate at the end of each two-minute stint: 3.0 (99/81), 3.5 (104/85), 4.0 (109/94), 4.5 (114/107), 5.0 (120/126), 5.5 (122/145). My conclusion: Running is harder than walking at paces slower than 12-minutes-per-mile. At faster paces, walking is harder than running.

    How to explain this? It's not easy, except to say that walking at very fast speeds forces your body to move in ways it wasn't designed to move. This creates a great deal of internal "friction" and inefficiency, which boosts heart rate, oxygen consumption, and calorie burn. So, as Jon Stewart might say, "Walking fast...good. Walking slow...uh, not so much."

    This is the full article: http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-242-304-311-8402-0,00.html
This discussion has been closed.

Categories