Topic: Is walking 5 miles as good for you as running 5 miles?

[pandamonium]

Nobody mentioned joints? 

That's one of the reasons I'm hesitant to start running. I carry a bit o' extra something something and I've already had knee issues.

When I run, I prefer to do it on a treadmill because I can grab onto the rails and not put as much force on my legs. I'm considering re-joining a gym in order to have access to a treadmill.

You might also try an elliptical, which gives a good workout without stressing the knees.

Or I could get this.

Metal is also what I like to listen to when gymming. On my bike I prefer podcasts and audiobooks. I prefer music at the gym because it helps me time myself better. And I can chose songs with an appropriate beat. And make playlists that will help my workout.

I miss the gym.

[gcason]

I walk because it's easier on my knees.  I listen to podcasts.  I can go 6 miles on a typical SGU episode. 

[khendar]

I've been told (by other cyclists) that is is duration and intensity that makes the workout, not speed or distance. How much that applies to running vs walking a set distance I don't know. Your intensity is higher while running, but your duration is shorter.

[EhJayArr]

I've been told (by other cyclists) that is is duration and intensity that makes the workout, not speed or distance. How much that applies to running vs walking a set distance I don't know. Your intensity is higher while running, but your duration is shorter.

I was having trouble making sense of the comparison until this post. THAT makes sense.

[Jolimont]

That's just it! I wonder if intensity matters as much as we assume.

[pandamonium]

Probably depends on your end goal. if you want to generally feel better and be in better shape, you can walk yourself there. if you want to be able to chase down wildebeasts, you should take up running.

I spent the last week walking around Portland. Holy Christ, do you ever use different muscles for walking versus for riding a bike. and because I had comfortable shoes/insoles and a slightly higher general tolerance for moving, I ended up overdoing it the first day. I walked for at least four or five hours because I wasn't getting the signal from my feet that usually tells me I've reached my limit. the rest of the week was pretty awful wrt me and having to walk everywhere.

I really need to take up running/jogging/interval training.

[Jolimont]

Probably depends on your end goal. if you want to generally feel better and be in better shape, you can walk yourself there. if you want to be able to chase down wildebeasts, you should take up running.

LOL! Me chasing wildbeasts!!! No, I just want to feel good, keep my weight under control, get some sun, and enjoy being outside. I have no desire for extreme sports or anything like that, never did.

[superdave]

In general, no.  But the quality of the workout is variable.  Depending on your age and fitness level, it is possible to get your heart-rate up high enough for cardiovascular benefit while walking, but it isn't easy and you really have to be going for it.  Personally when I was in worse shape than I am now, I could get my HR up to 120 BPM while walking briskly, which for my age group at the time, was just about the bare minimum for cardiac benefit.  Now it's hard for me to walk fast enough to get it up that high.  Running or jogging easily puts me over 120 BPM.

Now, of course, walking is better than being sedentary. 

[EhJayArr]

From Runner's World:

In "Energy Expenditure of Walking and Running," published last December in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, a group of Syracuse University researchers measured the actual calorie burn of 12 men and 12 women while running and walking 1,600 meters (roughly a mile) on a treadmill. Result: The men burned an average of 124 calories while running, and just 88 while walking; the women burned 105 and 74. (The men burned more than the women because they weighed more.)

Thanks to the Syracuse researchers, we now know the relative NCB of running a mile in 9:30 versus walking the same mile in 19:00. Their male subjects burned 105 calories running, 52 walking; the women, 91 and 43. That is, running burns twice as many net calories per mile as walking.

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.

Walking doesn't burn as many calories, but it remains a terrific exercise. As David Swain says, "The new research doesn't mean that walking burns any fewer calories than it used to. It just means that walkers might have to walk a little more, or eat a little less, to hit their weight goal.

And for balance, from walking.about.com:

Walking at various speeds burns between 2 and 8 MET. Running at various speeds burns 8 to 18 MET. That sounds like quite a difference, but you have to take into account the length of the workout. Do they run for a set number of miles, or do they run for a set period of time? It makes all of the difference.

Should I Walk or Run?

If you enjoy running, you can burn calories in less time and be done with your daily workout sooner. Many people enjoy the higher heart rate and the burst of happy brain chemicals it produces. But for others, running is a grind that they have to force themselves to do. In order to get any benefit from a workout, it has to be one that you enjoy and will do day after day. If you love to run -- run. If you hate to run but love to walk -- walk. You will just need to spend more time walking to go the distance you need to burn the calories you want to burn.

Seems pretty cut and dry to me, and I like it because this is in line with what I already thought: running burns more calories than walking, but walking for a much longer period of time can equal the calories burned on a shorter run at a lower body impact.

[DRmeg378]

My brother once explained his rationale for believing that, like you cite, walking burns more calories at very high speeds. His idea was that at certain speeds, it is our natural impulse to walk. At others, it is our natural impulse to run. Natural selection should have probably made those the energy-efficient decisions.

[TheLostVertex]

I think it's fun. My main problem when running is that unlike when I walk, my inner monologue somehow gets silenced. It bores me to death. I try and compensate with podcasts (or a magazine on the treadmill) but it's sometimes better to just alternate.

What about music.  Music takes less concentration, but takes away that bored feeling.

It doesn't really work. I want to concentrate in the music, and when I do I almost automatically stop running. Podcasts are okay, but the only way I have been able to run continuously for over 20 minutes is by reading the New Yorker on a treadmill.

You should try playing music that makes you want to run then. Try nickelback, nothing will make you try and run away faster. 

[Johnny Slick]

I think it's fun. My main problem when running is that unlike when I walk, my inner monologue somehow gets silenced. It bores me to death. I try and compensate with podcasts (or a magazine on the treadmill) but it's sometimes better to just alternate.

What about music.  Music takes less concentration, but takes away that bored feeling.

It doesn't really work. I want to concentrate in the music, and when I do I almost automatically stop running. Podcasts are okay, but the only way I have been able to run continuously for over 20 minutes is by reading the New Yorker on a treadmill.

You should try playing music that makes you want to run then. Try nickelback, nothing will make you try and run away faster. 

How many calories per hour do you burn by curling up in a fetal position?

[Karyn]

I think it's fun. My main problem when running is that unlike when I walk, my inner monologue somehow gets silenced. It bores me to death. I try and compensate with podcasts (or a magazine on the treadmill) but it's sometimes better to just alternate.

What about music.  Music takes less concentration, but takes away that bored feeling.

It doesn't really work. I want to concentrate in the music, and when I do I almost automatically stop running. Podcasts are okay, but the only way I have been able to run continuously for over 20 minutes is by reading the New Yorker on a treadmill.

You should try playing music that makes you want to run then. Try nickelback, nothing will make you try and run away faster. 

How many calories per hour do you burn by curling up in a fetal position?

Does that include thumb sucking and soft crying?

[David E.]

I think it's fun. My main problem when running is that unlike when I walk, my inner monologue somehow gets silenced. It bores me to death. I try and compensate with podcasts (or a magazine on the treadmill) but it's sometimes better to just alternate.

What about music.  Music takes less concentration, but takes away that bored feeling.

It doesn't really work. I want to concentrate in the music, and when I do I almost automatically stop running. Podcasts are okay, but the only way I have been able to run continuously for over 20 minutes is by reading the New Yorker on a treadmill.

You should try playing music that makes you want to run then. Try nickelback, nothing will make you try and run away faster. 

How many calories per hour do you burn by curling up in a fetal position?

Does that include thumb sucking and soft crying?

If you were to add shuddering you could burn some serious calories.

[Johnny Slick]

Sorry, the involuntary shuddering only happens when it's Creed on the radio.