Fitness
Moderators: melkor


Do you burn the same amount of calories walking and running ?


Quote  |  Reply
like for example... walking 3 miles vs running 3 miles. yes, running takes less than half the time, but is it still the same calories burned ?
10 Replies (last)
#1  
Quote  |  Reply

"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.)"

http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-242-304-311-8402-0,00 .html

I don't think so because your heart rate is much faster running, which will cause you to burn more calories. Walking is good for you, but 20 minutes or more a day of aerobic activity is better for you.

Running an equal distance burns more, even though it takes less time. If you look at it in terms of net calories (subtracting out your BMR for the time of the exercise), the difference is even bigger.

There are exceptions though. When you get close to your maximum walking speed, you are burning more calories (per minute, and per mile) than you would be running at that speed. My "crossover point" is about 5.3 mph. i.e. I burn the same calories running or walking at that speed. For a lot of people, the crossover is closer to 4.8 mph, assuming that they have put out some effort to build up their walking.

Oldguysrule made a good point.  Intensity is a factor.

I burn more calories walking fast  ...  13:30 mins per mile than I do running easy, say a 9:00 pace.  But, if I run harder, at say a 7:00 to 7:30 mile pace, I will burn more calories than when I walk fast.

Generally though, running will burn more cals than walking.

Original Post by cpa_pfs:

Oldguysrule made a good point.  Intensity is a factor.

I burn more calories walking fast  ...  13:30 mins per mile than I do running easy, say a 9:00 pace.  But, if I run harder, at say a 7:00 to 7:30 mile pace, I will burn more calories than when I walk fast.

Generally though, running will burn more cals than walking.

I'm not sure that's quite right.  Ogr is correct that running burns more calories than walking until you get to your crossover speed, but you have to hold the speed constant to make the comparison.  E.g. you will burn more calories walking 6.7mph (9:00) pace than you will running 6.7mph, assuming your crossover speed is lower than 6.7mph.  You would still burn more calories running 6.7mph than you would walking 4.4mph(13:30)

 

Original Post by smashley23:

E.g. you will burn more calories walking 6.7mph (9:00) pace than you will running 6.7mph, assuming your crossover speed is lower than 6.7mph.  


Wow!  Can you walk at a 9:00 min mile pace?  That would be damn fast.

Not even close, but trained speed walkers can walk really fast.  The world record is 10.28mph, and that's his average speed for the 5k walk.

Original Post by smashley23:

Original Post by cpa_pfs:

Oldguysrule made a good point.  Intensity is a factor.

I burn more calories walking fast  ...  13:30 mins per mile than I do running easy, say a 9:00 pace.  But, if I run harder, at say a 7:00 to 7:30 mile pace, I will burn more calories than when I walk fast.

Generally though, running will burn more cals than walking.

I'm not sure that's quite right.  Ogr is correct that running burns more calories than walking until you get to your crossover speed, but you have to hold the speed constant to make the comparison.  E.g. you will burn more calories walking 6.7mph (9:00) pace than you will running 6.7mph, assuming your crossover speed is lower than 6.7mph.  You would still burn more calories running 6.7mph than you would walking 4.4mph(13:30)

 

Since I can't walk as fast as I can run, let's reverse it.  If I can walk at a 13:30 mile pace and I could slow jog at that pace (no way is that a pace I can actually run at)  ...  then walking would burn more calories.  Probably not much of a difference though.

My point though was intensity.  If you put the same intensity into walking and running  ...  running will burn more calores.

My point is physics.  Running is a series of micro jumps.  It requires more energy than walking does because of the motion.  This doesn't apply when you walk super-fast because the awkward motion of walking at a fast speed keeps you off-balance.  It's easier to run fast than it is to walk equally fast. Jogging at a slow pace would still burn more calories than walking the same pace, even though it wouldn't be a very hard jog.

Original Post by cpa_pfs:

Original Post by smashley23:

E.g. you will burn more calories walking 6.7mph (9:00) pace than you will running 6.7mph, assuming your crossover speed is lower than 6.7mph.  


Wow!  Can you walk at a 9:00 min mile pace?  That would be damn fast.

And very uncomfortable.  We did a VO2max 1 mile walk test for our fitness assessment class.  I don't remember my time, but by the end of it my shins were burning.  To do this over 3 miles would be pretty painful, but I'm sure you can train for it.

One thing that surprised me with the fast walking was that we monitored our heart rates.  You can get your HR up to 85% of max HR while walking.  I'm sure this would be hard for someone who's in great shape though.

10 Replies
Advertisement
Advertisement
Allergy Remedies
Is It Possible to Go Natural?
The side effects of allergy medications keep some people from using them. Natural remedies can be a great alternative, but some are more effective than others.