Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Question re: leisure walking
I live in a city and therefore my feet are one of my principal forms of transportation. I got a pedometer recently and have been tracking my miles. My daily commute includes 1.5 miles of walking. On weekends when running errands, I seem to walk about 3.5 or 4 miles on average (and often another mile or two later to/from dinner and/or drinks).
I don't use it as a replacement for going to the gym, but am happy to have the added activity. My husband and I were talking about it the other day and we were in disagreement on how to view it -- I see it as a form of exercise, he doesn't (because it isn't strenuous).
So my questions are -- well, obviously leaving the house for a few hours to go shopping and realizing afterwards that I walked four miles is different from running (or briskly walking for) four miles in a row on a treadmill. My heart rate doesn't go up like it would if I was doing the miles faster. But I am burning around as many calories as I would if running, right? (Just over a much longer period of time?) And what about the cardio and muscle-building effects -- are they shot because I'm moving too slow, or is there some benefit?
This isn't really an important issue -- just curious! Thanks!
Re: Question re: leisure walking
My Lunch Blog
I work out on top of this -- I don't see it as a substitute for going to the gym at all.
Katiescats, I swear I had read that walking/running a mile typically burned the same number of calories but the time it would take to burn those calories would normally be the difference. What would the difference be? Like, if I jogged a mile on a treadmill set to 4.5 and then walked the next mile also at 4.5 (I think that's a pace where both could be done?), what would be the difference in calories for the two activities? (I know it would vary by person... so I guess for a typical person).
It depends. You and Katie are both right.
Studies have shown running burns significantly more calories than walking because you're using more force (and covering more vertical distance as well as horizontal) when running than walking, thus more energy expenditure. However,if you're walking at a pace faster than 5mph, you're likely burning more calories than if you were running at that pace since your movement is less efficient.
A couple easy reads on the theories
Lol, I'm not sure where racewalking would fall in this discussion.