forget about calories burned during exercise and focus on continually increasing the distance traveled in the same amount of training time.
for those that are heart healthy exercising at a high level of intensity is always better for long term health and for reducing body fat. the greater the intensity and duration of exercise the greater the stimulation of the resting metabolic rate after exercise. attempting to target fat loss during exercise is far from optimum and at best will bring minimal results. exercising at a low level of intensity does burn more fat during exercise but after there is no increase in the resting metabolic rate. when you exercise at a high level of intensity the body utilizes glucose as the primary source of energy during exercise. but after exercise the body has to utilize extra oxygen to help restore the body to the pre-exercise state. this causes the metabolic rate to increase for hours after exercise, where the REAL fat loss takes place.
it's kind of a no-brainer....
2007-08-23 10:28:54
·
answer #1
·
answered by lv_consultant 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its all about exercise intensity or exertion level. If two people with the same body type were to run 3 miles; one at a 7 minute per mile pace and other person at a 8 minute per mile pace. The person who ran the 7 minute pace would burn more calories than person who ran the 8 minute pace, even though he ran for a longer amount of time. The harder you body works the more calories you burn and continue to burn after you workout. Now there is a time and distance factor to this as well sooo I'm not saying that a one mile rune is better than a 40 minute walk. any exercise is a good thing keep it up hope this helps
2016-05-21 00:55:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by jeana 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The number of calories used depends on the distance. So if you run you are burning more calories but you finish faster so the total number is the same as if you walked. The benefits are almost the same depending on what is your intent. You can tone your legs with both types of exercise. If you are not trying to compete, but just looking to improve either will work.
2007-08-23 08:00:43
·
answer #3
·
answered by lestermount 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
You burn about the same calories in the same distance. But, it'll take you longer to burn the calories if you're walking the distance rather than jogging it. There are pros and cons to each: walking is better on your joints, but running is better cardiovascular exercise than walking is. So, it's your choice. Doesn't matter too much--just get active. That's what's important.
2007-08-23 08:00:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
you burn about the same but when you run you work the musles more than a walk and you can tone legs without doing either squats and toe lifts can be done just same easy
2007-08-23 08:04:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by infoman89032 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
hi you can burn my calories by walking up hill than you can do jogging . i can be jogging on the treadmill and turn to the next treadmill at the gym where my husband is walking fast up hill and he has burned more calories , there both brilliant for toning up just make sure you do some stretching exercises before and after and wear decent trainers ,xx
2007-08-23 07:57:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
In physics, work is defined as the product of force and distance W=FxD. If the distance is the same but the force is less then the work is also less. The unit for work is joules or calories. :-) In the case of running, there is greater force used to counter the force of inertia at rest than when you walk, ergo, there is more force when you run than walk.
2007-08-23 08:06:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by e-man 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
well i think there the same running tone legs better..hope i helped :D
2007-08-23 07:58:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋