According to a walking calorie calculator I used-
Weight 172lbs Distance walked 1 mile
Pace Duration Calories
Slow (2.5mph) 24 minutes 98
Normal (3mph) 20 minutes 96
Fast (3.5mph) 17 minutes 100
Very Fast (4mph) 15 minutes 102
Even though you burn more calories per minute the quicker you walk, walking slower takes a longer amount of time to travel the same distance so it equals roughly the same amount of calories burned?
Edit: thanks for your responses! I was aware running burns more calories per mile than walking the same distance due placing greater demands on the body/being far less efficient, I was specifically interested in walking speeds alone over the same distances?
Personal anecdote; I’ve managed to lose a significant amount of weight over the past 6 months walking 5 miles daily at a very brisk pace (4-4.5 mph average), today due to fatigue I took it easy, walked a lot slower at 3-3.5mph, felt less fatiguing but obviously took longer amount of time, a good trade off if it means I can walk at a more leisurely pace some days and burn roughly the same amount of calories over the same distance. 🙂
In: Physics
You don’t care about calories, but your weight. Faster movement increases your breathing rate, and most of the weight “burned” is carbon dioxide literally leaving your body via breath – those molecules have *mass*, and that’s the weight difference that you see on scales. And, faster movement might also hasten your metabolism, which means you poop out a lot of carbon sooner, as well. You might have more water weight, though, because fast walking will make you sweat more and thus, drink more, which you could overcompensate with. But water is in constant, and quite rapid movement in body, anyway.
So faster movement is definitely better, since you flush out more literal grams of weight. If you don’t get aerobic (breathe harder), then the use is very little, though. So… jog.
Latest Answers