Walking/jogging/running for the furthest distance without supplies?


If you needed to get somewhere very far away in order to survive, no food or water – is walking better than jogging or running? Should you keep a fast pace or slow pace?

In: 2

2 Answers

Anonymous 0 Comments

Running and jogging are both more physically demanding on your body for a given time than walking. That’s why running for 30 minutes burns far more calories (and makes you sweat a lot more) than walking for 30 minutes.

But walking is also much slower, so less distance is covered in the same amount of time. So if time is a concern then walking might not be best if you otherwise have enough energy (and hydration) to get where you can get supplies.

Anonymous 0 Comments


So much would depend on your general level of health and activity prior to this.

As a 60 year old I would carry a 25kg lb pack for 20 km back in military training. Then I would probably do fast march/double march which is like a jog, followed with just walking as a rest phase.

Now I still play sports, but at 60, I would probably choose walking.

My 89 yo mom still walks 3 k most days (snow and ice stop her now)

do what you are used to, and good at.