| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 750.1 | | ASICS::LESLIE | Andy Leslie | Mon Jun 22 1992 18:36 | 5 |
|
It doesn't matter when you fill the tank, It matters that you use up
the fuel that you put in.
- andy
|
| 750.2 | 10 calories = (approx) 1 minute of slow walking | HEYYOU::ZARLENGA | umm, dan, there's no e in potato | Mon Jun 22 1992 22:06 | 30 |
| 750.3 | 16 calories = (approx) 90 seconds of slow walking | MILKWY::ZARLENGA | umm, dan, there's no e in potato | Tue Jun 23 1992 05:12 | 10 |
| I found the article... Consumer Reports on Health, Feb92, p13 :
It was 16 calories per day they saved, eating their day's food in
one sitting (10 minutes), rather than in 6 sittings, each 30 minutes
apart.
The "daily food" was a 750 calorie liquid meal.
Digestion took 58 calories when eaten all at once, 42 calories when
eaten in 6 settings.
|
| 750.4 | Walk, don't run ? | HGRD01::STEVELIU | | Tue Jun 23 1992 06:34 | 10 |
|
OK, exercise is important. I have another question.
Someone told me that walking and running the same distance will
burn up the same amount of calories as your body is moving the same
distance because in physics, work = mass x distance.
Any comment.
Steve
|
| 750.5 | | ASICS::LESLIE | Andy Leslie | Tue Jun 23 1992 15:16 | 4 |
| That's more-or-less true. It's quicker if you run, obviously. This
doesn't apply to cycling or swimming though.
- andy
|
| 750.6 | | HEYYOU::ZARLENGA | umm, dan, there's no e in potato | Tue Jun 23 1992 21:09 | 27 |
| .4> Someone told me that walking and running the same distance will
.4> burn up the same amount of calories as your body is moving the same
.4> distance because in physics, work = mass x distance.
Work = forceXdistance, not massXdistance, but that's irrelevant to
your question ... like Andy said in .5, for the most part, that's
right, running and walking will consume the same # of calories per
mile.
There are some differences worth mentioning, besides # of calories :
o Walking is easier on the knees and lower back (very important if
you're overweight).
o Walking doesn't require expensive footwear to prevent injuries
(any good sneaker is Ok)
o Walking, as an exercise, consumes MORE FAT PER MILE than running
(as a general rule, the lower the intensity, the more fat your
body can metabolize for energy)
o Running will increase your cardiovascular conditioning, walking
will NOT (speedwalking will, though, and it's also easier on the
knees and lower back than running)
o Running takes about half as much time as walking to cover the
same distance
|
| 750.7 | more about walking | HGRD01::STEVELIU | | Mon Jun 29 1992 11:27 | 10 |
|
Very good analysis from .6
It seems walking is more preferable than running for over-weight
people to start exercise to lose weight.
Wiil walking up a slope yield more advantages than just walking
on flat ground ?
Steve
|
| 750.8 | | MILKWY::ZARLENGA | Michael Zarlenga, DEC/FXO | Tue Jun 30 1992 05:32 | 3 |
| Walking uphill requires more energy than walking on level ground.
How much more depends on how much you weigh.
|
| 750.9 | more... | TLE::TLE::D_CARROLL | a woman full of fire | Wed Jul 01 1992 20:48 | 10 |
| How fast is "speed-walking"?
Also, walking *will* increase your cardio-fitness if your heartrate is
in your training target zone when you walk. For most people this won't
be the case but for very heavy or very out-of-shape people it will be.
I get in to my target heart rate by walking on a treadmill at a 13%
grade at 3.5 mph.
D!
|
| 750.10 | | MILKWY::ZARLENGA | Michael Zarlenga, DEC/FXO | Thu Jul 02 1992 06:52 | 6 |
| Diana, there's a half-pager on walking on p94 of the July/August92
edition of American Health.
Briefly, a strolling pace is about 20 minutes per mile, a brisk pace
is about 14-18 minutes per mile, and power walking is faster than 14
minutes per mile (this is what I call speed walking).
|
| 750.11 | Exercise your heart | HGRD01::STEVELIU | | Thu Jul 02 1992 11:00 | 7 |
|
I heard about something about exercise that you need to keep your heart
beat faster at a certain rate , say 30% more, and maintain this rate
at certain lenghth of time, say 20 minute or so, before you can gain
real benefit from exercise. Is it true ?
Steve
|
| 750.12 | | ASICS::LESLIE | Argh! Where's my security blanket? | Thu Jul 02 1992 12:14 | 2 |
| 20 minutes, 3 times a week, is the minimum needed for
cardiac-respiratory conditioning. More like 40 minutes for burning fat.
|
| 750.13 | | CNTROL::JENNISON | The Son reigns! | Mon Jul 06 1992 20:32 | 22 |
|
Add one thing to Andy's note. Intensity. Your heartrate
should be in the Target Zone.
Remember it this way:
F.I.T.
Frequency (3-5 times/week)
Intensity (60-80 percent of Maximum heart rate, roughly calculated
as 220-AGE)
Time Minimum of 20 minutes
One note on Speed walking - Mike's note is a good guideline, but
at 13 minute miles, I find I'm usually just barely in my target
zone. I've started to add some joggig back into my walks to bring
my heartrate up, unless I'm pushing the baby stroller.
Karen
|