23 ms·

You can also just walk around while doing something else, e.g. listening to a podcast or talking to somebody on the phone (this can even be a work meeting!)

by shafyy 4y ago

OkayPhysicist 4y ago
Walking is not great exercise from a time efficiency standpoint. It's like half the caloric burn in twice the time of any dedicated exercise, be it running or swimming or weight lifting. Exercise that elevates your heart rate is simply better, from a fitness perspective or from a weight-loss perspective.
- valarauko 4y ago
  Depends on what the goal of the exercise is. For the majority of people who need to be in better health, zone 2 cardio is what they need rather than increased caloric burn. You can't look for time efficiency with zone 2 cardio - you just have to do it for enough time to build conditioning. Depending on the person, zone 2 might be running, but for most people a brisk walk is enough.
- hombre_fatal 4y ago
  That doesn’t matter when you’re sneaking walking into activities you’d normal do sedentary. It’s not competing against dedicated exercise. I have this goofy plastic As Seen On TV board that is bent in the middle. Whenever I’m watching TV or playing a game, I stand in it and waddle my body so that i’m doing a light core activity. It doesn’t matter that sprinting is better exercise when I otherwise would be sitting in the couch.
- fredophile 4y ago
  Efficiency isn't the only factor. I'd say the most important factor is enjoyment. We each have a finite amount of willpower. If you're using it up on exercise you hate doing eventually you're going to hit a day where you don't have much willpower, skip the exercise and break the routine. The most time efficient exercises I know aren't ones you can sustain for longer periods of time. I can consistently walk for hours but only run sprint intervals for a few minutes. Sure every minute of sprinting burns more than a minute of walking but if I can walk significantly longer than I can sprint it will probably lead to a higher total calorie burn.
- shafyy 4y ago
  As others have said, it's not about efficiency. Also, doing a brisk walk does elevate your heart rate (mine goes up to ~100-110 BPM). If your goal is just being healthier, and not necessarily increasing your stamina or building up muscles, than walking is great. It also doesn't fuck with your joints.
- jjav 4y ago
  > Walking is not great exercise from a time efficiency standpoint. Sure, but it's infinitely better than a more efficient exercise that never gets done.

You can also just walk around while doing something else, e.g. listening to a podcast or talking to somebody on the phone (this can even be a work meeting!)

by shafyy 4y ago

You can also just walk around while doing something else, e.g. listening to a podcast or talking to somebody on the phone (this can even be a work meeting!)

OkayPhysicist 4y ago

Walking is not great exercise from a time efficiency standpoint. It's like half the caloric burn in twice the time of any dedicated exercise, be it running or swimming or weight lifting. Exercise that elevates your heart rate is simply better, from a fitness perspective or from a weight-loss perspective.

valarauko 4y ago
Depends on what the goal of the exercise is. For the majority of people who need to be in better health, zone 2 cardio is what they need rather than increased caloric burn. You can't look for time efficiency with zone 2 cardio - you just have to do it for enough time to build conditioning. Depending on the person, zone 2 might be running, but for most people a brisk walk is enough.
hombre_fatal 4y ago
That doesn’t matter when you’re sneaking walking into activities you’d normal do sedentary. It’s not competing against dedicated exercise. I have this goofy plastic As Seen On TV board that is bent in the middle. Whenever I’m watching TV or playing a game, I stand in it and waddle my body so that i’m doing a light core activity. It doesn’t matter that sprinting is better exercise when I otherwise would be sitting in the couch.
fredophile 4y ago
Efficiency isn't the only factor. I'd say the most important factor is enjoyment. We each have a finite amount of willpower. If you're using it up on exercise you hate doing eventually you're going to hit a day where you don't have much willpower, skip the exercise and break the routine. The most time efficient exercises I know aren't ones you can sustain for longer periods of time. I can consistently walk for hours but only run sprint intervals for a few minutes. Sure every minute of sprinting burns more than a minute of walking but if I can walk significantly longer than I can sprint it will probably lead to a higher total calorie burn.
shafyy 4y ago
As others have said, it's not about efficiency. Also, doing a brisk walk does elevate your heart rate (mine goes up to ~100-110 BPM). If your goal is just being healthier, and not necessarily increasing your stamina or building up muscles, than walking is great. It also doesn't fuck with your joints.
jjav 4y ago
> Walking is not great exercise from a time efficiency standpoint. Sure, but it's infinitely better than a more efficient exercise that never gets done.