Walking is good for health but walking faster is even better, study finds
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
Since I've been working from home I've made it a point to head out mid-workday and go for a walk. One hour. Surrounded by trees. It's fantastic.
Whenever I'm getting annoyed or cranky, it's time to go. Most of our development tools are shit. I get lots of opportunities…
When I started doing that I could reliably measure my blood pressure going down by 10 to 15 mmHg. Lasting the rest of the day.
Now I've lost quite a bit of weight (mostly by eating less, not much by walking, I think), and I cannot see such a reliable drop in blood pressure anymore (it's now regularly lower). I still feel better whenever I've been out.
Have you had endorphin kick yet ?
It's relaxing for me, not exciting.
For most people, walking multiple times a week where they weren't absolutely will.
Sidewalks might as well be illegal in most parts of my home city, given how many areas are completely devoid of them.
And I’m disinclined to risk my life to try to prove a futile point. Walking very far here is dangerous due to narrow roads, bridges with no sidewalks, etc.
Start making changes and influencing people instead of saying its futile. Change is always possible.
I set just one rule: go for fast pace walk every day no matter the weather and no matter the time of the day.
https://www.runnersworld.com/training/a20866689/why-crawling...
I prefer bodybuilding lifts over crossfit style movements, but I realized that dynamic movements would be a worthy addition, at least to my warmups or finishers.
It came to light in a particularly undignified way: I took my kid to a mega-trampoline place and realized: 1) I can't jump for long, 2) jumps down from height are especially unsettling now that I'm no longer in my youth.
Do both and you've covered your bases. Makes sense.
This way you'll condition better mitochondria development, oxidise fat for energy and avoid producing damaging metabolic by-products.
Some people smoke, drink, eat junk food and never exercise and have excellent blood pressure and never get fat. Others can't keep in shape without tremendous efforts. Equality is for human rights, but nature doesn't care.
My target (aka zone 2) is around 140 bpm which I can achieve by walking fairly briskly -- I can still hold a telephone conversation and breath through my nose.
I have tried running in the past but I kept injuring this or the other (not at all athletic). Doing "slow" 10k+ steps per day total did not help with my weight either. But just doing these 1-hr zone-2 sessions (3-4x per week) made all the difference. Ofc ymmv!
[1] https://www.artofmanliness.com/health-fitness/fitness/zone-2...
Things I learned on my walks:
* Railroad tracks are policed by railroad cops, some equipped with large revolvers. That Colt is cemented in my mind...
* Railroad tracks are frequented by migrant workers and those who might prey upon them. Some of those people are dangerous.
* Ben's has great Chinese food. (near Jack London Square)
Mind sharing? Curiosity burns!
https://www.oxfordortho.sg/articles/why-running-is-actually-...
1. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18550323/ 2. https://health.gov/sites/default/files/2019-09/Physical_Acti...
I always fall into a two-steps–breathe-in/two-steps-breathe-out rhythm. It comes out to be a very unnatural and uncomfortable breathing sequence.
(Also I cannot decouple music beats from my steps, so listening to music is out, as well)
That being said, when I do try to maintain a regular breathing pattern when running, I usually also do two-in, two-out. Feels pretty good to me.
If you're walking recreationally (maybe less than 10km in one go) shoes are mostly irrelevant. No, you shouldn't use Wellington boots, I guess.
Nike makes some good walking shoes that skew wider, but definitely read the reviews first to confirm, since they change between model years/revisions. For a while Downshifter was my go to, recently the Revolution 6 has been a good replacement.
However I got pediatric inserts designed by a foot doctor. What he didn't tell me was that for those kinds of inserts it is better to wear a wide shoe which accommodates the inserts, but "neutral". I still was wearing my supinator shoes. So it will not "overcompensate". This advice was from a specialist running shoe shop. When I tried the neutral one he offered me on one feet, and the old "overcompensating" shoe I had, I noticed the lack of stability immediately.
I have a friend whose problem is that their feet sweat more than usual. In their case the solution was shoes with extra ventilation around the soles.
Also: soles wear out! If you walk/run more, you need to replace your shoes more often.
My current pair is far overdue! Anyone here have experience with the Gore-Tex 880's, are they good?
I'm quite overweight, and my tennis shoes last me ~6 months in good shape.
* Used for running when new, usually for a year.
* In their 2nd year, for walking, gym and casual use.
* In their 3rd year, for gardening, house maintenance and stuff like walks in muddy places.
Nothing fancy, just whatever is cheap and catches my eye - I usually go through 2 pairs a year.
It's worth remembering that whatever physical activity you feel best doing might be the best for you. We aren't just physical robots. Mental well-being is also part of health, and it affects your physical health to some degree as well. Not to mention that we're a lot likely to do things we find pleasurable, and physical activity that you do is healthier than activity you don't do.
It's best to bear in mind that quantitative research doesn't take into account those subjective differences. It's probably not a good idea to singularly optimize for what's statistically shown by evidence. It's not like we're all data points on a neatly fitting curve.
Just do healthy stuff that works for you and don’t worry about something you don’t want to do being slightly healthier.
Additionally, it’s great if you add a friend in the app to compete for the max steps in the last 7 days.
Also, stationary bikes are about half as effective as road biking. It seems that the necessity to maintain balance improves the results.
The same with weight machines. Lifting with barbells is more effective, and dumbbells even more so. This is because these require your muscle stabilizers to be engaged, while the machine stabilizes the weight for you.
Weight machines are an expensive waste of time.
Running and cycling (or most any other endurance sport) produce similar benefits for your energy systems as long as you hit the same heart rate zones. Most casual athletes find that for a given level of perceived exertion, running causes a slightly higher heart rate due to engaging more different muscles. But cycling is lower impact, so it's easier to sustain a target level for longer training sessions. Thus for general long-term health and fitness purposes it's better to cross train a mix of different sports.
Stationary bikes are as effective as road bikes for pure exercise purposes. It's just a matter of hitting the right power output and heart rate. Some pro triathletes now do the majority of their bike training indoors for safety and convenience. It's difficult to follow a structured workout on a road bike while navigating, dodging cars, and stopping at intersections. But with modern smart bike trainers it's easy to hit the exact target at each step and optimize physiological benefits. Some Zwift Academy participants have even scored pro cycling team contacts based on stationary bike workouts.
https://www.velonews.com/news/riders-get-pro-contracts-with-...
You can buy roller trainers or rocker plates if you want to work on balance but it makes little difference in the training benefits.
Given that cycling usually involves higher heart rates, a larger range of resistance, a larger range of joint movement, more balancing skills, and increased attention requirements, for the same period of time I would expect cycling to be better. And in most American cities, you can actually cycle from your home to another destination, whereas walking will not. Of course, cycling involves greater costs and danger.
Very true. I considered that too. My solution:
- bought a secondhand citybike iso race bike - always helmet & reflective vest - longer but safer route alternative
Only if we're talking about longer distances/times do I start to feel even a small amount of exertion.
In contrast, even a short run (say, 2 miles, or 20 minutes) I am out of breath, sweating like crazy, and totally exhausted.
In other words, unless I am spending a lot of time walking or cycling, I don't feel like I've exercised at all. Whereas even a short run is hard. So if I have a limited time window to exercise, I feel running is a more efficient use of that time?
"After adjustment for age, body-mass index, smoking status, alcohol intake, and family history of cardiovascular disease, swimmers had 53%, 50%, and 49% lower all-cause mortality risks than did men who were sedentary, walkers, or runners, respectively (p < 0.05 for each)."
edit: more, this one favors volleyball and stretching - https://globalsportmatters.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/sh...
Running is certainly usually harder for heavier folks, but being bad for your joints is not the reason.
Running a reasonable amount (contextually defined), with good form, in appropriate footwear, ideally not on hard surfaces (i.e. concrete) can be good for your joints.
To get the same benefits from running, you need to run faster/farther than walking. Just like when you switch biking, the same 3mi loop doesn't do any good and you need to start doing 10-15mi loops instead.