Brisk Walking vs. Hiking

Brisk Walking vs. Hiking

Walking, Brisk Walking, Running, Hiking. Are these one and the same thing? You will find these series of articles helpful for your healthy lifestyle.

Brisk Walk & Hike | List | AllTrails

We attempted to do the longer trail back as it said moderate. It is not well marked at all and sun was going down fast. We ended up walking through golf course lol I would stick to this route.

Read More: Brisk Walk & Hike | List | AllTrails   How about this?  

Brisk Walking Reduces Stroke Risk

Women who walk two or more hours per week or who walk at a brisk pace can significantly reduce their risk of suffering a stroke, new research indicates.

The findings are based on a study of the exercising habits of 39,315 female health professionals whose average age was 54. It found that:

“Physical activity, including regular walking, is an important modifiable behavior for stroke prevention,” Jacob R. Sattelmair, MSc, of the Harvard School of Public Health, says in a news release. “Physical activity is essential to promoting cardiovascular health and reducing risk of cardiovascular disease, and walking is one way of achieving physical activity.”

Previous research has indicated that people who are physically active generally have a lower risk of stroke than those who are more sedentary.

Read More: Brisk Walking Reduces Stroke Risk  

“The Cinderella Solution offers an easy to start, simple-to-follow cure using Flavor-Pairing rituals that hit the “reset-switch” on your metabolisms 3 key fat-burning hormones; Insulin, Cortisol and Estrogen. Click this link for the solution.”

One more surprise health benefit of brisk walks.

Frequent, Brisk Walks May Aid Those With Early Alzheimer’s – The …

For some people with early-stage Alzheimer’s disease, frequent, brisk walks may help to bolster physical abilities and slow memory loss, according to one of the first studies of physical activity as an experimental treatment for dementia.

Read More: Frequent, Brisk Walks May Aid Those With Early Alzheimer’s – The …

  Speed matters?

Walking Speed and Longevity – Slow Walkers Die Younger

A new study has some bad news for the slow walkers out there.

Do you always pass slow walkers on the sidewalk, even if you are not in any real hurry? That may bode well for your lifespan, according to new research published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings.

In the study, researchers took self-reported walking speeds and body mass indexes (BMI) of nearly 475,000 participants, and followed up with them for nearly seven years. There were around 12,800 deaths in that time.

They used this data to estimate the lifespan of the participants. They discovered that regardless of BMI, brisk walkers enjoyed a longer longevity than the slow walkers. The life expectancy of brisk-walking women ranged from 87 to 88, and from 85 to 87 in brisk-walking men. Slow-walking women, on the other hand, had a life expectancy of 72 to 85. Men who walked slow had a life expectancy of 65 to 81.

Read More: Walking Speed and Longevity – Slow Walkers Die Younger  

“Having trouble STICKING with the Paleo diet?” This stunningly simple cookbook will show you how to cook savory, mouth-watering meals in minutes for some of the busiest Paleo eaters in the world. Find out more by clicking the link.”

Are you ready to run or choose to walk? 

Walking vs. Running | How Many Calories Do You Burn Walking?

If someone asks you which burns more calories, walking or running, the answer is pretty obvious, right? It’s running, of course. But walking provides a lot of the same benefits as running, and it can be a valuable workout in its own right. Here’s how the two stack up against each other.

Running a mile and walking a mile aren’t going to burn dramatically different calorie amounts, says Alex Harrison, Ph.D., a USA Track & Field-certified run coach and sport performance coach for Renaissance Periodization. However, it’s going to take you a lot longer to do the latter—and so the caloric difference between walking and running comes down to how many calories you burn per minute, not per mile.

A 140-pound person burns approximately 13.2 calories per minute running, according to the American Council of Exercise. That same person would burn approximately 7.6 calories per minute walking. I’ll do the math for you: For a 30-minute run, that works out to around 396 calories burned running compared to around 228 calories burned while walking for 30 minutes.

Read More: Walking vs. Running | How Many Calories Do You Burn Walking?  

Will you choose to run or to hike? 

Should You Run or Hike That Hill? – CTS

Chances are, if you are asking the question, you should power-hike (walk). At slower speeds, walking is a more economical form of locomotion than running. It is only when you speed up to near the 12-min/mile range on level ground that walking is less economical (Falls and Humphrey 1976; Margaria 1976; Glass and Dwyer 2007).

The practical decision to run or power-hike has to do with both the situation you are in and the difference in energy costs between the two forms of locomotion.

While most elite runners, particularly at the 50K and 50-mile distance, will choose to run anything they can in order to finish faster, they knowingly do so at the expense of economy and have to spike their efforts up the steepest climbs in order to continue running instead of slowing down to a power-hike. At shorter ultra distances, this strategy can work because winning a race is a good tradeoff as long as the increase in effort is reasonable. However, most ultrarunners are not in that position. Most want to finish as fast as they can, but prioritizing economy and effort level over short-term speed, specifically when choosing whether to walk or run, will almost always end up saving the average ultrarunner time. For the average ultrarunner—and definitely anyone flirting with cutoff times—running when you should be power-hiking burns a lot of energy and takes a toll on your system. Any time you gain in the effort will likely be lost (plus additional time) when you are forced to slow down.

“Check this cool 4-foot design solar industry secret. A self sustained power source like a power plant inside your home. Check it out. Click here.”

Now, what speed you should choose for power-hiking is a more complicated question due to individual variability, course specificity, terrain technicality, and fatigue. The preferred walk-to-run transition speed is around 2.1 meters per second or 12:46 min/mile on flat ground (Beuter and Lalonde 1988; Hreljac 1993; Diedrich and Warren 1995). This means that if you begin walking and gradually increase your speed, you will naturally transition from a walk to a run at about this pace. The scientific explanations vary, but one thing is certain: At speeds slower than the preferred walk-to-run transition point, on level ground, it is energetically optimal to walk (Falls and Humphrey 1976; Margaria 1976; Dwyer 2007). This means running at a 12- to 13-min/mile pace requires more cardiovascular effort and more energy than walking at a 12- to 13-min/mile pace. This balance changes with increases in grade and differences in surface. Generally speaking, the speed at which you should transition slows down as the surface gets more technical and grades get steeper. To put it in practical terms, if you are running on any normal climb (4 to 15 percent grade) around 18- to 19-min/ mile or slower, it’s in your best interest to drop to a power-hike, even at the expense of a few extra seconds at the top. You will be far more economical, and the required effort is substantially lower. As a bonus, you can take the opportunity to take in a few calories.

Read More: Should You Run or Hike That Hill? – CTS  

“Harness the female fat burning hormone for a total metabolic overhaul using the metabolic override trick. Click to Learn More”

Brisk walking or walking slow? Enjoy this video/song before you carry on reading.  

Walking up the slopes. To walk brisk or to walk slow? – The Great …

This question has been eating my head for quite some time now.

I trek often and most of the treks involve climbing up to a peak or something similar. I usually carry heavy loads of around 13-15kgs on my back and I’ve always found that walking up the slopes of a hill/mountain at a brisker pace is easier with the heavier loads. I climb fast, rest for a minute or two and start off briskly again. However, I have met trekkers who have told me that this is not a good practice and it’s better to maintain a slow pace while going up the slopes. I did try this a few times but a slower pace tires me down faster while carrying heavier loads.

Hence, which is better while walking up the slopes? Slower pace or the brisk one? Or is it just a matter of choice and nothing more? (Better in terms of the ease of the climb and avoiding injuries over a period of years)

Read More: Walking up the slopes. To walk brisk or to walk slow? – The Great …

Affiliate links appear in this post where we will earn some commissions without any additional cost should you decide to make a purchase. Please find disclosure for details.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *