I might be missing something here, but a lot of people in this thread appear to be saying “Walking has so little exercise benefit that you might as well do absolutely nothing”, which is… an unhelpful attitude, IMHO. Kind of like claiming that Twilight and Harry Potter aren’t “real” books, it seems.
Exactly. My point (well, one of them) is like saying that people who read Harry Potter or Stephen King books are still READING, and that’s better than not reading at all. Every book you pick up doesn’t have to be Dostoevsky, and not everyone is aiming for a classical education.
Ah, yes, walking the plank. The instructors had us do this in bootcamp when push ups weren’t enough. The fond memories it brings back.
Aside from the plank and handstand push ups, what exercices are there? Where should one start then progress to?
A lot of gym habitues are average people! They’re not all hardcore athletes. I see no reason to define the “average” folks as the ones who failed.
Besides which, I also routinely encounter people who say that they gave up on exercise because they DIDN’T see results. I have yet to encounter a single person who gave up on exercise because the big, bad gym members complained about them hogging the equipment. (And if they did give up for that reason, it would be a copout anyway, since there are all sort of other options available, such as working out at home or outdoor exercise.)
Correct (though actually, I’d say that if you notice other people waiting for a chance to use the machines, you should give those people a chance). And anyone who quits because other people complain about them hogging the machines doesn’t deserve much by way of sympathy. They’re obviously looking for an excuse to quit and using other gym members as their scapegoats.
As you said, my goodness.
I’m willing to be corrected, but I don’t recall ANYONE saying such a thing. A tiny few have said that they don’t consider it to be real exercise, but that’s not the same as saying that it’s worth absolutely nothing.
In fact, the majority of people here have argued that it IS helpful. Many have correctly pointed out that it does not provide the same benefits as more demanding exercise, but that it is beneficial nonetheless.
Right. It is unhelpful. Thankfully, the majority of posters here have not espoused any such view.
Yes and it’s something I try to do at least an hour or two a day.
They may not have outright said it, but it’s certainly an extremely strong impression that I’ve gained from reading the thread.
Perfection is the enemy of the good. Walking may not be up there with fell running in terms of the number of calories burnt, but it’s still exercise.
Since Christmas, I’ve taken to walking every Saturday morning (just back), walking to work, and watching my diet. I’ve already lost six-seven pounds and feel much fitter.
The problem with such impression is that people often project their own preconceived notions into what people must surely be thinking. Hence the frequent complaints on the SDMB such as “I won’t go to the gym because I just know that the people there would surely be laughing at me” or words to that effect.
If anything, the vast majority of people here have been saying that walking IS beneficial. They correctly point out that it’s not intense exercise, and that it produce results more slowly than, say, running. However, they’re generally been supportive of the notion that it does produce tangible benefits.
For some reason though, you’re construing those remarks to mean “Walking has so little exercise benefit that you might as well do absolutely nothing.” As I said, methinks that you’re projecting your preconceived notions, which run contrary to what people have actually been saying.
I think you also have an incorrect notion of what gym people are like. Based on my years of experience with various gyms, I’d say that the vast majority of gym regulars are not hardcore athletes. Rather, they are everyday folks who made a commitment to get in shape or to otherwise improve their fitness levels. Of course, the people who lack determination will peter out, and they may even blame their failure on those mean, nasty fit people who complain about them hogging the cardio equipment while working out at ultralow intensities. This does not mean that we should consider the failures to be the “average” folks and the dedicated people to be somehow exceptional. By and large, they’re not.
Heck, not even Cubsfan, to whom you replied, has said that walking cannot be considered exercise. Rather, Cubsfan said that power walking is exercise, whereas a slow, leisure, chatty stroll is not. There is a broad continuum within those two extremes, with differing degrees of exertion and fitness benefits. (Personally, I’m not sure that I’d consider a leisurely stroll to be real exercise either; after all, when we’re just walking around the house, we don’t typically consider that to be a workout. I do think that this is a gray area, though.)
I concur. Nobody ever made me feel uncomfortable in a gym, not that I expected anyone to.
What does get discouraging is that, in my opinion, working out is sort of like clothes or cosmetics. You can optimize what you have, just as the right clothes will improve your appearance. But the biggest factor is your choice of parents. Only a fortunate few start out with yoga or free weights and experience crazy increases in strength and flexibility inside of six months.
If by “walking” you mean taking a stroll down the block now and then, obviously you are not going to make a huge difference. It’s better than playing video games, but is not really a fitness regime.
But if you make walking a part of your life, it can become a huge asset to your healthy lifestyle. I firmly believe that keeping a constant low-level of activity is as or more beneficial than relying on bi-weekly workouts.
I don’t drive, so I end up walking at least three miles a day just going about my daily business. On weekends or busy days, it may be significantly more…maybe more like six or seven. I do this every day, rain or shine, as a normal part of my life. It’s not something I think about or make extra time for, I’m just kind of always on the move. When you are walking meaningful distances every single day, without breaks, it is going to make a difference. It won’t do much for cardio, but it will give you nice legs and keep you slim.
I disagree that it won’t do much for cardio. MrWhatsit is a mailman and therefore spends most of his day out walking. Last year when I was training for my half-marathon, he decided to go on a run with me, just to see how far he could get. He made it the first 4 miles, and then turned around to run back mostly just because he got bored.
IMO anything that leaves you capable of running 8 miles on a whim is nothing to sneeze at.
If the information in this link is true, then it pretty much proves that walking is exercise.
The main point involves walking in relation to doing nothing. The number of calories you burn while doing nothing is considered a Metabolic Equivalent (MET. ~58 cal/hr for a 150lb person):
Obviously it depends on how fast you go. Here is their breakdown:
Strange that the numbers don’t progress in a straight line. But fast or slow it is better than nothing. People who don’t exercise but want to start ought to consider starting with walking before/if they move to something more intense
There was a period of about 5 years where I lived a carless lifestyle, and had similar activity levels, perhaps with even a little bit more walking. As soon as I got back to a car-based lifestyle (I moved), my weight starting creeping up. Over the course of a year, I gained about 20 pounds, with no other difference to my eating habits, so far as I could tell. If anything, my caloric intake decreased slightly, as I wasn’t drinking (alcohol) as much.
So, yeah, it’s exercise and it makes a difference. Apparently about 20 pounds, in my case.
(I eventually noticed the weight, made some lifestyle changes, and dropped 40 pounds, but I credit half that weight loss to modifying my diet, and half to exercise. I don’t buy the “you can only lose 10 pounds” through exercise idea that I occasionally hear floated.)
The more you weigh, the less of a role exercise plays in your weight loss.
If someone weighs 225 pounds and burns 2500 calories just living through a day, it is fairly easy to cut out 500 calories, and not too much of a struggle to cut out 1000. However, a person who weighs 225 pounds (assuming that the extra weight is fat) is pretty out of shape, and it would be very difficult for them to burn 500 calories a day and probably impossible to burn 1000. The majority of their caloric deficit is going to come from restricting eating.
If a person weighs 120 and burns 1500 calories a day, cutting out 500 means living most of the day very hungry, and cutting out 1000 is impossible for any length of time. The most a very small person can hope to restrict per day in a sustainable way is 200-300 calories. It’s much easier to match or exceed this figure through exercise, so a very small person might well lose weight more through exertion than through restriction.
I respectfully disagree. The issue I see is that really out of shape people are reluctant to do any exercise at all -> they talk themselves out of including exercise in their health portfolio -> they remain out of shape.
I think a person who wants to lose weight/get in shape will need to allocate at least a year, and probably two or more to see any significant results.
An out of shape person who walks very slowly and burns only 100 calories a day at it is on track to lose ~10 lbs. a year-without restricting eating at all. Make it a lifetime habit and voila! Eventually this person will reach their weight goals.
10 lbs a year isn’t fast enough for most people (it’s impossible for a 225 lb person to burn 1000 cal/day!), and so they give up. I guess there is a kind of leap of faith involved with exercise, in that if you do it, you really will get better at it. That is what getting in shape is all about. If 100 calories a day is all the exercise a person can handle, they need to be realistic about that and do it anyway (disclaimer- I am not your boss, so don’t if you don’t want to). It isn’t a contest- your results are only relative to yourself, not Michael Phelps. In a matter of mere weeks this person will be up to 110+ cal/day, and so on in a gradual progression. It can seem like it will take forever if your goal is to get up to 500 cal/day. Note all the anecdotes of people who just happen to be walking and are surprised by their weight loss… better to just do it and not worry about it so much.
No out of shape person is going to be able to jump in and perform the kind of workouts a trained athlete can do. Every out of shape person can do some exercise. And a person would really have to be out of shape to not be able to walk. So! Start with walking, be realistic about what is within your abilities, and over time your exercise program will ‘ratchet up’ and be a bigger and bigger contributor to your weight loss goals.
But! Only if you do it.
I’m in no way saying an out of shape, overweight person shouldn’t exercise. I’m a huge advocate of exercise. I’m just saying that for a out-of-shape, overweight person who remakes their lifestyle, it’s pretty easy to get 80% of one’s caloric deficit from caloric restriction and 20% from exercise: for someone who weighs 120 and wants to weigh 110, exercise will almost certainly play a larger percentage.
It’s easier, when very overweight and very out of shape, to cut 500 calories than to burn 100. It’s best to do both, and better to do either than neither.
Erm, that’s not quite true. As you lose weight, your caloric needs decrease, so you do have to reduce intake at some point.
Agreed.