Walking Pace for Weight Loss

[nbk_]

I used the "Track my Exercise" function in the app yesterday for the first time and it gave me a walking pace (min/km). Is anyone able to tell me what an adequate pace is to lose weight? I don't want to just walk if it isn't going to help me burn some fat.
Thanks! 😊

[divedragon]

Pace should be sufficent to increase breathing and heart rate.  Heart rate should be at least 60% of maximum and max is caluclated as 220-your age time .6. 

[Tave]

What the above poster said!  Also, try to work some incline/hills and/or stairs into your walk.

[nbk_]

Thanks divedragon. I use the Flex, so I'm currently not tracking my heart rate. 

[emili]

if you belong to a gym you can do an experiment using the HR function on the treadmill. they are almost accurate so it will give you at least ballpark what pace you are doing to raise your heart rate above fatburn or at least to fatburn. if you do not belong to a gym, the old fashioned count your pulse will have to do. Its hard to recommend a number because we are all at different cardio fitness and medical fitness. I know for me I don't get into fatburn numbers until I am going at least 4.5 miles per hour for an extended time.

[msouza0317]

you guys think the heart rate scanner on here is pretty accurate? my bpm should be 188...but i'm an overweight smoke and have been doing insanity lol....im affraid that i'm going to pop...Highest ive had it on the charge HR has been like 175bpm

[divedragon]

---

@msouza0317 wrote:

you guys think the heart rate scanner on here is pretty accurate? my bpm should be 188...but i'm an overweight smoke and have been doing insanity lol....im affraid that i'm going to pop...Highest ive had it on the charge HR has been like 175bpm

---

188 seems high.  For fat burn, you should be 60% of max and max is 220-AGE.  Then take 60% of that.  If you are going for cardio condition, go to 80%.  The only time you should be going at max is if you are doing High Intensity Interval Training and that last only 5 or 10 minutes at a time.

If you are 32 years old, 80% of max is 150.

Having said that, no they are not always accurate.  Mine usually is less than actual as measured by other devices including manual by 8-10 %.  This one is better than the previous one I had which I had to send back after it quit when running in the rain.  Gotta love their customer service though!

[DominicJ]

Any is better than none,

From a weght loss perspectve, my "Three rules are"

As long as you can

As hard as you can

As often as you can

30 minutes at a slow walk are better than 15 minutes at a brisk walk.

30 minutes at a brisk walk are better than 15 minutes at a brisk walk

30 minutes every day are better than 30 minutes once a week.

Adequate pace is essentially as fast as you can maintain throughout your workout time and still be able to repeat it everyday.

[divedragon]

---

@DominicJ wrote:

Any is better than none,

30 minutes at a slow walk are better than 15 minutes at a brisk walk.

---

Respectfully, I have to disagree with this one statement.  Intensity counts for a lot.  High Intensity Interval Training works on this principle.  Takada when working with the olympic ice skating speed team pioneered the concept that 4 minutes alternating 20 seconds all out with 10 seconds rest made huge gains.  Intensity also increases the afterburn effect for fat.  Same concept as for weight lifting - heavy weight for 5 reps is better than a lighter weight for 10 reps.

Other than that statement, all else is spot on!

[DominicJ]

Respectfully, if you want to post your results, Im happy to look at them

But afterburn is gargbage

Yes, if you run at a sprint for 30seconds you will burn more calories than if you walkd for 30seconds, but you can walk for much longer than you can run,

HIIT falls down because few "normal" people and no over weight people can do 20 seconds flat out and a 10 second rest for any sustained period

"Intense" quickly becomes a crawl

[divedragon]

---

@DominicJ wrote:

Respectfully, if you want to post your results, Im happy to look at them

But afterburn is gargbage

Yes, if you run at a sprint for 30seconds you will burn more calories than if you walkd for 30seconds, but you can walk for much longer than you can run,

HIIT falls down because few "normal" people and no over weight people can do 20 seconds flat out and a 10 second rest for any sustained period

---

So it boils down to aerobic vs anerobic.  It the anerobic that creates the afterburn in the sense of sustained recover - that's the afterburn

As to "for any sustained period"  That is kind of the point.  You don't do it for sustained period, you do it for 4 minutes.  I'm 57 and sitll about 15 lbs overweight and I can do it.  Flat out is also a function of your current fitness level.  What is flat out for you, may be too much for me, but mine still pushes me to the anerobic threshold.

[divedragon]

---

@DominicJ wrote:

Respectfully, if you want to post your results, Im happy to look at them

But afterburn is gargbage

---

Here is a study that shows afterburn is a real thing:  https://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/epocarticle.html

Most noteworthy is this conclusion:

In summary, that data clearly show that exercise intensity is the main factor in determining the magnitude and duration of EPOC following aerobic exercise.

[DominicJ]

"You don't do it for sustained period, you do it for 4 minutes"

If you think you burn more calories in a 4 minute sprint than I do a 40 minute jog then I can only repeat, post your actuals.

"I'm 57 and sitll about 15 lbs overweight and I can do it"

Yeah, most of the people on here who say they are "overweight" are 50, 75, 100lbs overweight, or more.

I'm 24lbs over target.  Having already lost 48lbs.

But afterburn is gargbage

"Although the energy cost of both exercise bouts was 500 calories, the higher intensity bout caused a significantly higher EPOC than the lower intensity bout (9.0 liters, 45 calories versus 4.8 liters, 24 calories)."

If you are structuring your workout on maximising afterburn you have lost your way.

In the above example, we have two workouts, both burnt 500 calories, one afterburnt 45calories, the other 24 calories,

A difference in afterburn of 21 calories.

Thats nothing.  The bottle of diet cola I drank this morning contained more than that.

A 10% increase in workout calorie burn is better than a 100% increase in afterburn

By not taking rest periods and by not exhausiting yourself at the beginning of the workout, most people can increase their calorie burn during the workout by far more than they can increase it after the workout, ESPECIALLY if they are already overweight and unfit.

[SunsetRunner]

The real answer for the right pace/approach to exercise is to work with your physician and/or exercise physiologist to develop the right approach for you. My physician recommended alternating intensities during a 30 minute workout. The result was a 27 pound weight loss in the past 90 days. A friend tried the same approach and only lost 10 pounds. I suspect there is a difference in diet that entered into the equation.

Dominic's and divedragon's approaches may not be the best answer for you based on any number of factors, one of which is your overal physical condition. It is also a good idea to read the studies for the approach you are considering to understand the ideas behind what you are being asked to do. Your doctor can help you analyze the study to determine if it was a good study or not. Someone endorsing or criticizing a study based on what they "know" to be true is not a good critique of any given study. It's amazing how many of us think we know more than the experts.

Good luck.

[DominicJ]

"It's amazing how many of us think we know more than the experts."

Its amazing how many people think a "personal trainer" is an expert....

I went for a walk earlier, I averaged 9c/m, including the bit where I milled around the supermarket

I could maintain that walking speed more or less indefinantly

If I jog

I average 14c/m, but I cant jog for much more than half an hour.

I burnt more calories at the lower intensity.

If you are time limited, upping intensity makes sense, but only to the point where you can maintain it for that time period.

Afterburn, for most people here, is an irrelevence, its worth a couple of minutes at best.

[divedragon]

---

@DominicJ wrote:

"It's amazing how many of us think we know more than the experts."

Its amazing how many people think a "personal trainer" is an expert....

---

So I totally agree with this statement and as I did in a previous post, here are some studies by experts to back up my position, which is not really my position, but based on research of the real experts.  It is not my desire to get into a long drawn out battle over who's right and who wrong, but I do feel some obligation to correct where ever possible mis-conceptions.  I'll post the references and let anyone reading this thread draw their own conclusions.

https://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/HIITvsCardio.html

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2991639/

http://jap.physiology.org/content/102/4/1439

http://bmcsportsscimedrehabil.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2052-1847-7-3

Endurace training may cause damage to heart:

http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/12/05/eurheartj.ehr397

As for my own training, I do both.  This morning I started with a 5 min warm up, then 4 minutes of 20:10 HHIT followed by 50 minutes of steady state.  My view  is that HIIT puts me into an anerobic state which is maintained through the cardio portion.  I get the best of both worlds.  A year ago, I weighed 240 and today I weigh 189.  Those are the stats that count.

With this post, I conclude my comments.