Why walking is the most underrated form of exercise (2017)
87 comments
·May 21, 2025mcntsh
lm28469
> I don't really think it's a good physical exercise
The problem is that most people don't do anything physical at all and walking is one of the easiest way to get started. Any type of activity is beneficial, you need to move for your lymphatic system to work properly and walking is perfect for that, your feet/lower legs basically are lymph pumps: https://www.mdpi.com/2813-3307/2/2/4
kotyk
I once tried to burn 3,000+ calories per day using just walking. I had heart issues and couldn't do intense workouts, so I set a goal of 20,000 steps a day.
To hit that consistently, I ended up walking 4–5 hours daily. It worked — I was burning massive energy — but it was hugely time-consuming. When I later recovered, I realized the same burn could be done in 40 minutes of gym effort.
Walking is absolutely underrated, especially for recovery and mental clarity. But in raw efficiency... it’s humbling how long it takes to match even moderate training.
90s_dev
> I once tried to burn 3,000+ calories per day using just walking.
You'll generally burn about ~2k cals per day just being alive. An intense workout for an hour can burn maybe 500 on top of this. I think your math might be off somewhere if you walked a lot and figured that you spent a whole 1k.
bryanlarsen
Fat dudes burn significantly more than ~2k per day just being alive, or at least I did when I was younger. I lost significant weight on a 2300 calorie/day diet. So maybe the OP was 2500 for "being alive" and 500 for the workout?
90s_dev
Possible, and I considered that, which is why I put 500 cals for an intense hour-long workout, to imply that walking for a few hours will not even come close to 500 cals.
null
null
crabbone
Yeah, I too thought this number was unrealistic. I run, and I know that it takes about 60 calories per km (I run 10 km usually). To burn 3000 I'd have to... run more than a marathon (50 km, marathon is 42 km). Running marathon every day is... I won't say impossible, but is highly impractical (and actually impossible for most people who can run marathon). For an average runner, it takes 4-5 hours. So, I think that to burn 3k calories by walking one would need to walk way, way longer than 5 hours a day. Not sure even if it's possible to squeeze that much walking in a day.
psb217
The best way to hit 3000 is cycling. A reasonably fit (70kg-100kg) cyclist should burn 600-800 cal/hr riding at a moderate pace, so 3000 is a 4-5hr ride. It wouldn't be unusual for an enthusiastic amateur cyclist to hit that 1-2x/week.
defrost
For interest:
William Goodge smashes record after running across Australia in 35 days
British athlete four days quicker than previous record holder who completed 3,800km feat in 39 days
Spurred on by his mother’s battle with cancer, and with his father by his side, William Goodge crossed the finish line in Sydney just after 4pm on Monday.
It brought an end to 35 days of pounding the pavement, striding the equivalent of two-and-a-half marathons a day.
bob1029
This is what is kicking in when you do anaerobic exercises:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_post-exercise_oxygen_co...
> Anaerobic exercise in the form of high-intensity interval training was also found in one study to result in greater loss of subcutaneous fat, even though the subjects expended fewer than half as many calories during exercise.
Walking essentially does nothing to your EPOC levels. A one rep maximum deadlift can elevate it substantially for hours. 10 seconds of suffering can trigger responses that hours of walking cannot.
ChrisRR
My weight loss shows a huge difference in cycling vs. burning the same number of calories walking
lm28469
> the same number of calories
How do you measure the calories burned ? Get 10 different devices you'll get 10 different measures.
davisoneee
EPOC only accounts for something like 60 additional calories burned in the next 24 hours...unless there is something unexplained going on, it's _greatly_ overblown how significant this actually is
...but it sounds sciencey and sexy so it's often repeated.
crabbone
60 calories is what you burn when running 1 km. It's not insignificant :)
bluecalm
You will not burn 3000 kcal in 40 minutes of gym effort. Even burning 1000kcal in an hour requires serious fitness and burning 1200 is elite athlete level max effort for a full hour.
Calories burnt by walking, assuming flat surface are decently approximated by (distance_in_km x weight) formula so it is possible to burn a lot in 4-5 hours of walking but quite unlikely to hit 3000 unless you're very fit.
spacemadness
I think they mean all day calorie burn, not active burn.
bluecalm
Yeah but then they will not get close to what they can burn with 4 hours of walking by doing a 40 minutes gym session.
the_snooze
Going by my fitness tracker, a 1-hour 900kcal gym session is absolutely intense. On the few times I've hit that mark, I'm laid out on the ground and probably need to take it easy the next day.
More realistically, I hit 600-700kcal per session.
ndsipa_pomu
I've burnt over 1000kcal in an hour cycling and I'm over 50 and not super-fit. A few hills can make all the difference as it's difficult to be lazy whilst grinding your way up-hill.
chneu
Be aware the caloric estimates on gym equipment are like 20% over estimated.
redeux
As endurance hunters our bodies are tuned for efficient use of energy during low/medium paced exercise. Walking is awesome, and I try to get out there and do an hour a day, but I agree - you get much better results from the gym because our bodies aren’t specifically tuned for those types of workouts. Lifting weights also has a lot of tangible benefits for both men and women in the short and long term.
spacemadness
One of those being not being an otherwise healthy middle aged person constantly complaining about their back, general body pain, etc. I see people in their 70s even at the gym who look and seemingly feel great because they’ve been doing some resistance training their whole adult lives. Better than some software devs I know who never move and are in their 30s.
p_ing
> As endurance hunters
There's no evidence for this.
But everyone should walk a little bit if only for the mental health benefits.
chneu
Lol yes there is. You can find people alive today who still do it.
We used to do it as children on the ranch. Running down sheep and cows is easy. Deer just take more time.
redeux
There’s actually a good amount of evidence for this. Here’s a basic look but you can dig in to other sources that will expand on how we know this.
meindnoch
>But in raw efficiency... it’s humbling how long it takes to match even moderate training.
Bipedal walking on mostly flat ground can only be matched by kangaroos' hopping in terms of energy efficiency.
ndsipa_pomu
laughs in cycling
ChrisRR
Presumably by 3000 you mean 1000 over the ~2000 from your basal rate? 1000kcal per day from walking alone is about 3-4 hours of walking per day depending on weight.
2muchcoffeeman
4-5 hours for 20k steps? Because of your heart issues?
I just checked my current stats. I have 15k steps recently from walking to and from my job. And that’s not counting the steps at the gym. I take off my watch since it’s often a hindrance during work outs.
p_ing
I have a recorded 'hike' (on very steep logging roads) of 7 hours with a total expenditure of 1800 cal active/2500 cal total with an elevation gain of 3000' (the decent was way harder).
Are you walking for work?
clamlady
I wish more folks knew about/would take up rucking. Yes, I look a bit odd as a small woman in my neighborhood wearing a giant weighted backpack, but it's a great workout.
yread
I once trained for a mountain hike by walking up down the stairs in our 14 floor apartment building with 25kg backpack. I had no idea it has a name! I also walked 15km to work a few times, but I admit it affected my productivity...
0_____0
rucking seems like it would be bad for one's back and knees? How much weight do you use? It seems like one of those things that's military inspired, except I don't have the VA to look after me if I wear out my hard goods.
lm28469
> be bad for one's back and knees?
"This can't be good for your body" is a bullshit excuse most of the time, I have 1 in a million chance to pulling a muscle while deadlifting, but someone who sits all day and don't exercise has 1 in 1 chance of slowly rotting away day by day, pick your poison. Unless you morbidly obese I don't think a 10kg backpack will be the straw that breaks the camel's back
Most people got it backwards, your knees and back don't hurt because you overused them, they hurt because they're grossly underused.
0_____0
I do 10-15 hours of cardio a week lol. I make an effort to take care of my knees because at those training loads, having bad bike fit or an uncorrected varus knee issue can mean really messing things up for yourself.
My question was how much weight is necessary. Also curious whether that applies on the flat or only on incline, and whether a similar training load could be accomplished with lower joint stress by doing unloaded runs and weight room stuff.
chneu
People always have excuses.
dnpls
+1 for rucking. It's as easy as walking and you can progressively increase the weights if you want more effort - I need a better backpack for my weights!
treetalker
I've been considering getting into rucking. Can anyone recommend a weighted vest or a rucksack to purchase?
chasil
"Walking is the suggested workout over running for... those with knee, ankle and back problems... walking... creates less stress on joints and reduces pain."
I've seen many people around me with knee replacements, and I do not want that for myself.
I walk two miles per day. I would not run for this reason.
Swizec
> knees /../ I would not run for this reason
Studies increasingly show that running is not bad for your knees and runners in fact have some of the strongest healthiest knees around. User proper form, replace your shoes regularly, don’t train for the olympics, and running will be just fine for your joints.
> Studies have shown that recreational runners have a knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) prevalence that is three times lower than that of sedentary non-runners. Competitive runners showed an even more impressive four-fold reduction in knee and hip OA prevalence. These results are due to the fact that regular running strengthens the muscles around the knee joint and supports overall joint health. Running also plays a vital role in maintaining healthy cartilage and bone density, which are crucial for knee function.
https://longevity.stanford.edu/lifestyle/2023/08/29/is-runni...
Edman274
Is it your contention that if an obese, not-runner who views walking as a form of exercise were to start running, the immediate effect would not be knee injury, but actually strengthened knees, on the evidence of a study comparing recreational runners to people who are obese and don't move at all?
AnimalMuppet
Also consider not running on pavement. A track, a trail, or grass will be kinder to your knees.
0_____0
Trail running has a lot of weird loads associated with it, at least where I am. Roots and rocks galore, never a dull moment.
lm28469
> I've seen many people around me with knee replacements
Caused by running too much ?
Every sport is detrimental at _very high_ level but I think you have a faaaat margin before running becomes an issue, most people are much closer to "undertraining" than "overtraining"
If you learn to run without heel striking (I don't even know how people can run like that but I see it all the time, no wonder it hurts your knees) and don't run on hard surfaces you can run a marathon a week and I doubt you'd ever develop any issues
https://www.health.harvard.edu/healthbeat/will-continuing-to...
chasil
The article appears to contradict this.
“Adding an incline is a great way to increase the challenge for your cardiovascular system and get the same kind of benefits that you can get from jogging or running without the same amount of wear and tear on your knees,” says Tyler Spraul, a Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist and the Head Trainer at Exercise.com.
mcntsh
Rollerblading, cycling, swimming... there are plenty of lower impact cardio exercises to running. Walking isn't true cardio exercise.
amelius
Underrated, but also overrated, as it does not bring the heartrate into the region for cardiofitness (unless you are walking up a steep mountain).
spudlyo
It depends on your weight and current fitness levels, for sedentary and morbidly obese folks walking can be a zone 3-4 workout, as it's more like rucking.
sn9
You would be shocked at how easy it is for walking to put you into Zone 1-2, especially if there's any incline. Especially for non-athletes.
There was even a period of history where extreme volumes of walking were used in marathon training.
dns_snek
Of course this depends on your current level of fitness. Even modest walking pace on level terrain can bring you up to ~70% of your max HR if you're out of shape.
IncreasePosts
You just walk faster
90s_dev
Fun story, I once walked about 11 hours because of my stupidity, and at the end my heart wouldn't stop racing even after I passed out in a bed. I woke up a few times with my heart still racing, and that whole day and night I wasn't sure I was going to make it. Don't repeat my mistake. Don't walk too much.
0_____0
I have ridden a bike for 24 hours+ several times and have not experienced anything like that. Mild post exertional resting HR increase is normal (going from 50 to 65, say) but I think you had a different issue.
lm28469
Definitely, healthy people should be able to hike 8+ hours a day for days in a row with minimal difficulties. Walking shouldn't raise your heart rate that much unless you're walking uphill, a healthy heart should be able to come back under 100bpm fairly quickly too
0_____0
"healthy" is a very loose term it seems. I know many people who would be called healthy by their doctors simply because they didn't have any concerning medical history or present concerns.
I think I may agree with you that "healthy" should include basic levels of fitness and not simply !(ill)
pastage
88 hours of walking.
IncreasePosts
You might have just been low on electrolytes
xwowsersx
I train six days a week, but since I work from home, I was actually pretty sedentary outside of my gym time—basically just an hour or so of movement a day. That changed recently when I got a Fitbit. I've gotta say, it's helped a lot. Just having something simple like step tracking and reminders to move makes it way easier to stay aware and hold myself accountable. Now I'm consistently hitting at least 10,000 steps a day. Before I started tracking, I would've assumed 10,000 steps was a lot, but now I realize it's actually pretty easy to hit if you’re just a little intentional about it...tbh 10K feels like a basic minimum.
rhubarbtree
100% agree got a Fitbit recently my steps have gone through the roof.
The biggest change was when I made it show steps on the main screen.
joduplessis
I can't think of a single person that would think of walking as "pointless".
pc86
It's a great way to get from point A to point B, it's a great workout if you're "maybe you should have a television show" levels of obese, but if you're reasonably fit and not completely sedentary in your day-to-day life it is pointless as a means of exercise.
Context matters and in terms of good means of exercise it does not take much for walking to fall pretty far down the list.
spudlyo
I think "pointless as a means of exercise" perhaps overstates it a bit. I agree you're not going to see much benefits in terms of cardiovascular fitness, but every bit of activity figures into one's energy balance. You often hear that even small little movements throughout the day (non exercise activity thermogenesis) can be the difference between maintaining weight homeostasis or having a few pounds a year creep into your life. Prioritizing walking seems like a good hedge against this if you're not blessed with NEAT.
InitialLastName
I know lots of people who are anywhere between bemused and actively hostile to the idea that walking might be a worthwhile activity, either on its own or as a transportation mode (and this in a region with decent pedestrian infrastructure, and temperate weather).
hyperbovine
Trying living in Los Angeles.
blu3h4t
I’ve just lost 45 kilos in 10 month with 10 km a day walking and lots of vegetables and fruits. AMA :D
thaisstein
That's why walkable cities are so important for mental health in general
iJohnDoe
FWIW, walking 30 minutes a day is hugely beneficial. Even when I wasn't eating as healthy, my 30 minute walk would keep me maintained and healthy. I would just walk and BS with a friend for 30 minutes.
Walking is a low calorie burn which is sometimes more beneficial when you're out of shape. One theory is that your body doesn't go into fight-or-flight. Running might be too stressful, which might cause an excess cortisol response, which can increase fat storage (especially belly fat), suppress recovery, cause muscle breakdown, so overdoing running when out of shape can backfire metabolically. Not because it's ineffective, but because the body is overwhelmed by the perceived "emergency."
Anecdata, simply walking more was the magic solution for me.
josefritzishere
Read Obesity stats, eat less junk, go for a walk. https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statisti...
My take is that walking is good for the mind and soul. I don't really think it's a good physical exercise, but it's definitely better than nothing.