Slow walking or fast?
 

Prevention and other sources say that interval walking is best for losing weight, but I read an article yesterday saying that walking slower taps into the fat stores more easily.

Thoughts? Experience?

Thanks,

DZ

I've read that slow walking burns more calories per mile, too. It's got something to do with the efficiency of how your body is moving, but I'm not sure how many more calories per mile you actually burn..... I prefer walking briskly because I want to burn more calories in a shorter amount of time.

If you walk 2 miles at a 2 mph pace, and I walk 5 miles a 5 mph pace you will have burned more calories per mile than I did - but I'd be way ahead on total calories burned for the same 1 hour.

Here's a chart you might be interested in. Pace/Calories Burned Chart

Heidi,

Thanks for the input--I'll look at that link.

I guess I do both types of walking anyway depending on how I feel. Somedays I only have enough energy to stroll...

DZ

The slow walking tapping into fat stores is kind of misleading. Basically your body burns different percentages of types of energy based on what is easy and what is available. When you are sleeping, your body burns a higher percentage of fat than when you are walking around. Same is true for if you are walking slow versus walking fast/doing intervals, your body is burning a higher percentage of fat but in the same time period will burn less calories overall and less fat overall. Intervals are actually a great way to burn a lot of calories in a short period of time.

If a slow walk is what you can do, then go for it :) If you can add in some faster walking intervals into your slow walking, then that will help you burn more fat/calories overall.