I find it a lot more fun. Are the psychological benefits taken into account? My attention is always better after running.
Is running a more efficient way to travel than walking?
91–100 of 188 posts
Re: Is running a more efficient way to travel than walking?
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
Walking is a weight bearing exercise, while cycling is not. That's why cyclists can develop osteopenia. ( https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/why-cycling-is-bad-for-bo... )
Sure, but I don't think it is reasonable to perform a single physical activity if your goal is maintaining good health anyway. There is a neeed for resistance training, cardio, mobility and balance. E.g. lift weights, ride a bike, do some yoga. It is only a matter of finding activities that you enjoy.
I don't think that's reasonable at all. I ride and trail run regularly, and the amount of time that it subtracts from my nerd hobbies is *immense*. Other poster is right, the 99th percentile regular non-professional shredded athletes I know do one thing consistently.
Re: Is running a more efficient way to travel than walking?
#93This problem was treated with a bit more sophistication by Harvards Lieberman in „A story of the human body“ and the corresponding nature article [0] establishing persistence hunting as an ancestoral hunting technique of homo sapien. See figure 2b for the plot you were looking for. Running faster is less efficient but only slightly so and walking is a U-shaped curve like most mammal gaites. It shows that in contrast…
I don't doubt the results but I cannot imagine how that can be true, I'm not fit but I've had many 20+hours hikes to the high mountain peaks but if I run to a bus stop when I'm late I'm tired beyond belief and I just cannot maintain running, have to stop
Re: Is running a more efficient way to travel than walking?
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a runner and have had a weird question, could a runner defeat a larger human in this way? Like if I found myself in mortal combat with The Rock at 260 lbs after his steroids cycle, could I just repeatedly run away and follow him (while staying out of range) until he tired out and then bonk him on the head with a rock, like a tired antelope? (No offense to The Rock, seems like a great guy) Might explain why we are…
Somewhat related anecdote: When a friend of mine was in college, he got into some sort of amicable debate with another friend and they decided the way to resolve it was through a boxing match. Neither of them had an ounce of boxing experience. My friend realized before the match that just holding the gloves up and swinging punches is more tiring than you'd think. So the strategy he settled on was to just put his guar…
Was your friend perhaps Muhommed Ali, fighting George Foreman in Zaire? Or perhaps Homer Simpson fighting Drederick Tatum?
Re: Is running a more efficient way to travel than walking?
#95This problem was treated with a bit more sophistication by Harvards Lieberman in „A story of the human body“ and the corresponding nature article [0] establishing persistence hunting as an ancestoral hunting technique of homo sapien. See figure 2b for the plot you were looking for. Running faster is less efficient but only slightly so and walking is a U-shaped curve like most mammal gaites. It shows that in contrast…
I don't doubt the results but I cannot imagine how that can be true, I'm not fit but I've had many 20+hours hikes to the high mountain peaks but if I run to a bus stop when I'm late I'm tired beyond belief and I just cannot maintain running, have to stop
I think it assumes you run regularly and are therefore fit for running.
The same way if you lie in bed for a month you're not going to be doing 20 hour hikes either.
Fitness isn't a one-dimensional thing -- our muscles adapt efficiently to our specific activities and only our specific activities.
So comparing the efficiency of walking and running only makes sense for someone who is already well-adapted to both.
Re: Is running a more efficient way to travel than walking?
#96This problem was treated with a bit more sophistication by Harvards Lieberman in „A story of the human body“ and the corresponding nature article [0] establishing persistence hunting as an ancestoral hunting technique of homo sapien. See figure 2b for the plot you were looking for. Running faster is less efficient but only slightly so and walking is a U-shaped curve like most mammal gaites. It shows that in contrast…
I'm a runner and have had a weird question, could a runner defeat a larger human in this way? Like if I found myself in mortal combat with The Rock at 260 lbs after his steroids cycle, could I just repeatedly run away and follow him (while staying out of range) until he tired out and then bonk him on the head with a rock, like a tired antelope? (No offense to The Rock, seems like a great guy) Might explain why we are…
I'm a big guy, 6'5", 255 (aiming for 240), plenty of muscle, and when I was a young kid and teen I cycled a _lot_. I kept cycling through my 20s, and did a tremendous amount of walking too for enjoyment. At my peak I could run a mile in just under 7 minutes. I did the 50 and 100m sprints freshman year of high school for track and won a fair amount. I was on the swim team. And despite all of that, yes, the cross country kids had more stamina than me, although I could beat them in sprints.
So, anecdotally, yeah, me vs a runner and the runner takes off? If I don't catch them within a couple of hundred yards, they're gone. I can walk or cycle at a medium pace all day, but distance runners will beat me in marathons every single time. In caveman times I'd have been the closer, the guy who catches up to the runners and finishes off the bear or tiger or elephant when it's exhausted.
Re: Is running a more efficient way to travel than walking?
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also purely anecdotal, but I once lost 17kg (37lb) just by walking an additional 90 minutes a day for several months straight. And successfully maintained the new low weight for years afterward, also by walking moderately more than the usual. The great thing about walking is that you can just keep doing it mindlessly, while also doing other things such as commuting, shopping, running errands and taking care of the do…
90min/day is a lot Ive started doing 6kmh walk for 30min after gym, two times a week and Ive lost like 10kg in 6 months
6km/h is a brisk walk. You need to concentrate on the walking aspect if you want to maintain that pace.
Slow down a bit to 4-5km/h and you can last much longer, not to mention multitask more effectively (listen to an audiobook, be on a phone call, just brainstorm, etc.) so you don't actually need to set aside hours a day specifically for walking.
Re: Is running a more efficient way to travel than walking?
#98It's an interesting question, but only looking at energy expenditure probably does not cut it. I hike a lot and started running races in alpine territory (e.g. this one [1]) about a decade ago and think if you take into account fatigue (mental, muscle, tendons) and exposure to the elements (sun, rain, wind, snow), a light running pace can definitely make you arrive at your destination less exhausted than walking the…
Very true. First thing I thought when I read this - how much weight are we carrying? What are the water requirements?
Then again the opposite example (lets say a super hot desert with intense sun - but you can wear a shaded hat or something) might result in the opposite - your feet might still be more tired because walking is slower (and more time on them) but the environment is a huge factor.
Re: Is running a more efficient way to travel than walking?
#99This problem was treated with a bit more sophistication by Harvards Lieberman in „A story of the human body“ and the corresponding nature article [0] establishing persistence hunting as an ancestoral hunting technique of homo sapien. See figure 2b for the plot you were looking for. Running faster is less efficient but only slightly so and walking is a U-shaped curve like most mammal gaites. It shows that in contrast…
I don't doubt the results but I cannot imagine how that can be true, I'm not fit but I've had many 20+hours hikes to the high mountain peaks but if I run to a bus stop when I'm late I'm tired beyond belief and I just cannot maintain running, have to stop
You are probably sprinting to the bus stop, not running. Running would be below your aerobic threshold, for however well you're trained, and thus should not leave you exhausted or wiped out. The general rule of thumb is that if you can't have a conversation, you're exceeding your aerobic threshold and so are exceeding your pace.
Training increases what that pace is, but ultimately no (land?) mammal can exceed their aerobic threshold for long, since there are limits to stored oxygen. Cetaceans and pinnipeds might be an interesting exception.
Re: Is running a more efficient way to travel than walking?
#100As far as human endurance goes (more the topic of various comments than the article), humans can outrun a horse, most recently last year: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-65867327
I seem to remember reading as a kid that this happened first in some Victorian bet (I would have read this in one of my dad’s kid’s books from the 1930s).
This was also a plot device in a Larry Niven short story (one of the Draco’s Tavern stories).