0

votes

Hike or run for fat loss

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created December 06, 2012 at 8:49 PM

Hello tribe,

Which one is better for fat burning and enhanced health, hiking or running?

Thanks,

love to all

Medium avatar

(1097)

on December 09, 2012
at 04:37 AM

*watches hiking Jesus get his running shoes on*

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on December 07, 2012
at 03:04 PM

Jesus Christ, just do both!

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc

(14952)

on December 07, 2012
at 03:04 PM

Just do both, Jesus!

35deaf0f101526bb113ea69f79934f2b

(436)

on December 07, 2012
at 01:33 AM

totally agree. I LOVE running but get bored walking/hiking. Because of this, I am much more likely to run consistently than walk. I think you should do what you will enjoy and will stick with.

Medium avatar

(1097)

on December 07, 2012
at 01:03 AM

Might need something more for 'leaning out', I donkt know. Right now I'm only exprienced in the 'getting out of morbid obesity and almost at the upper end of over-weight' caregories. If I want to get below 155 I may require something more.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on December 07, 2012
at 12:53 AM

I lost 50 and kept it off walking for the last 5 years. It only got me to that point though, and to go below my current weight I think I'd need something more strenuous. A walking staff eliminated my walking-induced swollen Achilles tendon problem.

  • Size75 avatar

    asked by

    (3213)
  • Views
    3.3K
  • Last Activity
    1431D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

5 Answers

5
Ebb10603524dd22621c1155dd7ddf106

(19150)

on December 06, 2012
at 09:38 PM

The answer to this question is "yes".

A healthy lifestyle protocol contains great food and as good amount of physical activity. Hiking and running are great physical activities.

However, neither hiking nor running is going to be a perfect fit for everyone. Someone may have bad knees, and running is out of the question, or hiking has to be careful and methodical. Beginners-to-exercise, or very overweight individuals, are going to find running more strenuous than hiking -- even hiking may be too much, if a walk around the block leaves them winded. Some may also argue that runners are more likely to overdo running, than hikers are going to overdo hiking, leading to inflammation and slowed weight and fat loss.

I would say that if you find either activity zesty, invigorating, and fun, than it can be a good piece of a fat loss regimen, and into a general healthy lifestyle.

35deaf0f101526bb113ea69f79934f2b

(436)

on December 07, 2012
at 01:33 AM

totally agree. I LOVE running but get bored walking/hiking. Because of this, I am much more likely to run consistently than walk. I think you should do what you will enjoy and will stick with.

3
Medium avatar

on December 06, 2012
at 11:57 PM

I've lost 55 lbs with just plain-old walking. Means I can keep the carbs in check. I walk for 1 h and 50 mins everyday, through town, through a woods/park area, and up two fairly steep hills. I plan on losing the final 45 lbs this way, too :)

As for running, I agree with shorter intervals of that. Hiking is fantastic, I say do it 1-3 times a week for variation.

Medium avatar

(1097)

on December 07, 2012
at 01:03 AM

Might need something more for 'leaning out', I donkt know. Right now I'm only exprienced in the 'getting out of morbid obesity and almost at the upper end of over-weight' caregories. If I want to get below 155 I may require something more.

Medium avatar

(10611)

on December 07, 2012
at 12:53 AM

I lost 50 and kept it off walking for the last 5 years. It only got me to that point though, and to go below my current weight I think I'd need something more strenuous. A walking staff eliminated my walking-induced swollen Achilles tendon problem.

2
5e5ff249c9161b8cd96d7eff6043bc3a

(4713)

on December 06, 2012
at 09:43 PM

If your running is interval sprints, I'd say that. If you're talking more along the lines of jogging, I'd definitely say hiking. I'm not what you would call a fan of steady state cardio, I don't find that it's really good for much in regards to practicality (running only really makes you good at running, whereas something like lifting would be a more effective use of that time to build muscles to be used in all manner of real life situations) and I'm not convinced that kind of continual low level strain is good for you as opposed to briefer higher intenstiy types of strain.

As my n=1, running does nothing for me in terms of fat burning, whereas weight training has a big impact. As an aside, I do however also enjoy walking and yoga, which I would categorize more as activities than actual exercise.

1
3ce6a0d24be025e2f2af534545bdd1d7

(26217)

on December 07, 2012
at 01:37 AM

In my opinion, exercise is about four things, in this order:

  1. Enjoyment
  2. Frequency
  3. Intensity
  4. Duration

The exercise that is best for you is the one that you enjoy and will do on a regular basis. After that you can exchange 3 and 4, intense but short or less intense and longer (i.e. running hard for 20 minutes is probably as good as hiking for an hour).

1
68294383ced9a0eafc16133aa80d1905

(5795)

on December 06, 2012
at 11:51 PM

Do either "uphill" or "inclined" and you're golden.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!