Walking is the New (Fill in the Blank...)

[XXtwindad]

I love walking. It's my "dirty little fitness" secret.

Imagine a gathering of high-caliber athletes celebrating a few post event beverages. One of them casually mentions they went for a "walk" a few days ago. The conversation stops. Throats are cleared. A few awkward, mumbled responses.

It's a bit of an exaggeration of course, but not by much. I know a prominent triathlete who's recuperating from an injury. He's started taking walks and lamented to all of his friends that this is what his life has become...taking afternoon walks.

How did the most fundamental expression of human movement wind up at the bottom of the "Fitness Hierarchy?"

There are some obvious answers. Part of it is the exigencies of the times we're living in. We're pressed for time - so any expenditure of energy has to involve visceral feedback: lots of sweat, elevated heart rate, high rates of perceived exertion and occasional discomfort.

Then too, walking has no axioms to extoll its virtues. No "walkers high." Very few people are excited about having completed a "killer walk." Extreme athleticism is not the first image that comes to mind with walking. Perhaps more along the lines of office workers on a lunch break with sensible shoes.

But walking should be at the very top of the exercise hierarchy, not at the bottom. For starters, it's much more structurally sound than cycling. And less high impact than running. Walking (especially on uneven terrain such as a trail) strengthens the foot and ankle complex in a way that cycling never will. This is especially important for people with flat feet and hyperflexible ankles (such as myself.) Also, walking (especially up hills) forces recruitment of the glute muscles that cycling rarely does.

The advantage to walking is that you can leave the house without a lot of equipment and "just do it." (There are, as in everything, socioeconomic factors here as well. It's much less convenient to just go for a walk when your neighborhood has no shade or is blighted)

The biggest benefit in walking for me is that things slow down. It's the same reason I cycle: it clears my head. And, as much as I enjoy Strava (perhaps "addicted" might be the right word) there is no quantitative way to measure the "Local Legend of Sorting Your Thoughts Out."

I know there are some "walkers" on this site. Gasman, Weisan, and Mr. Pink come to mind. Anyone else on board the "Slow Train Express?"

[mhespenheide]

I now average a half-hour to hour a day, taking my 18-month old outside. Often with my wife. We talk about everything that's going on.

Before he was born, I used to love backpacking. My goal for about a decade was to try for 30 days a year; many years I made it and some I didn't. Backpacking's just a long walk where you don't go home at the end of the day.

[prototoast]

I'm in the anti walking camp. I walk more than most--per Garmin I average over 16k steps per day and I'm in the top 1%. To me, walking is a chore. It wears me out without the endorphin boost of more vigorous exercise. It doesn't noticably improve ant physical performance, and it triggers hunger that is roughly double the calories it burns. Overrated.

[Black Dog]

About an hour and a half a day with my dog in the woods. This more than anything keeps me centred. It also is so good for recuperation of mind and body. On a bike it is so easy to make the goal of the ride something other than the ride, with walking that is much less so.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by mhespenheide

I now average a half-hour to hour a day, taking my 18-month old outside. Often with my wife. We talk about everything that's going on.

Before he was born, I used to love backpacking. My goal for about a decade was to try for 30 days a year; many years I made it and some I didn't. Backpacking's just a long walk where you don't go home at the end of the day.

It's kind of funny how many different ways we like to classify "walking." Not sure why that is. I guess you could certainly sell more subscriptions to "Hiking Magazine" than to "Walkers Gazette."

When my daughters were first born, and I had to combine exercise with caring for them, I walked everywhere with them in a stroller. All over Oakland. It was a great way to bond with them, and formed memories I'll never forget.

[reuben]

All of my backpacking trips, especially overseas, have been cancelled. Still, a few hours hiking in the woods is both good exercise and mentally refreshing. I call them my "mental health hikes".

[weisan]

Twin pal, you hit all the high points, thanks for the thread.

I walk daily for two hours, and when I do, I leave my phone at home, everything else can wait. There's nothing in my pockets, or my hands. Just me, my underwear (er... optional sometimes ), short, shirt, sunglasses, top it off with a cap. That's all the "equipment" I carry.

When I first started doing this regularly about four years ago, I was just amazed at the things I see along the way even though I was just walking in this little 2-mile radius of my neighborhood, I see something new almost everyday, something I have missed. I can't stop taking pictures using my phone. I got carried away, as a former avid photographer, I can't help it. Now, I just enjoy looking at them as I walk on by.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by prototoast

I'm in the anti walking camp. I walk more than most--per Garmin I average over 16k steps per day and I'm in the top 1%. To me, walking is a chore. It wears me out without the endorphin boost of more vigorous exercise. It doesn't noticably improve ant physical performance, and it triggers hunger that is roughly double the calories it burns. Overrated.

Well, always good to have a lively and civil discussion. But the above statement is simply not true. There are numerous postural distortions that occur from sitting that can't be remedied by cycling, because....you're sitting. Tight hamstrings, overemphasized traps, impinged rotator cuffs, etc.

Also, I think reducing movement to a calorie in/calorie out equation misses the larger physiological benefit of movement. It reminds me on an epic mountain bike ride I did with a friend many years ago. We both came back totally spent. At a burger shop, we orders burgers, fries, and sundaes. A mutual friend commented that we just "undid" the whole benefit of the ride.

But she missed the actual point of the ride, which was to have fun and see stuff. If movement is reduced to mathematical equations, it's not a long-term recipe for success.

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by weisan

Twin pal, you hit all the high points, thanks for the thread.

I walk daily for two hours, and when I do, I leave my phone at home, everything else can wait. There's nothing in my pockets, or my hands. Just me, my underwear (er... optional sometimes ), short, shirt, sunglasses, top it off with a cap. That's all the "equipment" I carry.

When I first started doing this regularly about four years ago, I was just amazed at the things I see along the way even though I was just walking in this little 2-mile radius of my neighborhood, I see something new almost everyday, something I have missed. I can't stop taking pictures using my phone. I got carried away, as a former avid photographer, I can't help it. Now, I just enjoy looking at them as I walk on by.

This is the essence of walking

[Ozz]

Originally Posted by Black Dog

About an hour and a half a day with my dog in the woods. This more than anything keeps me centred. It also is so good for recuperation of mind and body. On a bike it is so easy to make the goal of the ride something other than the ride, with walking that is much less so.

+1

I take our dog out in the AM for about 30 minutes...we have a nice wooded park at the end of our street...nice to be out in the woods to start the day...

My wife and I also take her out in the evenings, and that is when we get a chance to talk about "stuff" and make plans. Good together time!

Oh...gotta go....the dog just ran in and let me know it is time to head out......

[CZ413]

If you haven’t already read them, Rebecca Solnit’s book Wanderlust and Frederic Gros’s book A Philosophy of Walking are both really worth reading.

[jamesdak]

Walking is the New challenge in my life. Dangs knees are so jacked right now I have issues just hobbling around work. But I can still ride so life is good.

[Hilltopwalters]

Walking is the best. It was the first stage of me getting out of a huge pit of depression in my early 20s. I would just leave my house close to midnight and walk for hours. It toughens you up in a weird, passive way. I'm sure someone can speak to this better than I can but walking activates some portion of your brain where your surroundings are passing by on the peripherals of your eyes and that engagement does something healthy for your brain at an engagement level.

When my buddies complain about a hike a bike portion of some ride, I just laugh and enjoy it.

[Seramount]

at this point in time, my combined seven knee surgeries make walking arduous.

did a 4-mile walk last week, survived it but was having noticeable pain by the end.

cycling and swimming are infinitely more enjoyable and beneficial to me.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

Well, always good to have a lively and civil discussion. But the above statement is simply not true. There are numerous postural distortions that occur from sitting that can't be remedied by cycling, because....you're sitting. Tight hamstrings, overemphasized traps, impinged rotator cuffs, etc.

Also, I think reducing movement to a calorie in/calorie out equation misses the larger physiological benefit of movement. It reminds me on an epic mountain bike ride I did with a friend many years ago. We both came back totally spent. At a burger shop, we orders burgers, fries, and sundaes. A mutual friend commented that we just "undid" the whole benefit of the ride.

But she missed the actual point of the ride, which was to have fun and see stuff. If movement is reduced to mathematical equations, it's not a long-term recipe for success.

If anyone has fun walking, I'm not here to stop you. I was mostly responding to your point about the "fitness hierarchy" where walking is, rightfully in my opinion, at the bottom.

As I said, I walk a lot. Much more than most, but if I didn't spend so much time walking, I'd have the time and energy to do other fitness activities. Ones that would do more for my overall fitness. Because I walk so much, I am weaker, heavier, and more fatigued than if I walked less.

So sure, if walking is something you enjoy, or it's all you can do for exercise, that's great, walk! I just think that it's rightfully at the bottom of the fitness hierarchy because I can't think of anything else that we consider "fitness" activities that do less for "fitness" than walking.