Quote:
Originally Posted by raging moderate
Often I agree with you, and factually this is no exception; however, I disagree with some of the logic and the conclusion. For one, if walking is as ineffective as you say, why do you do it so much? Why not just save the money and pay for the bus pass? I think it can be very effective, at least to keep the weight off if not to lose any.
Second, idk about you but I live in one of, if not the, fattest country in the world. Actually, I live in one of the fattest states in that country, one in which 2/3 of the population is overweight and 30% is obese. I would never try to dissuade anyone from walking anywhere at any time. If they only lose three pounds by walking somewhere regularly instead of walking, so be it, at least that's three pounds closer to not being overweight or obese.
|
My point is that in my case, taking little snippets of walks will have almost no return because I
already walk so much. I'm not losing weight by walking 2 or 3 hours a day because I've
already lost it from that type of activity. There is an equilibrium your body will achieve at a certain
sustained activity level. If you were to take a person who is sedentary and obese and have them walk 2 or 3 hours a day, they're going to burn all kinds of weight off over time. But even then there will come a time when the weight no longer comes off. They will need to do more, such as high-intensity cardio and/or resistance training.
Again it comes down to this: if your body isn't challenged, it won't need to adapt.