During this time many people are still confused may choose between a brisk walk or run. Which burns more calories and which one is more beneficial for the heart. But a new study reveals that a brisk walk as well as run, especially as the number of calories burned by both, not just the time spent to do both.
Investigator Paul Williams of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, California, and Paul Thompson of Hartford Hospital, Connecticut, Williams studied 33 060 runners who took part in the National Runners 'Health Study and 15,045 walkers who participated in the National Walkers' Health Study. Each participant measured blood pressure, blood sugar and cholesterol levels since the beginning of the study and then observed for six years.
Researchers also noted how many participants were diagnosed with high blood pressure (hypertension), unhealthy cholesterol levels or diabetes within six years of the study.
From there, Williams and Thompson reported that people who expend the same energy when exercising will get the same benefits, regardless he is a brisk walk or run.
"It took longer to walk along a mile rather than run a mile. But if you observe the actual energy expended both equally," said Williams, as reported by today.com, Friday (04/05/2013).
"The point is if you do the same exercise with the levels or if you spend the same amount of calories, so that means you get the same benefits," he added.
According to William, this study is dedicated to the right if walkers and runners because they usually only consider the distance and time spent for running or walking. Though most people are difficult to estimate how much time and energy they spend to do so.
Both researchers used a measurement method called MET. "One MET is equivalent to the amount of energy you spend when sitting. Runs at high speed recorded can burn 3.8 MET or 3.8 times more than the energy spent to sit in the same time, while burning as much run 7-12 MET , "said Williams.
In addition, Williams estimates that the MET is also expected to walk the equivalent of one mile or half a mile. But not known to run as efficiently on foot so that runners tend to burn more calories than walking.
"Someone needs to walk the 4.3 miles at high speed to match the 3 mile run so far, including takes twice as long (one hour 15 minutes on foot, while the running just spent 38 minutes)," Williams count.
It's just that in this study the runners carrying the younger and fitter than pedestrians. The average age is 48 male runners and walkers guy is 62, while the average age is 38 while the women runners pedestrian woman 41 years. This certainly makes a lot of people think that the runners obviously more healthy because of his physical condition is much better.
But the study also obtained from the fact that the runners 38 percent less risk of developing hypertension, 36 percent fewer are known to have high cholesterol and 71 percent less likely to develop diabetes than pedestrians.
"Apparently this is because the runners in this study is much more diligent in exercising than pedestrians," added Williams.