Does running longer or faster burn more calories?

Question

I usually run 2 miles as fast as I can do them in. I do them in 17 minutes, averaging a 8:30 mile and I am pretty exhausted afterward. Would it be more beneficial to run a leisurely 6mph for 30 min @ 3 miles?

My goal is to lose weight, but I am pretty thin as it is. 5'10" - 150lbs. But I am a little doughy.

Answer 1

its better to run longer than faster concerning wieght loss. run at a pace where you can still talk with ease and not be panting while doing so and that is a good pace.

Answer 2

You burn more calories by running fast as you can for two miles but there is only a ten calorie diffrence between the two.

Answer 3

This is a law of physics...if the amount of work is equal, then the energy required is equal.  In other words, if a mile ruinning requires 100 kilocalories, then a mile walking requires the identical amt of energy (ie, kilocalories)...however it will take longer AND the cardiovascular benefits will not be equal.

Therefore, you will use more calories walking 3 miles then running just 2, but the cardio benefit of running the 2 miles is greater.  If I were you, I would run the 2 miles and walk a thrid mile (especially if you're really walking a 10-minute mile)

Answer 4

Running faster does not burn more calories.  A person who runs 2 miles and a person who walks 2 miles, burn roughly the same amount of calories.  Try to run on a softer surface like dirt trails, or a track. It'll be better for your joints.

Answer 5

Yes.

Answer 6

Running 3 miles burns more calories than running 2 miles. Calories is pretty much a function of moving your body a certain distance.  Running faster burns more calories per unit time but running 2 miles quickly only burns slightly more calories than running 2 miles slowly.

Running hard all the time is a good way to get injured.  Most running should be done at a leisurely pace.  That's not to say you shouldn't have a hard running days just that you shouldn't run like this all the time.  In addition, your body get more aerobic benefit by running longer.  20 minute is pretty much the minimum time to exercise so the fast 2 mile runs are actually a little short to be good workouts.

Answer 7

running longer and if losing weight is your goal eat smaller meals and swim also

Answer 8

...

If your goal is to lose weight, which maybe you really don't need to at your height and weight, then the question is, what's best for losing weight?

The question becomes - how do you burn off that fat stored on your body?

To do that, you need to run at slow or moderate rates for 40 minutes or more.  By doing this, your body uses the lipids (the fat in fat cells) stored on your body in an oxygen-rich (aerobic) body environment to produce energy (the running movement!).  And it takes that much time to really get to using fat!

Until you get up to 40 minutes, or if you are running nothing but fast and short, you are just using the glucose stored in your bloodstream for energy.

Running 30 minutes at a 10 minute per mile pace leads to burning off the fat.  Running 17 minutes at a faster pace leads to burning off the glucose.  Running 30 minutes at a faster pace burns off the glucose and MORE fat.

If you are a bit doughy, as you say, you might consider going to doing workouts that tone up those doughy parts.  For example, core exercises for the body's core - the abs, back muscles, side muscles, diaphragm, pelvic floor muscles.  And basic exercise machine or weight workouts, 2 or 3 times a week, 30 minutes at a time, for arms and upper body.

Running will cut the weight off the mid-body and upper-body, but won't add much in terms of muscle tone or strength there!

Regards,

Phil