It doesn’t burn many fat calories or calories at all, it doesn’t raise metabolism significantly enough to matter, and it doesn’t deplete muscle glycogen. People should be spending their time doing something useful for fat burning, but no, they’re told to go for a walk. Why? Sure, walking is easier than doing a proper workout, but what does anyone have to gain by deluding people into thinking they’re actually getting fit? Or worse yet, building significant muscle mass? Where does this come from?
Weight loss is never simple and success or failure depends largely on the individual. Your question is why is walking recommended for weight loss….
There are several good reasons:
1) Some exercise is better than none. It is of more benefit if you just get out there and do something rather than just stay inactive. For some, anything more strenuous than walking will not be done.
2) While it is true that the harder you work your body during a workout the more calories you burn, there is a major difference in where those calories come from depending on how fast your heart rate is. If you stay between 60 and 65% of your max heart rate (i.e. a lower intensity) you will burn fewer calories overall, but of those calories burned a higher percentage will be burned from fat. At a walking pace it is easier to stay in that "zone". Unfortunately, there is a slight misconception here….. take this example:
Low Intensity – 60-65% MHR
Total Calories expended per min. 4.86
Fat Calories expended per min. 2.43
Total Calories expended in 30 min. 146
Total Fat calories expended in 30 min. 73
Percentage of fat calories burned 50%
High Intensity – 80-85% MHR
Total Calories expended per min. 6.86
Fat Calories expended per min. 2.7
Total Calories expended in 30 min. 206
Total Fat calories expended in 30 min. 82
Percentage of fat calories burned 39.85%
So while you burned 50% of your calories expended at lower intensity from fat, you still only burned 73 cals vs. 82 cal at higher intensity.
I hope this makes sense for everyone.