Is cycling better for weight loss than walking?

When I consulted the physical medicine department at Apollo, they told me that cycling burns more calories per hour but walking is gentler on the lower back for some people. You should ask your doctor clearly which one fits your joint health and fitness level.

Both are great cardio options, but cycling generally has a higher intensity, so you burn more fat in less time. Just combine whichever you choose with a calorie deficit diet and some basic strength training to get the best results.

I spend hours worrying about which exercise is perfect and whether I am doing enough. Walking feels safer for my knees, but then I get anxious that I'm not burning enough compared to cycling. Honestly, just start with whatever feels less stressful for you!

If you look at the budget, walking is completely free and requires zero investment. For cycling, you either need to buy a decent cycle or pay for a gym membership, which can get expensive. I prefer walking to save money while still staying active.

I have seen many people in this group debate this. Practically speaking, cycling is great if you have a safe track or a stationary bike, but walking is something you can do anywhere, anytime. Choose the one you can stick to for the next six months.

According to my smartwatch data, 30 minutes of moderate cycling burns around 250-300 calories, while walking at a brisk pace burns around 150-180 calories. So mathematically, cycling is more efficient for weight loss if you're tracking daily burn.

At my age, I have tried both over the decades. Cycling used to keep me very fit in my younger days, but now walking is my daily companion. Both work wonders for weight and health, just be consistent and don't rush the process.