Health & Fitness
Wed, November 19, 2025
Tue, November 18, 2025
Swimming vs. Jogging: A Side-by-Side Look at Cardiovascular Benefits
//health-fitness.news-articles.net/content/2025/ .. ide-by-side-look-at-cardiovascular-benefits.html
Published in Health and Fitness on Wednesday, November 19th 2025 at 11:30 GMT by newsbytesapp.com- 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
- 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source
Swimming vs. Jogging: A Side‑by‑Side Look at Cardiovascular Benefits
Summary of the NewsbytesApp article “Swimming vs. Jogging: Comparing Cardiovascular Benefits”
The article from NewsbytesApp dives into a familiar debate for fitness enthusiasts: which cardio activity—swimming or jogging—provides greater heart‑health benefits? By drawing on scientific studies, expert commentary, and everyday experience, the piece offers a nuanced view that neither activity is “superior” in every way; rather, each has its own strengths and trade‑offs.
1. The Baseline: What Do We Mean by “Cardiovascular Benefit”?
At the outset the authors explain that cardiovascular health hinges on two major metrics:
| Metric | What It Measures | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| VO₂ Max | The maximum volume of oxygen the body can use per minute | Indicator of aerobic fitness and heart‑lung capacity |
| Heart Rate Response | How quickly and strongly the heart rate climbs during exercise | Reflects cardiovascular strain and training load |
The article points readers toward the American Heart Association (AHA)’s guidelines, which recommend at least 150 minutes of moderate aerobic activity—or 75 minutes of vigorous activity—per week. Both swimming and jogging comfortably fall into the “vigorous” category for most people.
2. How Intense Is “Intense”? – Metabolic Cost and Heart Rate
A large portion of the article is dedicated to comparing energy expenditure. Using data from the National Institutes of Health’s MET (Metabolic Equivalent of Task) values:
| Activity | MET Value | Typical Heart Rate (% of HRmax) | Calories Burned (per 30 min, 155‑lb person) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jogging (6 mph) | 9.8 | 70–80 % | ~240 |
| Swimming (moderate freestyle) | 8.0 | 65–75 % | ~210 |
The AHA‑endorsed calculator shows that both activities elevate the heart into a similar “moderate‑to‑vigorous” zone, but jogging tends to push heart rates a bit higher on average. However, swimming’s resistance—water pressure—compensates with strong muscle engagement, particularly in the core and upper body.
The article also highlights a study published in the Journal of Sports Science & Medicine (2019) that found swimming produced a more sustained elevation of heart rate over a 45‑minute session compared to jogging, owing to its continuous full‑body effort. This sustained cardiac output is beneficial for improving endurance and heart resilience.
3. Muscular Engagement and Joint Impact
One of the article’s most compelling sections contrasts the two activities on muscle use and joint health:
Swimming
* Muscles Worked: Quadriceps, hamstrings, glutes, chest, back, shoulders, triceps, and core (isometric stabilizers).
* Joint Impact: Zero gravity means no compressive forces on knees, hips, or ankles—ideal for people with arthritis or recovering from injury.
* Additional Benefit: Warm water provides natural resistance; deeper water (e.g., lap pools) further increases intensity without extra effort.Jogging
* Muscles Worked: Primarily the lower body—quadriceps, hamstrings, glutes, calves—along with core stabilization.
* Joint Impact: Repetitive impact can strain knees and hips; however, running on softer surfaces (track, grass, rubberized track) reduces impact.
* Additional Benefit: Weight‑bearing exercise that strengthens bone density—a major plus for aging adults.
The article cites Dr. Elaine Carter, a sports physiologist at the University of Colorado, who notes that the upper‑body engagement of swimming translates to better overall balance and posture, especially when paired with a running program.
4. Metabolic and Weight‑Loss Considerations
When it comes to calorie burn per hour, the article presents a balanced picture. Although jogging marginally outpaces swimming in raw calorie expenditure, swimming’s higher resistance can make it more efficient when you factor in time:
| Scenario | Calories Burned in 1 Hour |
|---|---|
| Jogging (6 mph) | ~480 |
| Swimming (moderate) | ~420 |
Because swimming is less fatiguing to the joints, many people can maintain longer sessions (e.g., 90–120 minutes) without the same risk of injury, thereby offsetting the lower hourly burn. For weight loss, the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) emphasizes consistency over sheer intensity—an insight the article echoes.
5. Practical Factors: Accessibility, Variety, and Lifestyle Fit
The author weaves in several lifestyle considerations that often tilt the balance for individual readers:
- Availability: A jogging route is usually free—just grab shoes. Swimming requires access to a pool, which may involve membership fees or travel time.
- Learning Curve: Most people can jog with minimal training; swimming proficiency varies widely, and beginners may need lessons.
- Weather Independence: Indoor pools keep you protected from heat, cold, or wind—advantage for those in extreme climates.
- Social Options: Group swim classes (e.g., water aerobics) and running clubs provide social motivation, but the article notes that the social aspect can be a strong retention factor.
The article quotes a runner, Tomás Rivera, who swam his way through the 2018 Boston Marathon’s water stations, stressing the mental reset water offers between grueling segments—a unique advantage for endurance events.
6. Recommendations from Health Experts
The piece rounds off by offering a set of expert‑backed recommendations that blend the best of both worlds:
- Hybrid Training – Alternate swimming and jogging throughout the week. For instance, swim on Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday; jog on Monday, Wednesday, Friday.
- Cross‑Training for Injury Prevention – Swimmers benefit from jogging to strengthen lower‑body bone density; joggers benefit from swimming to build upper‑body endurance and reduce joint strain.
- Targeted Intensity – Use heart‑rate monitors: aim for 70–85 % HRmax in both activities to achieve “moderate‑to‑vigorous” training.
- Recovery and Flexibility – Incorporate post‑workout stretching and foam‑rolling, especially after jogging, to mitigate muscle soreness.
A link within the article directs readers to the Mayo Clinic’s “Aerobic Exercise” page, which lists the recommended weekly minutes and how to gradually increase intensity. Another link leads to a Harvard Health Blog article on “Swimming for Cardio Fitness” that outlines beginner drills and safety tips.
7. Bottom Line: It’s About What Works for You
In closing, the NewsbytesApp piece emphasizes that the “better” cardio depends on your goals, body, lifestyle, and preferences. Swimming offers joint‑friendly, full‑body conditioning that can be especially appealing to those with injury concerns or who simply enjoy water. Jogging, on the other hand, provides a high‑intensity, accessible, and weight‑bearing workout that strengthens bones and burns slightly more calories per minute.
The article encourages readers to try both, listen to their bodies, and incorporate varied cardio into their routines. As Dr. Carter concludes in her quoted interview: “Cardiovascular fitness is a marathon, not a sprint. The most sustainable training is the one that keeps you moving, feeling good, and, most importantly, consistent.”
By weaving scientific evidence, expert insight, and everyday anecdotes, the NewsbytesApp article delivers a comprehensive, balanced, and practical comparison that equips readers to decide which activity—or combination of both—fits best into their pursuit of heart health and overall fitness.
Read the Full newsbytesapp.com Article at:
[ https://www.newsbytesapp.com/news/lifestyle/swimming-v-s-jogging-comparing-cardiovascular-benefits/story ]
