The 10000 steps a day myth - Page 3

MoJoV · ‎10-01-2010

I usually get 10000 steps in a day from a walk and normal daily activity. I am kind of addicted to my fitbit. It's helped me keep active and that's important. I have my goal set at 8000 steps a day and if I reach that I'm happy. If I reach my 8000 early I don't sit down and say I'm golden. 😁

Trees are the lungs of the Earth

hckynut · ‎03-10-2010

Morning @Mindy D ,

This to me was nonsense since I first hear it years ago. I had/have enough background from experts in the field of all types of Exercise Physiology, and it's relation to the human body from hundreds of studies they have done, or in which they have participated. Hearing and seeing actual charts at those many clinics I have attended, from the experts themselves, told me pretty much all I needed to know.

It was/is very clear to me that my 10,000 steps per day, be they walking/running or ice skating, are not the same as too many other 80 year old men. How those steps are accrued makes a HUGE difference, in both physical fitness, and potentially, longevity.

It was shown again and again in many long term studies of women and men in almost all age group studies, that without records of ones heart rate during these studies, most studies tell very little of anything in connection with almost all forms of physical exercise.

These studies included the longevity of those that participated in these long term studies. While "X" number of steps/strides can certainly help with keeping one's mobility in regards to muscle/joints and connective tissue, those things have little to nothing to do with a person's physical fitness or longevity in life.

I rest my case.

hckynut

hckynut(john)

hckynut · ‎03-10-2010

Hello @cherry

I find that realistic goals are important in physical activity, and in most forms of living ones life itself. Everyone has different goals and there is no 1 right way to achieve them in most cases.

Myself? I have always preferred "time" over "measuring distances" in measuring my workouts. The mistake by many when using both "time and distance together", often ends up either in injury, and/or burnout and giving up.

Seems to be a tendency, for some reason, for many to say to themselves: "yesterday I did X distances in A amount of time, so today I should be able to do X+ in A- amount of time". That in itself is not wise for the average person, nor is it for competitive athletes, in any sport. Not many I know ever trained that way.

I totally agree with you that movement is the most important part, especially with those of us with decades of life behind us. Thanks for your thoughts on this topic.

hckynut

hckynut(john)

Sooner · ‎03-10-2010

@x Hedge wrote:

Mindy, I don't know a single person who takes that "ten thousand steps" expression literally.

I think the average adult knows without being told, that "ten thousand" is hyperbole.

Additionally, my brother who had polio, was given a pedometer to use as a motivating tool in his recovery long before 1965.

Whether you're 5' or 6', it's not the distance that matters nor the number of steps. It's daily activity that achieves the aerobic level and sustains it long enough to to have a positive impact on fitness.

@x Hedge I will disagree only on one point: I DO think the average adult will pick some steps number and go with that. I don't think most people spend a lot of time investigating the issue further, unless they have issues a doctor deals with.

Sooner · ‎03-10-2010

@sidsmom wrote:
If one wants to get FIT....walk.
If one wants to get HEALTHY...it’s diet.

If one walks 5 miles a day but still eats an icky diet,
you’re only working on the fit portion. You’re still not healthy.

We Can’t Out-Exercise Bad Diet.

@sidsmom Those things are as bogus as the rest we've talked about. My mom is 95, has a sister 90, another at 93.

Two of the smoked--my mom only quit in the last year or so. They ate sweets a LOT, had a not great diet. One aunt had some heart issues in her 70's but it still kicking.

Another of the three had a TERRIBLE diet, and was never over weight AND smoked and is in her 90's.

A health nut friend died at 67 while out jogging.

People need to be sensible and do what they can but my point is in the end, there is no one answer, no magic bullet NO GUARANTEE that doing this or that will pay off. So a reasonable lifestyle, including a healthy attitude toward life and living well all around, being a good friend and being charitable toward others seems to be a good option for many of us.

It's too individual to see only rules about steps or glasses of water or whatever. Maybe the best answer is "Know thyself." @hckynut John is a good example of that thinking. And some of us are just lucky healthwise and some are not.

santorini · ‎03-09-2010

I think it's a nice goal. I think more is better and there is no need to tell everyone - oh wait a minute -- you don't need to move that much after all. Aim for lots of movement but if you don't get to that every day, it's ok.

One note above said that the "trackers" don't count steps and that they only count arm movements. That's certainly not true for the Apple watch. I use the treadmill often and always check my step count before and after. I am guilty of holding on to the rail for long stretches of time so there is no arm movement but it still counts my steps.

Sooner · ‎03-10-2010

@sidsmom wrote:
If one wants to get FIT....walk.
If one wants to get HEALTHY...it’s diet.

If one walks 5 miles a day but still eats an icky diet,
you’re only working on the fit portion. You’re still not healthy.

We Can’t Out-Exercise Bad Diet.

@sidsmom And to be specific my mom smoked heavily, didn't exercise and had an icky diet--she's 95 and is on a blood thinner and that's it. You can't explain it, there's no reason for it, but it is what it is.

She recovered from a broken bone recently and is back up and at 'em again. If she goes to the hospital, they keep her for days, give her test after test for everything and she comes out with specific problems and no meds so far. I think she may be one of those who hit 100.

I understand your concerns about health and that's great for you, but it simply isn't universal--no matter how much validity there is in a healthy lifestyle. It just doesn't guarantee anything. It is admirable I will agree with you.

cherry · ‎03-09-2010

It is important to me to be as healthy as I can. I would rather not be falling apart, if I can help it..It isn't the length of your life ,as much as living the best life you can, for me

I come from a family ,on both sides, that live until the high 90's. I choose to have the best life I can have ,no matter how long it is. Exercise and diet are the best chance for this, that we have .Its not the years of your life, but the life in your years that matters to me

sidsmom · ‎11-25-2011

@Sooner wrote:
@sidsmom wrote:
If one wants to get FIT....walk.
If one wants to get HEALTHY...it’s diet.

If one walks 5 miles a day but still eats an icky diet,
you’re only working on the fit portion. You’re still not healthy.

We Can’t Out-Exercise Bad Diet.
@sidsmom Those things are as bogus as the rest we've talked about. My mom is 95, has a sister 90, another at 93.

Two of the smoked--my mom only quit in the last year or so. They ate sweets a LOT, had a not great diet. One aunt had some heart issues in her 70's but it still kicking.

Another of the three had a TERRIBLE diet, and was never over weight AND smoked and is in her 90's.

A health nut friend died at 67 while out jogging.

People need to be sensible and do what they can but my point is in the end, there is no one answer, no magic bullet NO GUARANTEE that doing this or that will pay off. So a reasonable lifestyle, including a healthy attitude toward life and living well all around, being a good friend and being charitable toward others seems to be a good option for many of us.

It's too individual to see only rules about steps or glasses of water or whatever. Maybe the best answer is "Know thyself." @hckynut John is a good example of that thinking. And some of us are just lucky healthwise and some are not.

My Mom is 95.

I would never, ever use her nutritional history as a blueprint for MY life.

People are fools who do that.

Bring born in the 60s, processed foods were standard fare

almost at birth...unlike my mother who ate fresh, garden food

for first 1/3 of her life.

And saying someone who was a ‘health nut’ who died while jogging?

Maybe they would’ve passed at a much younger age if they

weren’t a ‘health nut.’

A good diet with lots of fruits & vegetables will allow one to

live comfortably, no matter what age. The goal is to be disease-free

and medication-free. That’s a sign of optimum health.

Mindy D · ‎05-23-2010

@x Hedge wrote:

Mindy, I don't know a single person who takes that "ten thousand steps" expression literally.

I think the average adult knows without being told, that "ten thousand" is hyperbole.

Additionally, my brother who had polio, was given a pedometer to use as a motivating tool in his recovery long before 1965.

Whether you're 5' or 6', it's not the distance that matters nor the number of steps. It's daily activity that achieves the aerobic level and sustains it long enough to to have a positive impact on fitness.

Some people do take this figure literally. That is the impetus for the study. You don’t need to take it literally. I agree with you about the pedometer invention predating 1965, and I’m not sure where this date is coming from but it was seen in many of the articles. I’m pretty sure you’re right about the invention date.

To read exactly how the steps were calculated will cost me. I can only open the abstract for free. To open the full study, JAMA wants me to pay. This thread isn’t about daily activity. It’s about the myth of the 10000 steps and about the latest study involving older women and their longevity for four years after the start of the study and their number of steps. In the four years, 500 women died. I’d like to open the study to get the full information.

The study isn’t about fitness, per se. Instead the authors use the phrase “positive impact” and I can’t open the study to get their definition of “positive impact.”

”It's daily activity that achieves the aerobic level and sustains it long enough to to have a positive impact on fitness.” This isn’t mentioned and might be true but isn’t a part of the reason for the study. The authors wanted to know how many steps is necessary to maintain good heath. Is this the same thing as being fit? I don’t know. the “Conclusion” did say, “Stepping intensity was not clearly related to lower mortality rates after accounting for total steps per day.” Since I can’t open the full study, I can’t find out what they mean by “stepping intensity.”

Dispelling the myth of 10000 steps is the goal here. People really do believe this is true. At least for the women in the study, those that walked more than 7500 steps per day did not live any longer than those that walked 7500. Walking 15000 steps didn’t make a study participant live longer than one that walked 7500. Walking 10000 steps did not make a participant live any longer than one that walked 7500 steps.

Participants that walked 4400 steps did live longer than those that walked 2500 steps.