We are a numbers-obsessed people (we humans, I mean). We always want to know:
- How much do I have?
- How many do I need?
- Is more ever too much?
These are hard questions. Luckily, I’m not here to try to answer them. But I can tell you one thing: the number of steps recommended per day according to scientific studies is definitely NOT 10,000, but rather 7000 seems to be a sufficient number for loads of health benefits. We’ve written about this before, but a new meta-analysis came out in Lancet Public Health re-affirms this claim.
The researchers found studies meeting their criteria that showed associations between number of daily steps and the following health outcomes:
- all-cause mortality
- cancer incidence
- cancer-related mortality
- cardiovascular disease
- cardiovascular disease-related mortality
- type-2 diabetes
- dementia
- depressive symptoms
- physical functions
- falls
Here’s what they said:
Three key findings emerge. First, even modest daily step counts were associated with health benefits. Second, 7000 steps per day was associated with sizeable risk reductions across most outcomes, compared with the reference of 2000 steps per day. Third, even though risk continued to decrease beyond 7000 steps per day, it plateaued for some outcomes. Notably, the dose-response relationship might differ by outcomes, participant age, and device type.
So, the latest research analysis is saying that, compared with 2000 steps a day, 7000 is great for a lot of very important health outcomes. In other individual studies, an average of 4200 steps a day provides modest improvement in lowering health risks. And, I might add, activity researchers happen to agree with this blog that every step counts– small amounts of activity contribute to health and well-being in lots of ways that we appreciate.
Oh, and speed doesn’t seem to matter, say some researchers. This from a WBUR CommonHealth article:
Researchers have also tried to pin down whether speed makes a difference. Here, the new Lancet study could not make any definitive conclusions, in part because there are various ways to measure intensity and because differences could simply reflect better overall fitness and physical function.
“We actually don’t see an association once we consider the total number of steps,” says Paluch, who has also looked at this question. “So, essentially, the total number of steps, regardless of how fast you’re walking, seems to have a benefit,” she says.
So– faster or slower, harder or gentler, up or down, to or fro– all of these add up to the message (which we knew already, but science is reaffirming it) that movement is key to a number of the features of well-being and health as many of us think of it.
Oh, last thing: those 7000 steps don’t all have to be all up. Just saying.
