10,000 Steps or not?

Tacklewasher

Francl27 wrote: »

I actually burn more calories for the same amount of steps if I have an active day at home than if I use the treadmill for an hour then sit the rest of the day. Something about having my heart rate elevated for most of the day I guess? (I use a fitbit charge 2).

I find this as well.

ritzvin

Christine_72 wrote: »

1234newman wrote: »

That study I quoted worries me. Because over the years with work and family dominating I found myself without a close group of friends. That probably didn't help with weight too.

How I remedy that in retirement is my present problem, along with losing weight and getting some uni study going for interest.

I would have thought having a close group of friends would promote weight gain.. More friends equal more socialising, equal more eating and drinking.

Depends on the friends. Sedentary friends who always want to go to a restaurant or bar and just sit and hang out - then probably yes. Most of my current friends, I know from hiking, cycling, orienteering, or dancing...we rarely just sit around and eat/drink except after or during a physical activity.

fitmom4lifemfp

Christine_72 wrote: »

I wonder if it makes a difference how you get those 10,000 steps? Slowly shuffling about all day or purposeful intense walking. I would think the latter would be more beneficial. .. or no?

I prefer to RUN. Certainly there is more cardio benefit that way. But until my knee feels like it can take it, I am stuck with walking. But I walk pretty briskly...3.5 to 4 mph, sometimes faster, when I am walking for exercise. As far as calories, yes I believe the calorie burn is a bit more - my HRM always shows maybe 10-15 calories less a mile for walking vs running. But it isn't enough for me to worry about. For me it's more about the cardio benefit.

SusanMFindlay

Christine_72 wrote: »

I wonder if it makes a difference how you get those 10,000 steps? Slowly shuffling about all day or purposeful intense walking. I would think the latter would be more beneficial. .. or no?

Slow shuffling will definitely burn fewer calories than taking normal steps or brisk walking. I don't think it matters at all, though, whether the walking is "purposeful" (i.e. "I'm going for a walk to get exercise") or "incidental" (walking from my car to the office, walking from my office to my classroom, walking around running errands, etc.)

Ming1951

I also think it doesn't matter, when I started to just walk..I wasn't burning a lot of calories but just walking made me burn some...as I continue to walk my distance has increased 1/4 mile to sometimes 3 miles. Some days even my speed has increased. Last week I did 3 miles in 56 minutes. I know that isn't great but I have bad knees and I'm older. Not all my 10,000 is in "my wall" but at least 1/4-1/2 is. It is helping me immensely.

fitmom4lifemfp

Ming1951 wrote: »

I also think it doesn't matter, when I started to just walk..I wasn't burning a lot of calories but just walking made me burn some...as I continue to walk my distance has increased 1/4 mile to sometimes 3 miles. Some days even my speed has increased. Last week I did 3 miles in 56 minutes. I know that isn't great but I have bad knees and I'm older. Not all my 10,000 is in "my wall" but at least 1/4-1/2 is. It is helping me immensely.

That's 3.21 mph, and definitely a good pace. Good job!

For reference, you can check your pace here.
http://www.calculator.net/pace-calculator.html

LessCookiess

I think it's a good goal to have especially if someone is usually sedentary at least having a number in mind which is usually about 3 miles.