How do the number of daily steps correlate with health?

Flintwinch

Is it a straight line - more are always better? Is there a threshold beyond which benefits fall off? How many are enough?
Now we have the paper to answer this question.
https://www.thelancet.com/.../PIIS2468-2667(21.../fulltext
It appears there is a break point with diminishing returns (better health) as steps increase beyond 6000 - 8000 a day. "...a progressively decreasing risk of mortality among adults aged 60 years and older with increasing number of steps per day until 6000–8000 steps per day and among adults younger than 60 years until 8000–10 000 steps per day."
And according to the author:(https://www.nytimes.com/.../move/30-minutes-exercise.html...) "For most people, “150 minutes of exercise a week would translates into about 7,000 to 8,000 steps a day....”
The attached image displays the data.

crewahl

I followed the link to “server unavailable”. I wanted to know how their hazard ratio was determined. My curiosity was piqued by the fact that the hazard ratio diverged based on age range. Under sixty, the ratio increased after 10k, but over sixty it still decreased after 10k (although at a slower rate.).

Flintwinch

Here's the link to the Lancet Journal article...

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-2667(21)00302-9/fulltext

podkey

Many people have benefited by doing more activity and steps is one good way of measuring.

All activity is good in my book from lawn mowing to gardening, biking and more. In the National Weight Control Registry with over 10,000 members participating the time spent moving is more whatever that means (self-reported) Average loss per participant was 70lb and kept off for over 5.5 years. Average daily activity was about 60 minutes daily. They report eating breakfast but honestly since "breakfast" isn't defined and simply self-reported it is hard to say exactly what that means. For example I get up and ride my bike first and then eat in the morning. I would fall out of the more strictly defined term "breakfast" of within one hour of arising and more than say 300-400 calories. Some stretch the meaning to include eating 2 or 3 hours later which honestly is more like a brunch. Studies have bent over backwards to justify their grant money to "prove" time of day eating. I do feel slightly better eating in the morning but it isn't the end all for me and "technically" later than defined breakfast of within 1 hour.

I am active over 90 minutes daily which includes everything from walking to yoga, biking, lawn mowing and more.

misterhub

This is an interesting article, and it falls in line with an article I read early this year (2022).