How beneficial is 10k steps
fat_engineer
Posts: 36 Member
I’ve been hitting my step goal daily for a while. But how beneficial is it actually. Do you think you actually burn calories from light walking at work all day ?
1
Replies
-
10k steps are better than no steps. The good thing is that you are moving and are more active, and that by itself is a huge benefit. Unfortunately I can't tell the exact amount of calories you burn, but you definitely burn calories. I assume that you have a fitness tracker, so that should give you an estimate about the calories. Be careful though because some devices (a.k.a. FitBit tend to overestimate calories). Ultimately if you want to lose weight though, food balance is the key to success. Keep working hard and keep hitting those steps and you will see the benefits in the long run.6
-
9999<10000<10001.
You burn calories walking. You burn calories standing still. You burn calories sitting and pedaling an under-desk elliptical. There's lots of things that burn a few more calories than sitting still. Actually, the only thing that burns fewer calories than sitting still is laying still. Move. Something. Move.11 -
Actually, 10K steps is quite beneficial for health and the more steps the better really. I don't believe that it should be your only form of exercise but it's a good start and actually puts you into the "active" category for physical activity, although it does lack some of the benefits of a more intense cardio program.
I would always recommend that you do a more intense workout along with your step goals.7 -
fat_engineer wrote: »I’ve been hitting my step goal daily for a while. But how beneficial is it actually. Do you think you actually burn calories from light walking at work all day ?
Of course you do. You burn more calories sitting than laying, you burn more calories standing than sitting, you burn more calories walking than standing, you burn more calories running than walking, you burn more calories sprinting than running, etc.9 -
10k steps is an arbitrary number that originated in Japan which for some unknown reason as been accepted in the US (and other countries internationally).
10k steps for me is equal to about 4 miles and there's no way that I'm going to walk that far in an ordinary day. That only happens when I go on a hike for 5-10 miles, which I was doing weekly until the weather turned cold and wet.
I prefer to row 10k meters a day (which is also an arbitrary number) for my aerobic activity instead.
Doing so, I burn about 550-560 cals in an hr, which I can do in the comfort of my home, and is much more effective in terms of time and the cals burned when compared walking which, according to my pedometer, only burns 400 cals in 1.75 hrs.2 -
It's a pointless arbitrary number.
I normally burn around 500 calories during my ten hour on my feet employment
Currently due to surgery I am managing to walk around three miles each lunch time with the rest of the day being very sedentary due to tiredness and swelling. I burn around 100 calories over sedentary.
Both of these examples I hit 10000 steps.
Don't concentrate on steps. Concentrate on moving more than you do now.3 -
I only usually hit 10000 steps on running days, or maybe days I have a couple of meeting out of the office... my usual step count is around 6000, which doesn't seem to be doing me any harm.3
-
It’s just a number, it’s the sentiment behind it that’s important - the more you move, the healthier you’ll be.
What it has done is mobilise more people and get them thinking about their fitness and general lifestyle and that’s gotta be a good thing.
As for me? I, like many others only hit 10k on a run day. But if I happen to be a couple of hundred off whatever goal my tracker has set me for the day I sure as hell am gonna go for a walk to get that goal.4 -
I aim to hit 10.000 everyday but I am fairly active in my job. When I run I get about 16.000 and when I hike (which I am doing next weekend ) should be more .
I personally like little sense of achievement hitting my daily goal and it motivates me .2 -
10.000 steps of purposeful walking are around 6-7km for me. The calorie burn for walking is approximately miles * lbs weight * 0.3. Thus that's not much. But every movement is better than no movement. And even if you have an office job and stand at your desk instead of sitting, or fidgetting more you burn more calories. Other than that I guess 10.000 is just a convenient number: a little bit of a stretch goal for many, but still within reach.2
-
Its marginal gains ... yes it burns a "few" more calories than sitting on your butt all day but it all adds up over the week.
Its why sedentary people can only have 1500cal goal compared to lightly active people that have a 1800cal goal to lose the same amount of weight a week
just think, if you could burn an extra 40calories an hour by walking not driving, going up stairs instead of the lift, doing light work etc etc for your working day .... its would be the equivalent for doing an hours run3 -
As a sixty five year old I set my step target at 15000 as the daily standard. On average I would say one third of that is brisk walking. If I average 110,000 per week this has definite benefits. I think if I didn't use a step counter I would probably average 7-8,000 per day. Not reaching a target is a positive guilt trip and I put on my shoes late evening and go out to make up the numbers. An additional benefit is the distraction from late evening snacking- 'the 10pm munchies'.
In terms of calories I let this activity take care of itself in the belief it is a bonus that I best not account for; might justify half a dozen chocolate digestives, those with that delightful crunch combined with melt in the mouth chocolate; a combination that smacks willpower firmly on the chin should you be so weak and lily livered as to succumb to Satan's Biscuit Barrel Overture.3 -
fat_engineer wrote: »I’ve been hitting my step goal daily for a while. But how beneficial is it actually. Do you think you actually burn calories from light walking at work all day ?
Moving burns calories. The more you move the more calories you burn. Walking does not burn as many calories as some other activities but more than sitting or standing still. https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/06/22/how-many-calories-we-burn-when-we-sit-stand-or-walk/
A person who takes 10,000 steps is more active than someone taking 2,000 steps a day. There are health benefits to being active rather than totally sedentary. You do not have to get 10,000 steps every day to be active and healthy.
https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/basics/pa-health/index.htm
You can find lots of articles about "why 10,000 steps" is a recommendation and what benefits there could be.
https://www.livescience.com/43956-walking-10000-steps-healthy.html2 -
It's a good movement baseline unless you're an avid cyclist, it's a not unreasonable target for "nonpurposeful exercise"5
-
Personally, my experiences show that moving more (steps) is better than moving less... but actual exercise (purposeful, higher intensity, etc) is better than general movement/activity.3
-
RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »It's a pointless arbitrary number.
I normally burn around 500 calories during my ten hour on my feet employment
Currently due to surgery I am managing to walk around three miles each lunch time with the rest of the day being very sedentary due to tiredness and swelling. I burn around 100 calories over sedentary.
Both of these examples I hit 10000 steps.
Don't concentrate on steps. Concentrate on moving more than you do now.
Wouldn’t moving more mean having more steps? Why wouldn’t someone focus on their daily step count if it was making them move? This all came about as a fun way to have people challenge themselves to MOVE more.
Like you said you hit 10,000 steps regularly. Why not increase your step count. You know that’s an option right? I know it’s very rare I have less than 16,000 steps a day. On my long training days I’ll get up over 30,000 steps in a day. I’m like everyone else and like to see how many steps I can do in a day.5 -
It's intended physical movement. Of course you'll burn more calories than sitting still for the same time period.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
3 -
It's an arbitrary number intended to make people more mindful of getting up and moving around (some research has gone so far as to suggest that sitting desk jobs are as unhealthy as smoking....a little hyperbole perhaps?)
Given that 10,000 steps equals 4 or 5 miles for most people it's not a killer calorie burn (30 cal / mile for every 100lbs of body weight) but is better than not moving.
0 -
I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".5
-
I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".
Well, really, pretty much all our goals are arbitrary when you think of it. 10K isn't a bad number to aim for but it shouldn't be a cap either.
0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".
Well, really, pretty much all our goals are arbitrary when you think of it. 10K isn't a bad number to aim for but it shouldn't be a cap either.
Well, no. Maybe I'm trying to put too fine a point on it but for a goal to be arbitrary it would be random and without consideration. A goal can be wrong or worthless without being arbitrary.1 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".
Well, really, pretty much all our goals are arbitrary when you think of it. 10K isn't a bad number to aim for but it shouldn't be a cap either.
Well, no. Maybe I'm trying to put too fine a point on it but for a goal to be arbitrary it would be random and without consideration. A goal can be wrong or worthless without being arbitrary.
True, my goals often include getting out of bed, dressed, and not killing anyone at the office. In general, I'm success.
8 -
I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".
Well, really, pretty much all our goals are arbitrary when you think of it. 10K isn't a bad number to aim for but it shouldn't be a cap either.
I have to say it really is arbitrary. It's a good arbitrary in that its achievable and sustainable, but it's still arbitrary. There's no studies of 5000 vs 8000 vs 10000 vs 13000.
arbitrary isn't bad.6 -
stanmann571 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".
Well, really, pretty much all our goals are arbitrary when you think of it. 10K isn't a bad number to aim for but it shouldn't be a cap either.
I have to say it really is arbitrary. It's a good arbitrary in that its achievable and sustainable, but it's still arbitrary. There's no studies of 5000 vs 8000 vs 10000 vs 13000.
arbitrary isn't bad.
When it comes to goal setting. Arbitrary is bad. To think otherwise would indicate you do not know the definition of arbitrary.3 -
stanmann571 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".
Well, really, pretty much all our goals are arbitrary when you think of it. 10K isn't a bad number to aim for but it shouldn't be a cap either.
I have to say it really is arbitrary. It's a good arbitrary in that its achievable and sustainable, but it's still arbitrary. There's no studies of 5000 vs 8000 vs 10000 vs 13000.
arbitrary isn't bad.
Actually, yes there have been. I was listening to a broadcast interview of a PhD in physiology who studied different step rates and her conclusions was that more is always better. They did some interesting breakdowns as well of the benefits achieved at each level of step from 5000, 7500, 10K, and 12.5K IIRC.
She indicated that each 2500 steps actually knocks you up an activity level so somewhat arbitrary yes but not entirely. The whole purpose of her study was basically to see if 10K steps really was beneficial and what level a person should be aiming for. As much as possible seems to be the answer.1 -
stanmann571 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".
Well, really, pretty much all our goals are arbitrary when you think of it. 10K isn't a bad number to aim for but it shouldn't be a cap either.
I have to say it really is arbitrary. It's a good arbitrary in that its achievable and sustainable, but it's still arbitrary. There's no studies of 5000 vs 8000 vs 10000 vs 13000.
arbitrary isn't bad.
When it comes to goal setting. Arbitrary is bad. To think otherwise would indicate you do not know the definition of arbitrary.
So what would you set as the criteria for a goal that isn't arbitrary here?0 -
stanmann571 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".
Well, really, pretty much all our goals are arbitrary when you think of it. 10K isn't a bad number to aim for but it shouldn't be a cap either.
I have to say it really is arbitrary. It's a good arbitrary in that its achievable and sustainable, but it's still arbitrary. There's no studies of 5000 vs 8000 vs 10000 vs 13000.
arbitrary isn't bad.
When it comes to goal setting. Arbitrary is bad. To think otherwise would indicate you do not know the definition of arbitrary.
Then 10K steps is a bad goal.
As is the oft repeated goal of setting aside 10% of your paycheck or $100 a month for retirement.
Except they're good goals because they get you moving in the right direction. Once you start working at the arbitrary goal for a period of time you then have the experience and data to adjust to a personal/specific goal that's not arbitrary.
It's no less arbitrary than BMI. Which again is broadly useful but still arbitrary.
It seems that you don't understand goal setting or the definition of arbitrary.2 -
*sigh*3
-
stanmann571 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".
Well, really, pretty much all our goals are arbitrary when you think of it. 10K isn't a bad number to aim for but it shouldn't be a cap either.
I have to say it really is arbitrary. It's a good arbitrary in that its achievable and sustainable, but it's still arbitrary. There's no studies of 5000 vs 8000 vs 10000 vs 13000.
arbitrary isn't bad.
When it comes to goal setting. Arbitrary is bad. To think otherwise would indicate you do not know the definition of arbitrary.
Then 10K steps is a bad goal.
As is the oft repeated goal of setting aside 10% of your paycheck or $100 a month for retirement.
Except they're good goals because they get you moving in the right direction. Once you start working at the arbitrary goal for a period of time you then have the experience and data to adjust to a personal/specific goal that's not arbitrary.
It's no less arbitrary than BMI. Which again is broadly useful but still arbitrary.
It seems that you don't understand goal setting or the definition of arbitrary.
Thank you. You're argument proved my point. A goal which represents a change in behavior and moves you in a positive direction by design, is, by definition, not arbitrary.2 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".Wheelhouse15 wrote: »I don't agree that 10,000 steps is an "arbitrary" number. For the vast majority of people, that goal represents a substantial increase in their normal level of activity while being reasonably easy to achieve with some dedication and effort. It's certainly not a magic formula, but it fails the definition of "arbitrary".
Well, really, pretty much all our goals are arbitrary when you think of it. 10K isn't a bad number to aim for but it shouldn't be a cap either.
I have to say it really is arbitrary. It's a good arbitrary in that its achievable and sustainable, but it's still arbitrary. There's no studies of 5000 vs 8000 vs 10000 vs 13000.
arbitrary isn't bad.
Actually, yes there have been. I was listening to a broadcast interview of a PhD in physiology who studied different step rates and her conclusions was that more is always better. They did some interesting breakdowns as well of the benefits achieved at each level of step from 5000, 7500, 10K, and 12.5K IIRC.
She indicated that each 2500 steps actually knocks you up an activity level so somewhat arbitrary yes but not entirely. The whole purpose of her study was basically to see if 10K steps really was beneficial and what level a person should be aiming for. As much as possible seems to be the answer.
Was there a published study or just the note that more is always better?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions