The truth about.....

How many people are actually able to do HIIT? And that's not a light training. Or did the BBC fall into the interval training = HIIT trap as well?

I saw an article on the BBC website about the 10000 steps/three brisk walks idea and thought that it was very interesting. It's more achievable in a day too. I can park my car slightly further away and get one in on each end of my working day and can get a ten minute walk into a 30 minute lunch break.

I saw the programme too and found it interesting (tho overstated). For those who didn't, it is research based so atleast there is an attempt at latest research results om which to base your opininion!

Anyway I downloaded the Active 10 app the NHS has recently created - that is promoting the same approach. It tells you how much of your walking is 'brisk' (broadly 3 miles an hour or more) - and tells you if you manage this for more than c10 mins in amy one stretch (which is where the heart health cardiovascular benefits really kick in).

I like it. For example I walked over 11000 steps yesterday. Around 50 mins of this was at a brisk pace (It gave me the total time too). But I only walked at a brisk pace continuosly (ir 10 mins stretch) twice.

It is good for my overall health that I was on my feet that much. My body would benefit even more if I managed to walk faster more of the time.

I shsll be trying,

I thought the programme overstated as clearly it is better to do both - lots of walking around, much of it active. But the key point is that some fast walking (10 minute bursts) is better than lots of slow walking if you want to make a significant improvement in your heart health. Or have limited time (or whatever) and find a steps goal discouraging.

(And if you want to think calorie burn not heart health - it is good to know what proportion of your day's walking is actually at what pace for the mfp calorie 'eat back')

Thanks for the OP. I came onto the forum to find other users of this Active 10 app!

The programs of Michael Mosley do at least have some foundation in science and research. I think the issue is that you have to see who the target audience is - the 80% who fail to get enough exercise or the 20% who do go to the gym, perform resistance training, break into a sweat for more than 30 minutes 12 times a month.

The message that it's easier to fit in training and get health benefits than most people think is important for the majority of the population, although many would be surprised how infrequently they walk at a brisk pace for 10 minutes or more (good call on the Active 10 app - available here https://www.nhs.uk/oneyou/active10/home#6ga83gI1b7cqbs0J.97 )*

The context is also that Mosley admits he hates exercise so has looked for the base minimum to have a health impact in a number of these programs. It's like the 5-2 diet, finding what may work for those that struggle with self motivation.

I think the real message is to do as much as you can without giving yourself injuries, but this program at least shows how to achieve the minimum in a time efficient manner.

*this is the NHS that the Donald is so keen to disparage performing proactive health management because that's what a universal health care system looks like*

Michael Mosley? I am going to say that the science is probably skewed in a lot of places, that chap has an agenda and used his title erroneously (he hasn't practiced in eons).

That said, the ten minute bursts of purposeful get the heart rate up a little, walking is a good thing to promote if getting 10k steps, an arbitrary number, is more of a challenge for you.