back
171 comments
I got into 10,000 steps craze, thanks in part to my company providing Fitbits. I was not really a health nut, just 3 days a week at gym, lifting and cardio. I had a bit of muscle definition. Gym was just something I did like brushing teeth. I didn't focus my life around it.

Due to incentives and competition among co-workers, I got into Fitbit seriously. While it was fun, but after a few months, not only I lost some definition but also gained weight. I was expecting to lose muscle mass but didn't know that 10000 steps spread out throughout day were not enough activity.

Now I realize Fitbits are great for extremely unhealthy or lazy people. But those of us who been working out without any devices should stay away from any such devices. And not change your workout routines.

It is too late for me, now I cannot workout without a device and some nice charts. I ended up getting a HRM based device. I like the charts it provides but I was happy using mirror to judge how much I needed to workout. And I didn't need any external motivation back then.

Yeah, something that most people don't know is that extrinsic motivation dissolves intrinsic motivation.

see http://www.spring.org.uk/2009/10/how-rewards-can-backfire-an...

This means that fitbit will leave you as either a fitbit addict (if you stick with it), or as someone who's less healthy than you would have been otherwise (if you don't, because now you'll exercise less on your own).

I agree that 10,000 walking steps isn't enough, however, it's a great metric for monitoring throughout the day and realizing (on occasion) you haven't done much for the day and you need to get out and hustle.

Also, on the Fitbit, their analysis of a particular run with regard to your heart rate is very helpful.

Or you could wear the devices and not focus on statistics until after the fact. I dont really pay attention to my stats day to day, but its cool to me to see trends in my exercise and weight.
>I was not really a health nut, just 3 days a week at gym, lifting and cardio.

That qualifies as a health nut compared to 99% of the population!

I find this an interesting viewpoint. For me my exercise tracking is more useful as a metric to establish a good workout routine. Once I have it down then I can track my variations throughout the week and correlate that with work habits (I work from home half the time and half the time go into the office) so that I can make sure to set aside time to achieve those numbers as often as I can.

This and tracking food consumption has helped me lose 50 pounds over the past 7 months, and I can actually look at my graphs and see trends and hopefully I'll see even more as the years progress. I also picked up a Zeo from a recommendation on security now, and that helps me track my sleep patterns, which will hopefully help me figure out the best routines that I can utilize throughout the year to maintain optimal mental and physical happiness :) Sometimes it's not the tool.

Are you sure the extrinsic motivation was what caused your decreased intrinsic motivation? Exercise motivation slides downward for just about everybody for many reasons or no reason.

And do you mind sharing your age? Lots of people hit a point of metabolic change somewhere between ... 20-40?

All of this sounds very unhealthy from a psychic point of view. If you do 5 things of sport every week and not know that you are way above average in what you are doing your vision is somehow blocked. And if you can't get away from charts now it actually really sounds like an addiction. Sport addiction is a thing.

Reading this you will think "what kind of BS is he talking about?" But let's say there is just a 1% chance I'm right. It would be worth talking to a doctor once, wouldn't it?

No, fitbits are probably just legitimately terrible. The value-of-information that they collect seems low, and the motivational distortion can be a gigantic liability. If what you actually care about doesn't involve having and taking care of a body, then no amount of game-playing is going to fix it. And playing games isn't how you focus your attention onto what you want and why you're doing things.
> Now I realize Fitbits are great for extremely unhealthy or lazy people. But those of us who been working out without any devices should stay away from any such devices. And not change your workout routines.

Definitely this. All these "gamification" of everyday activities are pretty gimmicky imo and I'm glad I've always stayed away from these toys

Why were you expecting to lose muscle mass?
Hey all—OP here.

I'm working on developing Cardiogram, the Apple Watch app from which this data is derived, and working with UCSF cardiology doing machine learning on heart rate data.

Feel free to ask any questions here!

I was motivated to download your app based on your article so clearly you did a good job explaining the idea :-) I have to say that the Apple Watch has had a profound impact on my health. For the past 7 years, I work out at a gym almost every morning. However I did not realize that I was excessively sedentary for the rest of the day until I started wearing the watch. I now force myself to move around a lot more and sit less.
How come your graphs do not go below a resting heart rate of 70? If you look at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr041.pdf, about half the population should be below that.

The only explanations I can think of are either that Apple Watch owners are a non-representative sample (possibly true. But _that_ non-representative?) or that you do not manage to measure resting heart rate that well (how good is the Apple Watch at measuring heart rate?)

So is there an app available (hopefully yours) that tells me when/what I need to do to hit the "right" numbers each day?
Great summary of your findings.

I've been wearing a Fitbit Charge HR since last June, and I definitely do not reach 10k steps daily. However, I've noticed that on days I hit the gym and do weight lifting, my caloric burn easily tops 3300, while on days where I'm lazy and just working on my laptop, I barely break 2100.

As a rule, I typically do not do any cardiovascular exercise. I think, I do not know for sure, the Fitbit is better suited for measuring cardiovascular activities, so I'm not sure how or why it's adjusting my caloric burn on my gym days. Maybe it's looking at my heart rate and extrapolating?

Anyway, I'd be very much interested in some kind of fitness tracker that can provide better estimates on caloric burn. That coupled with calorie counting/recording of meals is what will really help me shed this weight.

I imagine the popularity of '10,000 steps a day' was mainly driven by how cheap/easy it was to measure steps. Nowadays with smart watches or dedicated fitness trackers it's finally becoming possible to come up with better metrics that can be widely used.
I walk quickly with long strides, so steps always seemed like a bit of a kludge - someone with shorter legs would presumably take more steps to travel the same distance as me, but would that necessarily make them 'healthier' than me?

In high school we had a cardio class and the requirement was 'get your heart rate above xxx BPM' - it would take less effort for out of shape folks to get above the threshold

I and my wife both have 50-53 bpm at rest, mine certain periods were 48 and doctor demanded to do an echocardiogram even after I explained I do a lot of sport. Everything was fine. Btw TLDR, we got those bpms doing crossfit 3/4 times-week (4/5 my wife), we rarely walk at all. I switched to crossfit recently (a few months), before I did powerlifting + cardio for years which provides very similar results from the POV of heart rate, AFAIK. Btw I think my level of cardio fitness is improving with CrossFit compared to PL.
Hm, what about the other goals of walking 10k steps? I started walking to lose weight and found, thanks to all these smart devices, that when I walk more than 15k steps I actually drop in weight. Since I'm on the very unhealthy part of the scale it really helps a lot to improve my health.

What I found is that the motivational gain from having data is quite low though. For a month maybe it was good motivation, but if you don't have someone to specifically compete against then you just stop caring.

I dont buy the intense workouts as better alternative to more "slow burn" workouts. I'm a runner and I used to do fast 5k runs 3-4 times a week. I would feel very tired at the end of each run, just depleted. Didnt wanna do anything else but just relax. Had headaches too and most likely due to burning carbs at fast rate (intense workout, high heart rate) and basically depleting my carb reserves, which i think are about 2500 calories in a person. Then I stumbled upon a book, i think here on HN, called Slow Burn by Stu Mittleman [1]. It changed the way i look at the cardio exercise dramatically ! You wanna be healthy - burn fat (slow pace, long time, low HR). You wanna be fit - burn carbs (fast pace, short runs, high HR). These are very different goals as you can imagine ! So which one do you want really ?

[1] http://www.amazon.ca/Slow-Burn-Stu-Mittleman/dp/0062736744

Edit: Just wanted to add, now I run 10k easily, feel great after each run and dont have any headaches and I think, though i dont really care, i loose weight too. Just keeping the HR under control during the run, thats all you need.

This simply looked at resting heart rate. Sure, you could do better then 10k step a day to improve that, but this does not mean there are no other benefits to 10k steps. As the article points out, there's no study of it.

For me personally, I find walking is fun, and simple to integrate in my routine. It burns an extra 300 cal a day, and forces me to spread my activity throughout the day. That last one is important, because there is a growing number of evidence that inactivity is very bad for you, and that exercise is not enough to counter the effect. What you need is to decrease your periods of inactivity. Finally, walking is very safe and easy on your body.

That's not to say any other alternate type of activity wouldn't be just as good, or better. When it comes to exercise though, anything is better then nothing, so if 10k works for you, keep at it.

After I got my iPhone 6 and started monitoring my steps using its pedometer, I started walking 10,000 steps every single day. After a few months, I noticed that my body was quite a bit more toned and muscular. Great benefit to the steps!
Well that's good to know. I literally can't get to 10,000 steps during a normal day unless I make it a goal during my lunch break to run down to the gym and walk around 4 miles on the treadmill. Since my walking speed is 3.2/3.5 mph, this can't be done leisurely. My only hope for getting to 10,000 is that I'll do the 3.5 or so at the gym and then hopefully be required to run to the grocery store later in the evening so that I can be forced to walk more.

The fitness tracker is supposed to be a motivator, but instead when I see that I'm only at 7-8k per day even after an hour-long walk, it feels more like a fat shamer.

Everything about modern fitness is fascinating. We have access to more data about health and exercise than ever before, all kinds of personalized fitness trackers, calorie counters, meal planners, personal trainers, exercise routines and equipment. Yet somehow our society still seems to be getting fatter and more out of shape every year.

What is going on!?

I think this is more or less common knowledge that the higher the intensity of exercise the less time or "steps" in this case is needed to achieve the same goal.

There is a curve ball however that needs to be taken into the account - the question is what exactly your goal is? For example, a sprinter and a long distance runner might be averaging the same BPM rate over the course of the week both resting and during their workouts, the end result is quite different however.

I myself have always been a proponent of high intensity training for everything - short and intense weight lifting workouts, sprinting etc. This changed when at one point in my athletic "career" I switched to boxing at a relatively young age (under 20 y.o.) and my shins/calves started getting sore to the point where it was difficult to walk.

The way to condition those for relatively low-intensity but long (2+ hour) workouts? Even longer and lower intensity workouts basically just walking around or light jogging for hours.

We should not dismiss products as Fitbits as being ineffective just because maybe 10k steps is not a valid metric. A little competition and settings of goals is good for everyone.
The measuring stick in this article seems to solely concerning the resting heart rate. Yes, this is because that is the origin for the 10k/day measure; but, surely there are other benefits regardless of what intensity a workout you have.
Now I'm impressed with the data generated from iWatch. I thought it would be used just in complex studies, but we can get important insights for everyday life.

I really want to buy an activity tracker now.

Do you need to do 10K steps per day?

I don't think your average person is capable, let alone able to set aside the time. Tools that confirm the minimum physical PT requirement in my view, is good. It will individualise the minimum requirement.

I do above and below, 10km/day, 6 days per week, year in, year out. [0] This puts me hard case territory. Does everyone need this? Probably not. I move upwards of 1600km to 2000km per year. If you move a minimum of 5km/hr that is 2 hours per day. Time commitment required. I choose to move across broken ground and carry weight, a minimum of 1kg and irregular max of 20Kg, averaging around 8kg. The physical commitment to do this is high.

What do I find.

10km/day is hard. In the cold it is better. You have to take precautions in the heat. You don't have to count calories as much. You get sore feet and muscles. Do you need it? I doubt it. For me I can probably meet your requirements with a 5km/day with some resistance gym work.

Interesting psychological observations: The most likely time for failure to get out the door is the short time before you start. If you say to yourself, "f*&$-it, just go" you are more likely start and complete. I've tried this for a decade and the resistance to start is pretty constant but one you get out the door, this disappears.

Do the hardest thing first ~ http://seldomlogical.com/hard.html

[0] currently at 5km/day with weights and gym till I crack 200km.

Been using fitbit for over 2 years now (~ 7.5Million steps logged). Have the data being pushed to other web apps (MyFitnessPal, FitStudio, Higi, Acheivemint, Walgreens balance rewards). Also, trained up and ran 2 half-marathons in this time. Lost 60lbs so far, first 20lbs was from increased walking and diligent choices via calorie logging in MyFitnessPal. Fitbit is not the be all end all, but it definitely keeps me aware.
The article calls it the "manpo-kei", but the Japanese sign clearly says "manpo mētā" (Manpo-Meter) with "meter" in katakana.
450M data points is cool, but without knowing how many people that represents, it's hard to say how meaningful this is.
10 000 steps roughly equal to 7-7,5 km walked.

To stop the shrinking of important parts of brain you need about 5 km/day average in a week (you can do 35 km in Sunday, for example). BTW, 5 km/h is close to typical walking speed, not fast and not slow either.

So yes, you do not need 10K steps a day. Slightly above 7000 steps per day would suffice.

The only statistics I care about are the number of exercise reps I do each day and how many hours a week I spend dancing to loud music.Not only do I not want to get hung up on analytics, I see absolutely no reason to share that data with anyone else so they can work out better ways to advertise to me.
Humans walk very efficient. If you want to burn fat or get your heart rate up, a 20 second sprint is equal to two hours of walking.

If you want to increase the capacity of your cardiovascular system, to get a lower resting pulse, the best method is to engage in an activity that gives you around 70% of your max heart rate, for about 45 minutes or more. Examples of such activities (for normal people) is gym training, cleaning the house, mowing the lawn, etc. At least twice a week.

Max pulse is around 220 minus age. So if you are 35, you want to average (220-35)*0.7=130, witch will feel easy.

Who thought it was a good idea to use bigger bubbles for larger groups of people? Those values should have the least spread, drawing them bigger for no purpose is just confusing. Simple error bars would have been a lot better.
Is resting heart rate a good indicator either? Mine is typically 55-58bpm but I do no organized exercise and am sitting for much of the day (I do try to walk quick and run up stairs to make up for it, so while I'm not "fit", I don't feel unfit per se).

I am free from cardiac related symptoms, so does this mean I am "naturally" fit without really trying? (A bit like people who don't focus on their diet but are slim.) Or, as I suspect, is resting heart rate not a very useful indicator of fitness at all?

Whaddya know. The bogus idea of chewing food 30 times (at least) also originated (or rather was popularized) in Japan.

This sort of falls into the same bucket.

This was originated by American diet reformer Horace Fletcher in the early 1900's.

See here, e.g.:

http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2009/10/31/Japan-govt-Chew-fo...

Interesting data but, does lowering my resting heart rate mean I will live longer? Will it decrease the chance of having a heart attack?
Without adjusting for BMIs it doesn't tell us that much about causality. If you could get that data that would be huge.
Do people read the Wall Street Journal simply publish the same story 3 weeks later?

http://www.wsj.com/articles/stop-counting-10-000-steps-check...

I regularly work out, about 3-4 times a week. I do this to stay in shape and have an healthy lifestyle. Although devices and charts can aid me in getting even better, I do not use any. I simply listen carefully to my body and adapt.
The scale of a lot of this data is from 74-77 bpm resting heart rate. I feel like there is only a small correlation and its a small distance improvement from "couch potato" to "high intensity"
Having gone through a heart failure, I can attest that walking is godsend. Even of moderate effort, as long as it's more than 30 minutes. Small hills are bonuses.

-- sent from my dead-oriented design desktop wheelchair.

A calorie is not a calorie.

Leptin signal blocking counts for something...

if i bike everyday my resting hr is 42bpm

if i dont for a month its 47

walking is just one way, bike or swim is better though..

(and yes ive a rather low hr genetically regardless)

Yes, we need 10000 steps every day. Its very good to lead a healthy life..