Monday, December 19, 2005

Running, Walking and Pedometers

I've been wearing a pedometer for a while now. I do occasionally forget to put it on in the morning (or take it off to change and neglect to put it back on). Regardless, I find that when I exercise, I usually tally 7000 to 10,000 steps per day. When I don't exercise, getting to 2000 is about all I end up with.

One question that I've been seeking to answer is, "What is the difference between running and walking on a pedometer?" Wearing it in a recent 10-mile race gave me some good running data. It seems that when I run, I usually tally about 1600-1700 steps per mile. This compares with the 2000 per mile that seems to be pretty close to the truth when I walk. I usually run at a moderate pace, putting in most of my miles between 7:30 and 8:30 pace (that roughly equates to 4:40 - 5:15 per km).

So, for me, my step count seems to be 15% - 20% less per mile than when I walk.

A further note on pedometers: current recommendations are for 30 minutes of exercise daily for health. Many of the pedometer advocates suggest 10,000 steps per day. This would equate to about 5 miles of activity. While it's a great goal, and one that will go far to helping people lose weight, it is probably more than most of us truly need. I think that most of us would do fine if we got to 6000 or 7000 steps per day. That would still represent 3 - 3.5 miles of activity, and would burn some 300-350 calories (yes, technically kilocalories). This activity level would take us about 45 - 55 minutes if we move at 15 minute miles (a brisk pace for most people). Further, since most of us will walk perhaps a mile in the course of "normal life", this can be cut down to about 30 - 40 minutes of "exercise" plus normal activity.

So, my suggestion is to aim for 30+ minutes of dedicated exercise supplemented with living a more active life (park a bit further away, walk to lunch, or take a stroll around the block) and you'll have enough activity to maintain health.

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I found your blog listed on http://completerunning.com/running-blogs/

First of all ... great post....the only comment I have is the pedometer is a bit inaccurate during running since your stride is dependant on how tired and what pace you run(i.e as you fatigue your stride tends to shorten). This will make it hard to measure the length of your course (unless you mark it previously with a car or bike with a computer). Are most of your activities outside? If so GPS is a realitivly cost effective solution and it's accuracy will allow for very specific details about your efforts.

V/R

Tazz

http://tazzscarunning.blogspot.com/

December 19, 2005 9:43 PM  
Blogger Mike said...

I concur with tazz on the GPS. I have 3 of them. The Foot Pods such as the Polar s625x are pretty good too.

I guess pedometers are cheaper though.

December 20, 2005 9:21 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home