‘It’s a superpower’: how walking makes us healthier, happier and brainier (2019)
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
In that case the whole journey is really 4 miles. I was thinking in terms of a continuous or largely continuous journey (such as walking to the shops and back) being 2 miles.
That said longer journeys can be treated as exercise. Why go to gym for an hour each day when instead you can spend that hour going to places you're going to go anyway.
If you have a headset for your phone. Call someone. You're interpersonal relationships get stronger.
If you're working through a issues, spend the time thinking about different alternative approaches.
If you're learning a new subject, review in your head what you've been learning.
If you're preparing a talk, dictate different ways of presenting it to a voice recorder.
If you're stressed out about the world, spend the walk finding things you are grateful for.
If you're in a relationship, compose a poem or two for your partner.
I've been taking a 1-2 hours walk in the morning for a few years, which I usually use to get groceries, and miss it dearly when I can't.
[0] Or music, but I admit I don't listen to much of that.
To be clear, I love walking, but to say that people are stupid for acting different than you is monumentally narcissistic.
When I make those choices I balance off what I want to do against what I need to do and what I should do and what I could do. That is the essential choice of being an adult.
My experience with walking, before I started walking, regularly, which was forced on me by a requirement to get more physical exercise as part of a weight management program, was that I felt very strongly that I had much better uses for my time than getting slowly from point A to point B. That attitude was supported by my ignorance with regard to what else I could do while walking and so stack time usage.
What I learned by being forced to walk at least 30 minutes a day (its now up to 2.5hrs a day) was that there were things I did while sitting around. Those things included calling people, having meetings, and thinking about solutions to problems or the days events. What I experienced was, that I was no less productive during the day where I spent time walking, and there were tertiary effects that were completely unexpected.
For example, I have always been plagued with the issue that as soon as I lay my head on the pillow to go to sleep, my brain starts kicking up all the things I didn't have time to think about during the day. As a result, getting to sleep could take an hour to an hour and a half. Just laying there, in bed, trying to stop my brain long enough to go to sleep.
Walking massively mitigated that problem. I found, after I had been walking, that I had spent some, if not all, of that time thinking through things that had been pushed aside by the immediacy of email or social media or "honey do" projects. Not only had I thought about them on my walk, I started recording on my phone notes to myself of actions to take to move forward on things I was stuck on. This meant that when it was time to sleep, not only was it much easier to go to sleep, I already had a good idea of the things I needed to get to the next day or in the near future.
That blew my mind. That I had traded laying immobile in my bed for some moderate exercise that effectively took no additional time out of my day and has lead to better sleep and better fitness. It also blew my mind how much more effective 1:1 meetings with direct reports were while walking than they were sitting in an office.
I was pretty ignorant about both the time saving aspects of walking and the effect it would have on my mental acuity and well being. If someone reading this decides to try it out for themselves, it is my hope they will see the positive benefits I have experienced. I wouldn't go back to a non-walking lifestyle now, I have come to rely on those benefits.
If you take a car ride, that time may be considered as wasted.
Now, this is only possible in a city that was built (at least) hundreds of years before cars. Having visited the US I can honestly say that some cities (not the ones like New York) are designed completely around the car. Trying to walk everywhere in a city like that is futile and you'll just hate life and everyone around you.
The comment you responded to was prompted by this: "When I see people drive somewhere that's less than 2 miles away it blows my mind."
> So I chose to live within reasonable walking distance of places I need to go.
I'm glad that works for you, but - depending on your life interests - it's pretty literally impossible for many people.
2. It might be better to not always be in a hurry.
3. Try to live in a place that's not so alienated as to have a grocery store that's 2 miles away (unless you're in a rural / countryside area in which case you're probably doing a lot of walking anyways).
The other side of some manual work is that it exercises you in some way- but if there are things that'll speed up whatever it is you want to do and they are generally available, you will be pitied!
I love to walk. I hate owning a car. In most of the US, there is no good way to get to most places other than by car. Really wish it was otherwise.
I do not use smartphones. I do not remember the exact rationale of how it started. But, it generates a lot of free time for your life. Whenever people question it, I would reply, "Well, it is an experiment I am doing".
Based on how close the other one is you might get a confused nod to how-stupid-are-you as a reply.
The good thing about it is, by default, you do not get to fool around in your free time. The time is only free, if there is do not have other ways to pass it by.
P.S.: But, I am not claiming it is better. But, I find it convenient and quite a bit fun.
Too late to edit now
Uh, sorry, what do you mean by "read"? You're not one of those people who reads books while walking down the sidewalk, are you?
Got me an extra 40m reading time over the day.
Perhaps it doesn't apply to you, but I don't think 90% of people who read books while walking are as good at navigating around obstacles as they think they are.
I was raised in a small city in Spain, population of 180k or so. I walked everywhere, and I still do when I visit: The city has great population density, with an average height of about 6 stories, plenty of pedestrian-only streets, and almost no surface parking. The situation is such that driving would be slower than walking to get most things done, as time to and from the car will often be quite the nuisance.
Later I moved to Madrid. It's a very large city by European standards: Too big to just walk everywhere. However, it's also very dense, and it's also not all that well set up for driving in many routes. Driving might be useful at times, but the subway might be faster, and it's hard to find places that are more than 10 minutes away from a subway station. It's not quite as hostile as my hometown, but you at least might have to make choices.
Now, however, I am living in a mid-sized metro in the US midwest: far smaller than Madrid in population, but easily 4x the total size. The vast majority of the metro area is single family homes in half acre lots. Even downtown is full of surface parking lots, so even living there you'll mostly be walking past asphalt. One person could possibly move to be in walking distance of their job, but good luck doing that with two people. Public transportation is sparse, and, at the best of times, has buses every half an hour, so your typical trip penalty vs a car might be an hour each way. And on top, temperatures will hit 40C in the summer, and -20C in the winter: Not exactly good walking weather either way. Here, walking is not a mode of transportation, but a completely intentional hobby which, in some cases, might take you past a store or a restaurant, weather permitting.
So really, while I am a huge fan of walking, it's not something anyone in my metro area will willingly choose as their primary mode of transportation, and it's the same all over the US: Few of our cities are built for anything but cars, and it's a decisions that is really hard to undo without ripping apart most of the city's construction. Imagine one of our largest buildings: The headquarters of a company you probably know. well over 15 floors, but completely surrounded by surface level parking. Many thousands of spots, one for each worker. you have to walk over half a kilometer before you find any other building: otherwise it's just cars.
So no, around here, I couldn't recommend walking to pretty much anyone, and that's because the decision is made for us. It's the city's urban planning department, over many decades, that decides whether people walk or not.
I don't know about that. Things don't change overnight, and never by themselves. Advocating for a more walkable city is probably a good idea. Might require political action of some sort. Or maybe it just needs a critical mass of frequent walkers.
For the record, I live in a walkable city now, and grew up in a tiny, walkable villagle. Wouldn't even consider moving somewhere that wasn't walkable.
Addendum: a city that isn't designed for people probably shouldn't be considered a city. I'm trying to think of a better name, but I'm stuck on expletives.
Wow, ok. I live in the raleigh-durham metro area. What is timeline for significant non-car travel for us of literally any kind outside of 40 years and hundreds of billions of dollars? If your answer is "there is none", everyone here already knows that. We are chained to cars with no way out.
>Wouldn't even consider moving somewhere that wasn't walkable.
Not joking: I am really proud of your opinion. Never change. There's not even close to enough of you to intact real transportation change in the US. I wish I was wrong about that, but it's not been my lived experience living in the US.
Buses are an incredibly bad public transportation option because they sit so well in a local maxima trap because they look like a viable public transportation and "share" the road infrastructure costs of cars leaving them "cheap investments", so much that cities don't think they need to invest in anything more expensive. But they also share all the detriments of investment in car infrastructure, and thus through self-fulfilling-prophecy expectedly never grow the ridership to encourage cities to push for more investment in public transportation over car transportation.
From that perspective bus services aren't even a band aid on the systemic problem, but a symptom/perpetuator of the systemic problem.
“More steps taken per day are associated with lower mortality rates until approximately 7500 steps/d”
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullar...
2. As the gyms are closed down here, again, and indoor dining is shut down, again, I have been walking at least 6 miles a day with the dog, and it has been a sanity-preserving way to get away from working at home.
(Not looking forward to the first slushy/icy storm, though. Both the dog and I hate walking in boots.)
Now, do you have super-secret Scandinavian folk knowledge of good dog boots? Because I have tried, and he hates the damn things. And the rock salt irritates his feet quite a bit.
Salt is a problem. If there's a lot of salt out, I'll rub a sealant into their pads before we go out. Lots of things will work -- lip balm or lanolin are my favorites, but petroleum jelly would probably do in a pinch. But whatever you use, the most important thing is to simply wash the salt out of their pads after they come back in. I've done this for almost a decade in Colorado and none of my dogs has ever had a cracked or frost-bitten pad.
It feels like a bit of a hack when you go for a 2hr walk and end up burning almost 800kcal listening to music, talking to people on the phone, maybe taking care of chores like paying bills.
I realized this during stay-at-home orders back in March. When I stopped bike commuting I started walking for 1-2 hours a day on days I didn’t go on runs, and realized I was burning a significant amount of calories according to my Apple Watch.
The article discusses whether long-term isolation due to Covid will have similar effects: [1]
[1] https://www.scientificamerican.com/video/what-research-in-an...
I wouldn't describe it as being a superpower, but I do find it to be relaxing.
My sense of direction is pretty bad tho, especially in unfamiliar places. I recently discovered a new trail system and while I didn't get "lost lost", there were times where I thought for sure I was going back to where I wanted to but I ended up going in the opposite direction.
But at the same time, when I walk around areas I've been to I can pick out very specific details, almost like recreating a map in my head but I think this has more to do with repetition and practice that would apply to everyone. If you've walked around a place literally 1,000 times you're bound to pick this stuff up. I'm sure it will happen for me in those trails with enough practice too.
With that said I know someone who doesn't walk at all and is one of those people who can drive to somewhere in an unfamiliar place once and then know exactly how to get there months or even years later. I'm not convinced walking by itself improves your internal GPS.
After all, if you're not going anywhere, what is the rush?
I have IBS, so getting to a bathroom. When I have an attack, walking makes things much worse, combined with the fact that it takes forever to get anywhere on foot it’s a recipe for disaster.
There is no rush, and that is what makes my brain anxious.
Running, cycling, lifting, shooting helps me focus, and that brings peace to my mind.
It's like when you try to fall asleep watching/listening to something. Too boring and your mind wanders and you dont fall asleep. Too exciting and you're thinking about things while keeping up with the original thing.
But while cycling is good for thinking, when I really want to get some thinking done and sort out my problems, going for a long walk in nature is my preference.
Funnily enough, this is my experience while jogging at a pace sustainable for more than 30 minutes. It feels much better to power-walk the same distance. Potentially the amount of movement forward vs. up/down makes a psychological difference.
Since I've been struggling for years to go from "running in my style for 15min" to 30min, I've instead switched to the goal of "running for 30min in any style", then working my own style back into that :).
You will burn anywhere from 75-200 calories/mile walking/hiking. I did like 14 miles yesterday. I will take weight off of you or allow you to eat whatever you want the easiest vs perceived exertion.
Side benefit, the world is strange and people are weird and you get a good dose of that. Saw a ground squirrel running down a trail carrying a severed rabbits head the other day, fun!
For example, a search for "pubmed walking versus hiit" actually turns up the answer to exactly what you were looking for.
Shiroma, Eric J., Howard D. Sesso, M. V. Moorthy, Julie E. Buring, and I‐Min Lee. “Do Moderate‐Intensity and Vigorous‐Intensity Physical Activities Reduce Mortality Rates to the Same Extent?” Journal of the American Heart Association 3, no. 5 (September 16, 2014). https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.114.000802.
"Among men, but not women, additional modest reductions in all-cause mortality rates are associated with a greater proportion of moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity performed at a vigorous intensity."
Fisher, Gordon, Andrew W. Brown, Michelle M. Bohan Brown, Amy Alcorn, Corey Noles, Leah Winwood, Holly Resuehr, Brandon George, Madeline M. Jeansonne, and David B. Allison. “High Intensity Interval- vs Moderate Intensity- Training for Improving Cardiometabolic Health in Overweight or Obese Males: A Randomized Controlled Trial.” PLoS ONE 10, no. 10 (October 21, 2015). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138853.
"While both exercise groups led to similar improvements for most cardiometabolic risk factors assessed, MIT led to a greater improvement in overall cardiovascular fitness."
I'd also say that while it's tempting to just skim through the abstract and the conclusion, oftentimes, the Discussion is where the real meat is, and in cases of controversy, careful attention needs to be paid to the authors, the raw data (sadly, especially in the nutrition space, there is often discordance between the observations published, statistical massaging, and the conclusions drawn...) and followup commentary.
For the HIIT study you referenced, I did find this commentary, which was pretty interesting (it's worth noting that I don't consider this topic area to be particularly controversial/heated - differences seem modest, and honestly, the biggest thing seems to actually be getting any physical activity, vs none for most people...):
Coswig, Victor S., Paulo Gentil, João P. A. Naves, Ricardo B. Viana, Charles Bartel, and Fabrício B. Del Vecchio. “Commentary: The Effects of High Intensity Interval Training vs Steady State Training on Aerobic and Anaerobic Capacity.” Frontiers in Physiology 7 (October 25, 2016). https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2016.00495.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/daviddisalvo/2016/10/30/six-rea...
What I forgot to mention was stretches which do help but if the motion isn’t fixed the tense muscles tense back as they try to compensate for the incorrect movement.
There are multiple paths to this and yoga could be one of them. Im just a stubborn self lerner and went through a lot of trial and error. At the beginning i studied muscular imballances and did a lot of strenghtening and stretching but that didn’t help too much as my bad habits were reverting all the progress and certain muscles would tense up and others wouldnt fire. Once i figured out the correct posture it all fell into place
1. Slow jogs with the only goal being getting my footstrike under the hips. This fixed the rolling/lurching I had developed in adolescence.
2. Runner's supplements. This did a lot to reduce pain and stiffness. Magnesium in particular really made a difference.
3. Strength and mobility training. Yoga or calisthenics both work for this: the main limitation in both walking and running postures is in being able to swing the hips, shoulders and knees fluidly.
This view implies not walking is normal and walking is something you can go out of your way to do to improve on normal.
I prefer viewing walking as normal and not walking as aberrant, so I would say "not walking destroys cognitive powers of the brain like nothing else."
People are free to define normal how they want. I find my way motivates more walking and less sedentariness.
I'm getting there, but forming new habits can be surprisingly hard, especially when family commitments get in the way.
one thing that was interesting was that i had traveled to another country a few months after NYC went to lockdown (so i was basically inside all day). after 2 weeks in quarantine i walked around the new city for the whole day and was suuper sore the next day, which surprised me. i think we take for granted the benefits of it.