Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to think 20 min walking a day is not 'very active'

212 replies

UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 15:51

I am reading a book called 'How not to die' by Michael Gregner. In it he talks about the 'Simple 7 steps' the American Heart Association says help cut your risk of Heart disease.

One is being 'very active'. This is defined as 22 minutes walking per day. I was pretty surprised by that. I walk more than that myself daily but don't consider myself very active, atall. I'm trying to get much healthier. Is that all I really need to aim for? Is there something I'm missing?

OP posts:
Forgothowmuchlhatehomeschoolin · 05/03/2022 16:01

Hmm maybe the fact he is American is the key point here....l was in the USA years ago and asked how far a particular landmark was from the hotel. They said oh it is a long way you need a cab. Started walking and was there in 15 mins! Not sure if the average American would walk that.
Disclaimer l love America and its people so no offence intended at all!
And even a short walk can give me a nice little boost so think it is good for mental health too.

Lovemusic33 · 05/03/2022 16:07

I guess walking for 22 minutes is better than not walking at all?

I walk for an hour a day but don’t consider myself that fit, though I do hope it keeps me healthy.

Midlifemusings · 05/03/2022 16:14

150 minutes of activity a week is considered active by the recommendations and standards so he has just divided that by 7.

The recommendations are 150 minutes of moderate level activity - so a brisk walk, not a stroll.

GregBrawlsInDogJail · 05/03/2022 16:15

That's just not completely sedentary by my benchmark, yeah. But a surprising number of people are in fact totally sedentary, so it's better than that.

Flippydip · 05/03/2022 16:16

I'd consider myself to be active if I walked for 20 mins a day. It's far more than I do currently, and I can't think of anyone I know who is that active.

MrsSkylerWhite · 05/03/2022 16:17

No, that’s not very active.

Fridafever · 05/03/2022 16:17

I believe the biggest bang for buck in terms of better health outcomes is quite a surprisingly small amount of activity versus nothing at all. It’s quite an important message to get out there because it’s very manageable and there are certainly people doing nothing because they’ve failed at being properly sporty/ active.

It’s obviously not very active in the commonly understood sense though.

BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz · 05/03/2022 16:18

Is the book aimed at those who are significantly overweight? I'd imagine 22mins (in one go) walking when your body is carrying 5+ extra stone is a workout.

hashbrownsandwich · 05/03/2022 16:20

Nhs guidelines state 150 minutes per week of exercise. That works out around 20/25 minutes a day.

RoastedFerret · 05/03/2022 16:22

@Flippydip

I'd consider myself to be active if I walked for 20 mins a day. It's far more than I do currently, and I can't think of anyone I know who is that active.
Do you not know anyone that owns a dog? I walk more than that but I have dogs so it isn't really optional!
InvincibleInvisibility · 05/03/2022 16:24

20 minutes for me is really low.

But we live in a capital city so walk and get public transport everywhere, with an emphasis on walking where possible.

I do 15 just to get to my metro station for work (plus walking for the connection then again to the office). DC and I walk 40 minutes to their sports clubs (just over 3km) 2-3 times a week.

We also walk to all Dr appointments (there are 3-4 a week as they have SN), which is 15 to 40 minutes depending on the Dr.

Fortunately mine are fantastic walkers and both have ADHD so walking is brilliant for all of us.

DB on the other hand drives everywhere so I suspect there are days when he doesn't walk even 10 minutes. 20 for him would be "active". 20 for me is not.

TippledPink · 05/03/2022 16:24

Yes I think the key here is it is American- they really don't walk anywhere! 20 minutes is not fit, but is a good starting place and manageable for the majority of people. If you have someone who never does exercise, it doesn't sound too strenuous or difficult to maintain.

Flowersandhearts · 05/03/2022 16:29

I'd consider active to be engaging in an exercise that increases your heart rate e.g
jogging 5 or more times a week for half an hour or more and very active to be borderline excessive amounts of exercise (e.g. running for 40+minutes six times a week).

DrSbaitso · 05/03/2022 16:31

Of course not. But it's better than nothing and it's a decent first target for a very very sedentary and unfit person.

Wafflesnsniffles · 05/03/2022 16:31

I try and walk briskly for an hour a day and dont consider myself active so no 22 minutes definitely isnt an active lifestyle.

Flowersandhearts · 05/03/2022 16:33

@BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz

Is the book aimed at those who are significantly overweight? I'd imagine 22mins (in one go) walking when your body is carrying 5+ extra stone is a workout.
I'm 15 stone so I guess in that category but still manage 1 hour of walking each day or some limited running but I'm youngish so maybe if I was older I would struggle more.
gannett · 05/03/2022 16:33

Well it's all relative isn't it? When I started running I thought puffing around for 10 minutes every three weeks was good exercise. Now I run 15km twice a week plus sport and resistance work.

20 minutes walking a day is better than nothing and the key to it is "every day" - it's designed to kickstart a habit, not be anyone's exercise endpoint.

D0lphine · 05/03/2022 16:35

Yeah I think he has said that to make it achievable to people who do absolutely nothing.

And to be fair to him, if a person is doing nothing, a 20 min walk every day will defo make a difference!

Movingonup22 · 05/03/2022 16:35

I am going through what I consider to be a shamefully inactive phase and I walk at least 30/40 minutes a day!

Original poster
UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 16:36

@Midlifemusings

150 minutes of activity a week is considered active by the recommendations and standards so he has just divided that by 7.

The recommendations are 150 minutes of moderate level activity - so a brisk walk, not a stroll.

I use the NHS Active 10 app and yes it recommends 150 minutes of brisk walking per week. But that isn't the same as just walking.
OP posts:
Original poster
UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 16:37

Plus isn't that a minimum level of activity not 'very active'

OP posts:
Original poster
UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 16:40

@Flippydip

I'd consider myself to be active if I walked for 20 mins a day. It's far more than I do currently, and I can't think of anyone I know who is that active.
Really? What about the school run? That is a 20min walk there and 20min back for me. Surely lots of people do that. I don't walk briskly, though when my DD is with me as she dawdles a bit!
OP posts:
BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz · 05/03/2022 16:40

I only manage to get my steps in during the week because we walk the school run. 15mins continuous walk up a steep hill, then 10mins fast walk back down again. Twice a day. I'd like to do more but add in 8 hours of work, housework, cooking, and the days gone.

Weekends I'm always out and about so do more than 20mins but not necessarily all in one go.

20mins walk could also be around the supermarket doing the big shop but it's not fast paced. Still activity though.

starfishmummy · 05/03/2022 16:41

It's better than nothing. And I assume he means a decent walking pace (dependent on the walkers abilities) and not just a Potter round the garden

Original poster
UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 16:41

@Fridafever

I believe the biggest bang for buck in terms of better health outcomes is quite a surprisingly small amount of activity versus nothing at all. It’s quite an important message to get out there because it’s very manageable and there are certainly people doing nothing because they’ve failed at being properly sporty/ active.

It’s obviously not very active in the commonly understood sense though.

That makes sense, actually. Thank you.
OP posts: