Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

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:
BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz · 05/03/2022 16:42

And if he is aiming the book at the completely inactive then he isn't going to get any results if he is telling people to do 3x HIIT classes a week, swim a mile a week and run twice a week.

BobbinHood · 05/03/2022 16:42

It’s barely active, but on average activity levels particularly for Americans is probably above average.

I consider myself pretty fat and sedentary and even I walk about an hour a day in total.

Krakenchorus · 05/03/2022 16:43

I reckon I've been pretty inactive today, but I've still walked 5km. To me that's just walking from here to there and back IYKWIM, not 'activity'.

XmasElf10 · 05/03/2022 16:44

I have a dog so walk 45 minutes a day on a bad day, 75 on a normal day and a few hours (2 or 3) on a good day. 20 minutes would be very little for me. Mostly the only people I are working routinely every single day are other dog walkers… we should live forever Grin

Original poster
UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 16:44

@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.
No, it's not. It's about lifestyle changes that lower your risk of many diseases.

I'm carrying about that extra weight and don't find a 20 minute walk a workout, atall, personally.

OP posts:
Gowithme · 05/03/2022 16:45

A 20 minute walk is like 10 minutes there and then 10 minutes back. It's literally nothing. I can't imagine how anyone can do less than that, you would just sit in a chair the whole day.

Original poster
UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 16:45

@hashbrownsandwich

Nhs guidelines state 150 minutes per week of exercise. That works out around 20/25 minutes a day.
Yes, but it is meant to be brisk not just normal walking.
OP posts:
BobbinHood · 05/03/2022 16:47

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.

It’s really not. I should know.

YforWanky · 05/03/2022 16:47

Hmmm I do more than that every day (have a dog) but don't consider myself "very active" at all! Before we got the dog it was less too as we live rurally so basically everywhere is a car journey away. I walk a lot more when visiting family in cities!

BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz · 05/03/2022 16:48

You might not feel like it's a workout but it is. I have the same extra weight. Our bodies are constantly hauling about 4/5 extra stones- it's making our bodies work hard even if it doesn't feel that way.

XenoBitch · 05/03/2022 16:49

I don't walk much at all. I hate being outside and find walking really boring. But I do a lot of cardio workouts in my house and consider myself active.

Fizbosshoes · 05/03/2022 16:49

That is my walk and back to the station every day and I don't really think of it in terms of exercise. I usually am walking briskly (at least on the way there) because I leave it to the last minute to leave for the train!Blush

Original poster
UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 16:50

@DrSbaitso

Of course not. But it's better than nothing and it's a decent first target for a very very sedentary and unfit person.
Yes, I understand but is it enough to significantly lower your risk of heart disease? It just said walking not brisk walking.
OP posts:
Submariner · 05/03/2022 16:52

Isn't the point he's making that 20 minutes walking per day is not enough? That's not what he recommends.

To be fair I haven't read the book but I use his website and on there he says: "I recommend 90 minutes of moderate-intensity activity, such as brisk (four miles per hour) walking or 40 minutes of vigorous activity (such as jogging or active sports) each day."

Original poster
UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 16:53

@gannett

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.

But how much would 15min walking lower the risk of heart disease? Maybe it would compared to nothing?
OP posts:
SilverGlitterBaubles · 05/03/2022 16:55

I guess something is better than nothing and as PPs have said it is aimed at Americans who do not walk anywhere. Their butts are permanently glued to their cars.

DrSbaitso · 05/03/2022 16:56

Yes, I understand but is it enough to significantly lower your risk of heart disease? It just said walking not brisk walking.

If it's intended as an attainable and non-scary first goal for a very very unfit person then yes, because it's likely to be the first step towards making even more change. If 20 minutes of normal walking or equivalent is a rarity for you, you'll probably find it does elevate your heart rate.

FourTeaFallOut · 05/03/2022 16:56

It's a fuck tonne better for your health than not moving for 20 minutes a day. As for whether it is very active, I mean it seems an unlikely definition but it must be very active relative to some scale with lower values otherwise it's meaningless. Is it very active compared to the number of active minutes for the typical American? Confused

WorraLiberty · 05/03/2022 16:58

I think the people saying 'it's better than nothing' are missing the point.

Even 5 minutes is better than nothing but that doesn't make someone 'very active' either.

If 20 minutes is considered 'very' active, it's a pretty low bar.

Original poster
UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 16:58

@Movingonup22

I am going through what I consider to be a shamefully inactive phase and I walk at least 30/40 minutes a day!
Haha me too! I often do 1hr 20min on the school run. It certainly doesn't make me feel 'very active'.
OP posts:
roarfeckingroarr · 05/03/2022 17:03

Yeah that's nothing

JinglingHellsBells · 05/03/2022 17:06

You are supposed to walk at a speed of 3-4 miles per hour . This means walking so fast that you are a bit breathless, and you can talk to a friend at the same time, but not sing.

Brisk walking is defined as at least 3 mph.

On an effort scale of 1-10, you should be exercising at at least 7 to benefit your heart.

Shockingly, 1:5 of the UK population does not walk continuously for at least 30 mins a week.

Original poster
UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 17:06

@BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz

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.

Please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying for a minute 20 min walk a day isn't getting in activity. I am not shaming anyone. For goodness sake, anyone doing 10 min walk.a day is doing better than someone on a couch! Any activity is to be commended. I don't do anywhere near enough! I run at the pace of a snail! I'm just questioning if a 20 min walk would be 'very active'. I suppose in my head 'very active' is something like 1hr+ of strenuous activity a day.
OP posts:
Original poster
UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 17:08

@starfishmummy

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
It is not him suggesting it, it the American heart association. It is just a walk not a brisk walk.
OP posts:
Original poster
UndertheCedartree · 05/03/2022 17:10

@BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz

And if he is aiming the book at the completely inactive then he isn't going to get any results if he is telling people to do 3x HIIT classes a week, swim a mile a week and run twice a week.
The book is not aimed at the completely inactive and he doesn't endorse the American heart association's definition of 'very active'. I think he feels their definition of 'very active' is very unambitious.
OP posts: