Counting steps or time when measuring progress on exercise goals is an essential aspect to consider. In a recent study conducted by researchers at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, it was found that both time and step-based exercise targets are equally associated with lower risks of early cardiovascular disease and early death. The study, published in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine, focused on 14,399 women who wore research-grade wearables to record their physical activity levels. The findings revealed that participants who engaged in higher levels of physical activity, regardless of whether it was counted as steps or time, experienced significant risk reductions in early death or cardiovascular disease.
The researchers emphasized the importance of aligning the method of measuring progress with personal preferences. Dr. Rikuta Hamaya, the lead study author, stated that while both step counting and time recording are useful in portraying health status, each method has its advantages and downsides. Steps may not accurately account for differences in fitness levels, while time recording may not be suitable for those unable to set aside time for regular exercise. Ultimately, the researchers concluded that movement looks different for everyone and nearly all forms of movement are beneficial to health.
Dr. Rohit Vuppuluri, an interventional cardiologist, highlighted the importance of consistency in achieving exercise goals. He mentioned that step counting is a low-impact exercise that can be done throughout the day, making it convenient for individuals with busy schedules. On the other hand, setting time-based exercise goals can provide a more structured workout routine that incorporates a variety of activities such as running, swimming, and cycling. Vuppuluri recommended incorporating both strategies to tailor fitness programs to individual cardiovascular goals.
Dr. Dana Ryan, the director of sports performance, nutrition, and education at Herbalife, emphasized the significance of incorporating both step counting and time-based exercises into daily routines. She suggested aiming for 7,000 to 10,000 steps per day while also focusing on intensity, strength training, and flexibility. Ryan highlighted the importance of engaging in solid workouts that focus on effective time spent exercising, rather than simply being at the gym for an extended period without engaging in meaningful physical activity.
While the study provides valuable insights into the correlation between exercise metrics and health outcomes, it is essential to consider its limitations. Dr. Julia Blank, a family medicine physician, pointed out that the study focused on a specific population of women, predominantly white and of higher socioeconomic status. She noted that the findings may not apply to broader populations and highlighted the observational nature of the study, which does not establish a causal relationship between exercise metrics and health.
In conclusion, choosing a method to measure progress on exercise goals should be based on personal preferences and individual needs. Both step counting and time-based exercise targets have their advantages and downsides, making it important to tailor fitness programs to suit individual preferences. Incorporating a combination of both methods, along with consistent workouts and gradual increases in activity, can help individuals achieve their cardiovascular goals while promoting overall health and well-being.
