“WALKING IS MAN’S best medicine,” said Hippocrates, an ancient Greek physician. Or so the story goes. Whether the phrase originated with him is disputed. But it does contain a kernel of truth. Walking is a form of exercise that is free, requires no equipment and is easy for most people to incorporate into their days. But how many steps should one walk—and at what speed—to unlock its benefits?
Conventional wisdom sets 10,000 steps per day as a good target. That source of that number, though, is as questionable as Hippocrates’ quotation. Its origins lie not in a clinical trial, but a Japanese advertising campaign for a pedometer launched ahead of the 1964 Tokyo Olympics (10,000, in Japanese Kanji, also looks a little like a person walking). Those committed to getting their steps in should not shy away from the 10,000 mark. But in terms of scientific research, the number barely has a leg to stand on.
A study published in Lancet Public Health in 2025 considered 57 perambulation papers published between 2014 and 2025 to assess the connection between different daily step counts and various health outcomes. Walking more was found to be beneficial across the board. Taking 7,000 steps a day, in contrast to 2,000, brought about a 47% lower risk of premature death, a 25% lower chance of developing cardiovascular disease and a 14% reduction in the risk of diabetes. Even a little goes a long way: going from 2,000 daily steps to 4,000 resulted in a 36% drop in mortality risk over the years tracked.
But the benefits eventually taper off. “What we see with most of the health outcomes is a diminishing return on investment after 7,000,” says Melody Ding, an epidemiologist at the University of Sydney, who led the study. Extra steps keep helping, but beyond around 7,000 steps per day, they are scarcely worth the effort. The jump from 7,000 daily steps to 10,000, for example, led to only a 2% further reduction in mortality risk.
Step count is only one measure. Another is intensity, which scientists generally quantify using cadence: the number of steps taken per minute. According to Dr Ding, the evidence for an ideal cadence is harder to pin down. Still, she says, sports science generally suggests that as far as physical activity is concerned, the more intense, the better: “If people can get the heart rate up, or a little bit out of breath,” she says, “that would definitely have health benefits.”
That aligns with the findings of Emmanuel Stamatakis of Monash University, in Melbourne. Writing in the British Journal of Sports Medicine in September, Dr Stamatakis and his colleagues tracked the joint effects of step count and intensity on the health of 64,743 participants for around eight years, using data from UK BioBank, a large data set. As with step count, quicker cadences were generally beneficial. Those who walked between 0 and 5,000 brisk steps per day achieved, on average, a similar reduction in mortality risk to those who ambled for between 5,000 and 7,500 steps. But diminishing returns applied to cadence too. The paper suggests the sweet spot, therefore, is walking 7,500-10,000 steps a day, with frequent intervals at 100 steps a minute.
Any reasonable amount of walking is better than none. But for those unable to walk much, upping the pace might be a way to increase the benefits. “And if you don’t have enough opportunities,” says Dr Stamatakis, “create them.” Rather than parking right outside the supermarket, for example, stop around the block and do a walking sprint in.
