How do people average 50000 steps per day?

[Emmeli]

Who has the time to average 50,000 steps a day!? How can this be possible?

Moderator edit: updated subject for clarity

[shipo]

---

@Corney wrote:

P.S. 6-7 miles never approached 50k steps and I doubt I could have logged 50K steps running a marathon.

---

If I recall correctly, I logged slightly less than 50,000 steps during my 6 legs of Reach the Beach a couple of years back when I ran a total of 32.8 miles over a 24 hour period.  That said, the toing and froing between the team van and the transition zones to cheer my teammates on and such easily logged another 10,000 or so steps.  So, in spite of the fact I've run over 5,000 miles over the last three years, I've only crossed the 50,000 step/day threshold once, heck, I've only crossed the 40,000 step/day threshold twice.

[USAF-Larry]

---

@BruceBu wrote:

Actually, about 1800 steps per mile. Yes, it is a lot of miles in the mountains. To be clear, I have done 100k in a day (55 miles) once, 90k 2 times, and averaged over 50k/day for a month only once. Long term average is about 30k/day over the eight months I've used Fitbit (although I've be power walking for 40 years).

---

I'm glad for you! I certainly couldn't/wouldn't do it! I wouldn't get anything else done if I tried to walk 30 miles a day.  If I averaged 3mph for a 30 mile hike, which I doubt I could do, that would be a 10 hour walk not counting breaks. If I were still on the green side of the earth after that, I'd probably be in CICU again. Think I'll stick to my 5 - 7 miles a day.... 

[BruceBu]

@USAF-Larry. My average is 30,000 steps/day not 30 miles. With my lifestyle, I get 8 -10k 'living steps' during the course of the day. That leaves about 22,000 steps as focused walking/jogging in the mountains, or about 12.5 miles, takes me about three hours real moving time, sometimes in one session, sometimes two. Not that big a time requirement for a retired person's life-long passionate hobby.

[USAF-Larry]

A cashier at a mall store noticed my Charge HR and asked if I get 10,000 steps a day. I told him I'm a very active person and I don't have a problem getting over 10K steps a day, and asked him about his number of steps.  He told me that because of his job of just standing behind the register all day, he had a hard time getting that many steps. Then he said he "cheats" by just swinging his arm until he gets the count. I just said, "Oh," took my package and left.  But, I wondered to myself "who is he cheating?"  Nobody else knows how many steps he has unless he is in a challenge, so who else care if he has 10K steps? And, it is doing absolutely nothing for his health, so who is he cheating?

[BruceBu]

Even without 'cheating' this whole discussion and the idea of using steps for 'fair competition' is kind of silly, simply because the level of effort for a 'valid' step can vary so widely - a beginner starting out at 2 mph and 18" stride is taking real, non-empty steps, yet those step probably have less than 1/25 the energy expediture per step as someone running a 6-minute mile. I think people who take fitness seriously do not use Fitbit (at least not for long) and step count as primary instrumentation and exercise metric. I think that for walking/running; distance (+ elevation gain x 13), heart rate and heart rate zone time distributions are much more important parameters, and even when considering step details, cadence and stride length are more important than the step count.

My primary instrumentation is a Polar M400 wrist unit (with excellent GPS built in - no smart phone needed - accurate to about 5 ft for distance and elevation), chest strap monitor for heart rate (it keeps working reliably under hard exercise conditions), and a Polar 'Stride' sensor attached to my shoe -  it measures both cadence and stride length (and step count) very accurately. When outdoors the stride sensor is automatically calibrated against GPS, then indoors (when I must) - treadmill or looping - the stride sensor calibration is used to accurately evaluate what you are doing in circumstances where GPS doesn't work or distances are difficult to evaluate. My typical 'sessions' are driven by heart rate zones - I'll often 'lock' a target HR zone (usually zone 3 = 70-80% of HR-max for longer walk/runs, medium aerobic, locking = wrist unit beeps if I get out of zone) and then adjust cadence to stay in zone. My Fitbit 'One' still comes along for the ride, but it is more of a social toy so that I can share with my friends here.

[shipo]

---

@BruceBu wrote:

...I think people who take fitness seriously do not use Fitbit (at least not for long) and step count as primary instrumentation and exercise metric...

---

Not sure why you'd think that; the Fitbit Surge is very useful for a dedicated/competitive runner.

[BruceBu]

I've never used the Surge, but from what I read I can't expect the HR function to work any better than my Charge HR did.

[shipo]

Can't speak to the Charge HR, but I can say my Surge is just as accurage as my former Garmin Forerunner combined with my Polar chest strap, and a heck of a lot more convenient too.

[BruceBu]

Glad it works for you. With my Charge HR I could get it to work if I wore it high on my forearm held tightly in place with a sweat band (more difficult to set up that a chest strap), but was never reliable on my wrist for vigorous exrercise. Even on the forearm I found myself fooling with it all the time to make sure it was working - the interruption to a focused workout was worse than not having any HR at all. Since Surge uses the same sensor, I didn't even consider it as an upgrade. Not really Fitbit's fault - the optical capillary flow sensors won't work for everybody, no matter who makes it - some people simply don't have sufficient surface capillary flow for a good measurments; in others pulsed arterial flow has already changed to continuous veinous flow before getting to the surface capillaries - not enough pulsed flow to measure reliably once the inevitable noise sources of vigorous exercise are added in. 

Moderator edit: format

[USAF-Larry]

---

@BruceBu wrote:

 I think people who take fitness seriously do not use Fitbit (at least not for long) and step count as primary instrumentation and exercise metric. I think that for walking/running; distance (+ elevation gain x 13), heart rate and heart rate zone time distributions are much more important parameters, and even when considering step details, cadence and stride length are more important than the step count.

---

I can't agree with that. I take fitness very seriously, and I use FitBit to track my distance and my heart rate zones during workouts. It is very important information that is charted for me on the FitBit Dashboard. I do not know why I would not use the FitBit. I don't need the chest strap monitor when the Charge HR gives me all that information. And, my phone has the GPS to accurately record the distances as well as pace.  The steps counted by the FitBit are important only to the extent they show I am moving. Moving is good, sitting all day is not.

[Marcy]

---

@SunsetRunner wrote:
I am a very high stepper myself 

---

@SunsetRunner, I am surprised you would make that claim as your Fitbit profile says your best day was 9741 steps. 

[BruceBu]

@USAF-Larry, It's good to hear your Charge HR gives you what you need, was not the case for me.

[shipo]

---

@BruceBu wrote:

@USAF-Larry, It's good to hear your Charge HR gives you what you need, was not the case for me.

---

I was pondering this conversation while having a little mid-afternoon snooze and a couple of thought occured to me:

1. Don't know when you last tried your Charge HR, but I understand a relatively recent release of firmware was supposed to improve heart rate accuracy.
2. While the hardware and firmware of the Charge HR and Surge are supposedly the same, there is one big difference; size.  Given sunlight and bright light from overhead lighting in workout clubs can directly skew the results of the HR monitor, the larger size of the Surge will greatly aid in shielding from external light sources.

[GershonSurge]

I love my Surge because of the convenience and the GPS. However, the heart rate function is sporadic. Often, I look down and see a couple dashes. It's accurate enough for an average during a run. 

Sometimes, the heart rate function goes wacko and says my heart rate is about 170. Then suddenly, it drops down to my normal range. 

[shipo]

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

I love my Surge because of the convenience and the GPS. However, the heart rate function is sporadic. Often, I look down and see a couple dashes. It's accurate enough for an average during a run. 

Sometimes, the heart rate function goes wacko and says my heart rate is about 170. Then suddenly, it drops down to my normal range. 

---

I had similar issues with my Surge when I first got it; I found tightening the band down one notch and making sure the back of the tracker is flat against the top of my wrist solved the issue.  Funny thing, Friday evening I forgot to tighten the band and lost the heart rate track about seven miles into a run; the last three miles was a flat line.  

[GershonSurge]

@shipo

Here is my heart rate for today. A little tighter seemed to help. Thanks.

[shipo]

Yeah, mine looks better as well; I remembered to notch down my Surge this morning.

FWIW, I'm currently recovering from not one, but two non-running related injuries, so I'm keeping my pace nice and slow; so far so good.  Here is a shot from this morning's trail run:

Notes:

• Bio-breaks at miles 0.5 and 3.1.
• Below grade tunnel walk-throughs at miles 2.1, 4.5, 5.8, and 8.2.

[GershonSurge]

@shipo 

Nice run. Your pulse seems more consistant than mine.

[shipo]

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

@shipo 

Nice run. Your pulse seems more consistant than mine.

---

Thanks, that was for a pretty flat rail-trail run; here's what it looks like when I hit the hills:

Elevation profile:

Heart rate graph:

[Jables]

This is funny to read all these people getting so mad about nothing. But that is what the internet is. Anyways I have gotten over 40k steps in a day and I know there is definetely room for much more. It is not impossible. And NO I do not cheat lol. I walk alot during work and go on long walk during lunch. I have finished work with over 20k steps. Then go on bike ride or hit gym after after work. I think if I really tried hard I could probably hit 60k. But that is just me and the type of job I have allows it. Some people cannot attain this many steps because they sit at desk all day so it seems next to impossible. But me with active job and no kids or wife I can spend the day running in circles for fun. 😉