October 31, 2025, 9:55 am | Read time: 5 minutes
Walking is considered one of the simplest ways to stay healthy in everyday life. Many people aim for the well-known goal of 10,000 steps a day. However, few consider how exactly these steps are accumulated—whether through longer walks or many short trips. A new study now shows: How we move is at least as important as how much we move. Especially for people who are generally less active, it could be crucial not just to accumulate steps, but to walk in longer phases.
What Is the Study’s Research Question?
In health research, the focus has mostly been on the total number of steps per day. Whether these were collected in many small stages or longer segments hardly mattered. But that is exactly what a new study has examined.
The central question: Can it make a health difference whether someone walks for 15 minutes twice a day, or is only on the move for one to two minutes at a time throughout the day? The answer, as the study shows, is clear—and easily applicable for many people in everyday life.1
How the study was conducted
The study was based on data from the UK Biobank, a large-scale British research project that collects health data from hundreds of thousands of people. For this analysis, researchers examined data from about 33,000 adults who wore motion sensors from 2013 to 2015.
All participants were free of cardiovascular diseases or cancer at the start of the observation. They were on average 62 years old and took at most 8,000 steps a day, thus belonging to a relatively inactive population group.
The sensors recorded not only the total number of steps but also how long someone walked continuously. Based on this data, four groups were formed:
- less than 5 minutes per walking phase
- between 5 and 10 minutes
- between 10 and 15 minutes
- at least 15 minutes continuously
Additionally, the total movement per day was considered. Those who took fewer than 5,000 steps daily were considered sedentary, while those who managed between 5,000 and 7,999 steps were considered low active.
Researchers then tracked, over an average period of nearly eight years, how often cardiovascular diseases occurred and how many people died during that time.
Longer Walking Reduces Mortality Risk—Even With Low Activity
The results were clear: The longer people walked continuously, the lower their risk of dying prematurely. And this was true regardless of how many steps they took overall.
In the group with the shortest walking segments (less than five minutes continuously), the mortality rate after about ten years was 4.36 percent. In the group that walked at least 15 minutes continuously each day, it was only 0.80 percent.
This difference is remarkable—especially since all participants were generally less active. The key was not the amount of movement, but its structure.
Longer Walking Phases Significantly Reduced the Risk of Cardiovascular Diseases
There was also a clear connection regarding the risk of cardiovascular diseases. In the group with the shortest walking phases, 13.03 percent of participants developed such diseases during the observation period. In the group with longer walking distances, it was only 4.39 percent.
This effect was particularly noticeable among the very sedentary individuals—those who took fewer than 5,000 steps per day. In this group, the risk of dying was up to 85 percent lower for those with longer walking segments compared to those with short movement phases.
This means: Even people with very low overall activity can achieve measurable health benefits through consciously structured movement.
Why Longer Walking Activates Circulation and Metabolism More Strongly
Researchers suspect that longer walking segments activate important bodily processes more strongly. These include:
- better blood circulation
- a more stable blood sugar level
- increased insulin sensitivity
- a more active metabolism
Such effects are important for heart health. In very short walks—as often occur in everyday life—these positive effects seem to be significantly weaker.
How Do Experts Evaluate the Results?
Several experts have assessed the study results. Sports scientist Emmanuel Stamatakis explains that this work sets new standards. It shows that not only the amount of movement but also its pattern plays a significant role.
Matthew Ahmadi, co-author of the study, points out that even one or two walks a day of 10 to 15 minutes could make a noticeable difference for less active people.
Three cardiologists—Fabian Sanchis-Gomar, Carl Lavie, and Maciej Banach—also emphasize that longer walking phases may make blood vessels more elastic, activate metabolism, and reduce inflammation levels in the body.2
What a Statistics Professor Says
Kevin McConway, a statistics professor at the Science Media Centre in London, is more cautious. He reminds us that this is an observational study. This means the study shows correlations—but no proof that longer walking directly causes better health. It is possible that healthier people tend to move for longer, not the other way around.3
The study also found that longer walking phases were associated with a slightly increased risk of accidents. This suggests that other, previously unconsidered factors should be taken into account.
Walking continuously or at intervals – which burns more calories?
New Study Questions WHO Exercise Recommendations
What Does This Mean for Everyday Life?
The study suggests: Those who move little can still achieve a lot—if they walk longer continuously.
Even one or two daily walks of 10 to 15 minutes can significantly reduce the risk of cardiovascular diseases and premature death. It’s less about perfection and more about consistency.
Especially for people with a sedentary lifestyle, this can be a simple yet effective measure–without a training plan or gym.
What Should Be Considered When Interpreting the Results?
Even though the results seem strong, one must know the study’s limitations:
- It is an observational study. Correlations, but no direct causes, were examined.
- The movement data comes from only one week—whether the behavior remained the same over the years is unclear.
- Other influencing factors (such as income, education, and diet) could have played a role.
Nevertheless, the data provides an important indication that not only the amount but also the type of movement could be important for health.