Saw this on Twitter, assumed it was a parody.
Reader, it was not:
4 Likes
i know i shouldnât let it get to me but practically every sentence of this article has left me fuming
1 Like
wtf does the last line even mean?!
2 Likes
I wondered that too.
Itâs supposed to be a reference/âjokeâ to the Bill Clinton mention earlier in the article but even then it barely makes sense.
But even those past-midnight plays of Last Nite â as predictable a part of any uni party as a girl sobbing over the debate team member with James Spader hair
Who says this paper is by and for the middle classes
13 Likes
It looks nothing like a knee either. Unless it was severely arthritic
Phenomenal url though:
music/2018/aug/31/is-this-it-strokes-bum-knee
13 Likes
In the first paragraph they diss Fitbits, then they write a whole article about why you shouldnât focus on 10,000 steps and look at other measures, failing to mention that Fitbits also measure active minutes, how long youâve been sedentary for, how good your sleep is, how much exercise youâve done all week, what your heart rate is, how many flights of stairs youâve walked upâŚ
i mean, surely the only reason to dispel 10,000 steps âgoalâ is if it was actively unhealthy? surely no one thinks that simply doing 10,000 steps a day is enough to make you a perfectly healthy human being, but itâs a bit stupid to discredit it as something to aim for besides
4 Likes
I made the mistake of reading this whole article and I was SO irked. Itâs a guide! Something to inspire people to be more active! ffs!
Yeah, itâs ridiculous. âIs walking 10,000 steps per day better on average than not doing so? Yes.â Article done!
1 Like
Which they essentially (itâs obviously awful) already published 18 months ago
Except it doesnât, obviously, because the thrust of Hagerâs presentation seems nitpicky. Yes, a flat 10,000-step goal doesnât take things such as age or length of stride into consideration. And, yes, simply walking for a few miles each day wonât be as good for you as a focused, closely monitored exercise and nutrition plan that has been created for your specific lifestyle. But it still means youâre walking a few miles a day, and that has to count for something. Youâre still being compelled to move around where otherwise you were not. And, so long as youâre not banking on it to turn you into an Olympic-level athlete, any movement is better than none at all. Meanwhile, at last count, inert sanctimony doesnât burn very many calories at all, which means that Iâm screwed.
I suppose the thing for me about the 10k is that itâs about additionality. I walk to and from work, which takes about 25 minutes each way. If thatâs it from me on a weekday, then I tend to hit 7-8000. So getting over the 10k mark requires I do a little something extra. So maybe Iâll walk to the cinema instead of getting a bus, or go to the supermarket thatâs a little further away.
Iâm under no impression that itâs going to lose me any weight or whatever, but just know that I have to a little extra, and actually doing that little extra, are nice things to do.
Donât tell the Guardian, but Iâve got my Fitbit set to do 12,000 steps not 10,000! 
1 Like
Thatâs actually worse that 10,000
5 Likes
Exactly the same here. My commute accounts for about 7,000 steps, so to hit 10 I need to play a couple of games of table tennis and take a decent walk at lunch. Itâs obviously better I do those than sit at my desk for another hour.
1 Like
I always make sure I do 10001, just to be on the safe side.
But come on guys, the article doesnât âdiss fitbitsâ or the concept of doing 10K steps per day. Itâs actualy quite an interesting description of the history and origins of that target and a discussion of what research there is into the health benefits of regular walking at various tempos and for various lengths of time.
1 Like
This is hardly a ringing endorsement:
You can barely walk down the street without someone stomping past you wearing a FitBit ⌠It has become a global obsession
When has describing anyone stomping ever been a good thing?
In the first paragraph theyâre confusing the sophisticated devices that people wear now with basic pedometers that you could have got 25 years ago, and in doing so giving the impression to people who donât know about them that they donât offer much value.
rubbish
You think using the words âstompingâ and âobsessionâ are positive? Letâs agree to disagree 