您現在的位置: 紐約時報中英文網 >> 紐約時報中英文版 >> 健康 >> 正文

我們真的需要每天走一萬步嗎?

更新時間:2019/9/19 20:46:57 來源:紐約時報中文網 作者:佚名

Do we need to walk 10,000 steps a day?
我們真的需要每天走一萬步嗎?

Many of us track our steps with smart watches, pedometers or phone apps and are of course thrilled when we reach that all-important daily goal of 10,000 steps. With the app I use, green confetti tumbles down the screen in congratulation. The app logs “strikes”, too, challenging me to see how often I can manage a week-long stretch above 10,000 steps a day. Answer: rarely.

很多人會用智能手表、計步器或者手機應用軟件來記錄自己每天走的步數,完成一萬步的目標就會特別興奮。我使用的手機應用軟件中,會有綠色的五彩紙花從屏幕上飄落下來表示祝賀。這款運動軟件還能記錄當天有沒有“罷工”,這很有刺激性,我也很想看看自己一周內有多少天完成日行一萬步以上的記錄。結果是:沒幾天。

There are debates over the accuracy of some step-counters and it’s obvious that they’re a blunt instrument in terms of measuring exercise. If you sprint, your score is no higher than if you dawdle, yet there’s a real difference in terms of benefits to fitness. Still, they do provide a rough guide to how active you’ve been.

有人對一些計步器的準確性存在異議,顯然,就測量運動量而言,這些計步器很遲鈍,比如說你快跑時的分數并不比閑逛時的分數高,但是在促進健身運動方面起了一定的作用。盡管不精準,但計步器還是能粗略的估算出你的運動量。

If you are going to count steps, the magnitude of your goal matters. Most tracking devices are set to a default goal of 10,000 steps – the famous number that we all know we should reach. You might assume that this number has emerged after years of research to ascertain whether 8,000, 10,000 or maybe 12,000 might be ideal for long-term health. In fact, no such large body of research exists.

如果要計算步數,目標的大小很重要。大多數跟蹤設備的默認目標都被設置為10000步。這個“標準目標”數字是大家都想完成的。你可能會認為,這個數字是經過多年研究得出的。事實上,保持長期健康到底該走8000步、10000步還是12000步,這個從來沒有人做過大規模的研究。

The magic number “10,000” dates back to a marketing campaign conducted shortly before the start of the 1964 Tokyo Olympic Games. A company began selling a pedometer called the Manpo-kei: “man” meaning 10,000, “po” meaning steps and “kei” meaning meter. It was hugely successful and the number seems to have stuck.

這個神奇的數字“10000”,可以追溯到1964年東京奧運會開幕前的一次營銷活動。一家公司當時開始銷售一種名為“萬歩計”(Manpo-kei)的產品。這個產品的營銷活動大獲成功,之后這個數字就一直被保持了下來。

Since then, studies have compared the health benefits of 5,000 versus 10,000 steps and, not surprisingly, the higher number is better. But until recently, all the numbers in between hadn’t been studied. Even now they haven’t been comprehensively tested on the general adult population. New research from I-Min Lee, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, and her team focused on a group of more than 16,000 women in their seventies, comparing the numbers of steps taken each day with the likelihood of dying from any cause – known as all-cause mortality. Each woman spent a week wearing a device to measure movement during waking hours. Then the researchers waited.

從那時起,有人開始比較走5000步和10000步對健康的好處,結果不出意料,步數越高越好。但直到最近,才有人開始研究介于這兩個數字之間的效果。即使到現在,也沒人在普通成年人中進行全面的測試。哈佛醫學院的醫學教授李益民(I-Min Lee)和她的團隊對16000多名70多歲的女性進行了一項新研究。他們對試驗者每天走的步數與死于任何原因的可能性(即全因死亡率)進行了比較。每位受試女性需佩戴一個測量清醒時運動量的設備,為時一周。然后研究人員等待結果。

When they followed the women up an average of four years and three months later, 504 had died. How many steps do you think the survivors had been doing? Was it the magic 10,000 steps a day?

追蹤受試者平均4年零3個月后,有504名受試者死亡。那么,剩下的幸存者每天到底走了多少步?是神奇的10000步嗎?

In fact, the average number for survivors was only 5,500 – and incremental gains in steps mattered. Women who took more than 4,000 steps a day were significantly more likely to still be alive than those who did only 2,700 steps. It’s surprising that such a small difference could have consequences for something as critical as longevity.

事實上,幸存者每天平均步數是5500步,并且每增加一些步數所帶來的影響都很明顯。每天走4000多步的女性明顯比每天只走2700步左右的女性存活率更高。令人驚訝的是,如此微小的差異竟會對壽命產生影響。

By that logic, you might assume the more steps they took, the better. For a range of steps that was true – but only up to 7,500 steps a day, after which the benefits then plateaued. Any more than that made no difference to life expectancy.

按照這種推理,人們可能會認為走得越多越好。在某個范圍內確實如此,但一個人每天在步行7500步之后,益處就沒那么明顯了,對預期壽命也沒有多少影響。

Of course, one drawback of this study is that we can’t be certain that the steps preceded the illness that killed them. The researchers only included women who were fit enough to walk outside their home and they did ask people to rate their own health, but perhaps there were some participants who were well enough to walk, but already not well enough to walk very far. In other words, they walked less steps because they were already unwell, and the steps themselves made no difference.

當然,這項研究有一個漏洞,那就是研究人員無法確定這些女性罹患致死疾病之前所走的步數。而且研究人員選擇身體健康可以出門散步的女性,雖然測試前讓受試者評估了自己的健康狀況,但有一些參與者身體雖然健康可以散步,但已經不能走太遠。換句話說,他們因為身體不舒服本身就走得很少,在這種情況下得出的步數就沒什么意義了。

But for this age group, this study suggests that maybe 7,500 is enough – although it’s possible that extra steps could confer additional protection against specific conditions. The higher step count could also have been an indicator of women who had generally been more active throughout their lives, and it was this that helped them to live longer. For this reason, it is hard to unravel the exact health benefits of extra steps alone.

這項研究表明,對于這個年齡段的人來說,7500步就足夠了。盡管多走一些更有益健康。步數越多也說明受試者平時運動量就大一些,正是這一點延長了她們的預期壽命。出于這個原因,僅靠額外增加的步數,很難證明對健康的確切益處。

Then there’s the question of the optimum step count in psychological terms. The 10,000 target can seem like a high goal to achieve every single day, which might tempt you not to bother. Consistently failing to achieve your goal day after day is dispiriting. In a study of British teenagers, at first the 13 and 14-year-olds enjoyed the novelty of being given the target, but they soon realised how difficult it was to maintain and complained that it wasn’t fair.

除此之外,“最佳步數”這個問題還與心理有關。每天走10000步是一個很高的目標,這種高目標讓許多人懶得去努力,達不到目標日復一日地失敗是令人沮喪的。在一項針對英國青少年的研究中顯示,13歲和14歲的孩子們一開始很享受追求目標的新鮮感,但他們很快就意識到持之以恒有多難,并開始抱怨不公。

I’ve done my own psychological experiment on myself by changing the default goal on my app to 9,000 steps. I kid myself that I do the other thousand walking around at home when I’m not carrying my phone, but in truth I just want to encourage myself by succeeding more often.

我在自己身上做了一個心理實驗,把應用軟件的默認目標改為9000步。我騙自己,當沒帶手機的時候,我也會在家里四處走動,事實上,我只是想通過提高完成率來鼓勵自己。

To raise the step count of the most sedentary, a lower goal might be better psychologically.

要想讓久坐不動者多走動,設定較低的目標在心理層面來說可能效果更好。

But even then, counting steps at all risks robbing us of the intrinsic pleasure of walking. Jordan Etkin, a psychologist at Duke University in the US, found that people who tracked their steps did walk further, but they enjoyed it less, saying it felt like work. When they were assessed at the end of the day, their happiness levels were lower than in those who had walked without their steps being tracked.

不顧一切只為完成步數,這會剝奪我們走路時的樂趣。美國杜克大學(Duke University)心理學家埃特金(Jordan Etkin)發現,記錄自己步數的人確實走得更遠,但他們并不那么喜歡走路,感覺像是在完成一項工作。當一天結束評估時,他們的快樂指數比那些沒有記錄的人要低。

Counting steps might be counterproductive for the fittest too – signalling that they should stop once they’ve reached the magic 10,000 instead of getting fitter by, say, doing more.

對身體非常健壯的人來說,計算步數可能會適得其反,因為這暗示他們,走到10000步就應該停下來,不需要做更多的鍛煉來提升健康水平。

What can we conclude from all of this? Count if you find it motivates you, but remember there’s nothing special about 10,000 steps. Set the goal that is right for you. It might be more, it might be less – or it might be throwing out your tracker entirely.

我們從這些研究中得出的結論是:如果你覺得記錄步數能激勵你,那就這么做吧,但是記住,一萬步并沒有什么特別的意義。要設定適合自己的目標。這個數字可以比一萬步多,也可以比一萬步少。或者你完全可以拋棄計步器。

“全文請訪問紐約時報中文網,本文發表于紐約時報中文網(http://cn.nytimes.com),版權歸紐約時報公司所有。任何單位及個人未經許可,不得擅自轉載或翻譯。訂閱紐約時報中文網新聞電郵:http://nytcn.me/subscription/”

相關文章列表
pk10九码滚雪球计划表