Ten minutes of easy running a day is enough to live longer

How much do you have to run before it counts? Most of us would guess somewhere around half an hour, a few times a week. But a large American study points to a much lower number: 5 to 10 minutes a day.

Dr. Duck-chul Lee and colleagues published the results of a study that followed 55,137 adults for an average of 15 years. Their question was simple. Do people who run live longer than people who don’t, and how much running do you need for that?

What the researchers measured

The participants came for a medical check-up at the Cooper Clinic in Dallas between 1974 and 2002. They were between 18 and 100 years old, 44 on average, and none had had a heart attack, stroke or cancer at the start.

On a questionnaire, they reported how they ran over the past three months: how long, how far, how often and how fast. About 24% ran. The researchers then followed who died, and of what, until the end of 2003. That added up to 3,413 deaths, 1,217 of them from cardiovascular disease.

Runners had a 30% lower risk of death

After correcting for age, sex, smoking, alcohol, other physical activity and a family history of heart disease, runners had:

• a 30% lower risk of death from any cause
• a 45% lower risk of death from cardiovascular disease
• a life expectancy that was 3 years longer

To put that in perspective, the researchers compared not running with other known risk factors. Not running weighed almost as heavily as high blood pressure. They estimated that 16% of all deaths and 25% of cardiovascular deaths in this group were linked to not running.

More running gave barely more protection

This is the part that surprised people. The researchers split the runners into five equal groups, from the least to the most running per week. Every group did better than the non-runners, and the differences between the groups were small.

Compared with non-runners, corrected for age, sex, smoking, alcohol, other physical activity and family history of heart disease. Source: Lee et al. (2014), table 3, model 2.

The same pattern showed up for distance, frequency and speed. Runners who covered less than about 10 km a week, ran only once or twice a week, or ran slower than about 9.7 km/h (6 mph) still had a clearly lower risk of death than non-runners.

In a separate analysis, the researchers looked at 30 to 59 minutes of running a week, or 5 to 10 minutes a day. That group had a 28% lower risk of death and a 58% lower risk of cardiovascular death. Current guidelines recommend at least 75 minutes of vigorous activity a week, so this is well below that.

Starting counts, staying counts more

Part of the group came back for a second check-up, on average 5.9 years later. That shows what happens when people change their habits.

People who ran at only one of the two visits did better than people who never ran. But the biggest benefit went to those who ran at both visits: a 29% lower risk of death and a 50% lower risk of cardiovascular death. Only 13% of that group kept running.

For us, that is the real message of the study. The dose is small. Keeping it up over the years is what makes the difference.

What this study does not tell you

A finding this attractive is easy to overstate. These are the limits the researchers themselves name, plus a few we add:

• This is an observational study. It shows that runners die less often, not that running is the only cause. Runners in this group were also leaner, smoked less and had fewer chronic conditions at the start. The researchers corrected for that, and the effect held in healthy and less healthy people, but an observational study cannot rule everything out.
• Running was self-reported. People tend to overestimate how much they move. According to the researchers, that would make the true benefit larger, not smaller.
• The group was not average. Mostly white, highly educated, middle to upper income. Whether the numbers hold for everyone is not certain.
• Intensity was not studied. The study looked at time, distance, frequency and speed, not at heart rate zones or interval training. It says nothing about easy versus hard running.
• It is about living longer, not about performing better. If you want to run a faster marathon, 10 minutes a day won’t get you there. Performance asks for a different dose.

One more detail. Runners had about 30% higher cardiorespiratory fitness than non-runners. Once the researchers corrected for fitness, the benefit of running disappeared. So the protection most likely runs through a fitter heart and lungs.

The top group, with three hours or more a week, did slightly less well than the middle groups. The researchers do not read that as a warning against running a lot. Even that group did clearly better than non-runners. Whether there is an upper limit remains an open question.

What you do with it as a coach

• A short run is not a failed session. For an athlete in a busy week, 10 minutes beats skipping. Plan them in, rather than letting the whole session go.
• Make starting easy. For a beginner, the gap between nothing and a little is the biggest gain in this study. The researchers recommend starting with walking for people who are inactive now, to limit the injury risk.
• Look at consistency over months, not peaks over a week. Persistent runners got the most benefit. A plan your athlete can sustain for years is worth more than a perfect block followed by a long break.
• Keep the goal in mind. For health and longevity, a small dose goes a long way. For performance, you build volume and specific work. Both are fine, as long as you know which one you are training for.

Source

• Lee, D., Pate, R. R., Lavie, C. J., Sui, X., Church, T. S., & Blair, S. N. (2014). Leisure-time running reduces all-cause and cardiovascular mortality risk. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 64(5), 472-481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2014.04.058