Trends are a common sight in the online fitness world, with social media algorithms changing and pushing topics and products at breakneck speed. While most workout fads are mostly based on achieving aesthetic goals, some are influenced by news about clinical studies and scientific research. A 2007 study published by Japanese researchers has been making the rounds in the news and social media, with headlines and posts raving about the wonders of the 'Japanese walking protocol'.
 |
| Photo by Masao Mask from Unsplash |
The study took place in 2004 with 246 subjects of both sexes with an average age of 63, subjects were randomly divided in three groups: a sedentary group with no training, a moderate intensity continuous walk group and a high intensity interval walk training group. The moderate intensity walk subjects were instructed to walk at approximately 50% of their peak aerobic capacity, their step count had to be 8000 steps or more for at least four days per week. The exercise protocol for the high intensity interval training group was to walk at 40% per aerobic capacity for five sets followed by a 3-minute high-intensity walking above 70%, having a total training time of thirty minutes per day for at least 4 days per week. After the five-month study period, the high intensity interval walk subjects not only avoided age related muscle mass loss and decrease of aerobic capacity, but also the reduction in resting systolic blood pressure was greater than the one achieved by the other groups. To summarize, this study found that interval walking alternating between moderate and high intensity might be more time effective and beneficial for aerobic endurance than continuous moderate walking for longer periods of time, especially for older people. You can read the full study here, for a video summary of the study's finding please watch the linked video below.
A video summary of the original study with the researcher leader behind the study
As mentioned above, the so-called Japanese walking protocol takes the instructions of the high intensity interval walk (3 minute slow walk at 40% peak aerobic capacity followed by 3 minute 70% peak aerobic brisk walk for five sets) and turns it into a more time efficient way to get your daily low impact cardio. Although the proven results of this study are very promising, one fact that is often ignored is that older people reach peak aerobic capacity faster than younger people, thus brisk walk might not be enough for reaching the 70% peak. Another fact that has been ignored is the reason of the three minute high intensity interval, established as three minutes due to the fact that some subjects reached fatigue if walked vigorously for longer.
Nitpicking aside, I decided to take matters in my own hands and test the protocol for myself at home. I'm a moderately active woman in my twenties but I struggle with getting steps in, so having a quick way to get the same benefits from walking more in less time seemed promising enough. I used my Samsung Galaxy smartwatch for measuring my steps and heartrate and did my walking before my daily workouts in the late afternoon. Due to bad weather in my area, six days of walking were indoors and only one was outdoors.
- Day 1: I followed along a video by Paul Eugene on YouTube to keep track of the intervals. Although this particular video has only four sets instead of five, there's a warm up that rounds the time to the required thirty minutes. Instead of static walking for the entire workout, light aerobic exercises are done during the high intensity intervals. Paul's channel also has a fully seated version of the walking protocol on his channel, the video can be found here. During this workout, my average heartrate was 114 bpm, 72.5% of the workout was in my zone 1 training rate and the remaining 26.9% reached zone 2. My total step count was 3298 steps.
This workout only does four walking sets instead of five but the warm up and cooldown
are enough to reach the goal of walking for thirty minutes
- Day 2: I decided to switch it up and trained with just an interval timer; my walk was mostly done stepping in place. I occasionally walked around the room for the high intensity intervals. My average heartrate was 113 bpm, 82.5% of the workout was classified as zone 1 and 16.9% was in zone 2. My total step count was 3294 steps.
- Day 3: Same conditions as Day 2 with mostly static walking. My average heartrate was 112 bpm, 80.1% of the workout was classified as zone 1 and 19.9% was in zone 2. Total step count was 3294 steps.
- Day 4: I changed locations to my living room and walked around for the entire workout. I replaced the interval timer with a YouTube timer with on screen instructions by the Healing Winds channel. My average heartrate was 108 bpm, a slight decrease from previous days. 90.6% of the workout was classified as zone 1 and only 8.3% was in zone 2. Total step count was 3318 steps.
This timer accurately follows the protocol with the intervals written onscreen
- Day 5: Same conditions as Day 4. My average heartrate was 105 bpm with a max heart rate of 113 bpm. 100% of the workout was classified as zone 1, I did not reach zone 2 during this walk. Total step count was 3279 steps.
 |
A graph detailing my heart rate during the interval training of Day 5,
light yellow line is for zone 1 training
- Day 6: This was the only day I could walk outdoors, so I did my training with just the interval timer. My average heartrate was 99 bpm with a max heart rate of 107 bpm. 87.8 % of the workout was classified as zone 1 and the remaining 12.2% was classified as zone zero. Total step count was 3022 steps.
 |
A graph detailing my heart rate during the interval training of Day 6, light yellow line is for zone 1 training |
- Day 7: On the final day, I did the walk around my living room with the Healing Winds interval timer. My average heartrate was 107 bpm with a max heart rate of 115 bpm. 100% of the workout was classified as zone 1, I did not reach zone 2 during this walk just like in the two previous days. Total step count was 3279 steps. Total step count was 3060 steps.
Results screen from my watch. My GPS is not accurate in my area
so the calculated distance is probably inaccurate
- Steady moderate intensity day: To compare the obtained results with a moderate intensity walk just like in the original study, I took an indoor walk with laps around my living room at moderate speed for thirty minutes. My average heart rate was 108 bpm, with a max rate of 114 bpm. The entire walk was classified as zone 1 training by my watch, with a total step count of 3020 steps.
 |
Blue line represents my average speed and the yellow line represents my heart rate during the workout |
Results:
As evidenced by the above data, I managed to get about 3000 steps with both walk styles in the same time period. Although my heart rate did reach zone two during the first three days, the other walks did not increase my heartbeat quite enough to reach zone 2, even staying in the low zone zero in the sixth day. I tend to elevate my knees more during static walks, which may explain the difference between the three first days and the regular walks. The follow along video by Paul Eugene might have helped me reach zone two for longer because of the aerobic inspired movements in the fast intervals.
While I tried to walk as fast as possible during the high intensity intervals, it was simply not enough to reach 70% maximum aerobic capacity. In my case, jogging or intense aerobic exercises might be more suitable for the high intensity intervals in order to achieve the results proposed by the study. On the other hand, the light thirty minute walks served as a gentle warm up for my regular workouts and made my body feel limber than usual. My sleep quality was also better than usual during the test week, likely due to the increased daily step count.
Thoughts:
The Japanese walking protocol may not be as effective for younger and active people than for older people for increasing aerobic endurance, but it is definitely an efficient way to get your steps in while adding some variety to the usual steady walk. I could not track VO2 max values because of time and equipment constrains, thus I can't give an actual assessment of the actual values reached during training. Seven days might be too little time to see improvement, yet with such a low impact routine and no progressive overload, I doubt any dramatic changes regarding aerobic endurance would happen in a longer period of time.
No matter the results, I'll continue using the protocol as much as I can for warming up before a workout or while watching TV. The improvement in my sleep and mobility during workouts has been noticeable enough, so I definitely recommend it if you're looking for a simple way to be increase your active time at home.
0 comments:
Post a Comment