Walking gait speed predicts longevity?

Investment Analysis Clubs Macro Economic Trends and Risks
1

{{ Yes, walking gait speed is a powerful predictor of longevity and is often called the “sixth vital sign”. Research shows that faster walkers tend to live longer, with speeds above 1.2 meters per second (2.7 mph) indicating better-than-average life expectancy. It is a strong indicator of overall health, including cardiovascular health, muscle strength, and brain coordination. }}

Prior to having my leg chopped off, I was able to walk the 4 miles to the dog park in just under an hour (depending on how often the dog needed to stop to pee.)

Of course, I was able to walk to the park without peeing.

intercst

11 Likes
2

Interesting. I was raised by an Irish mother who walked like there was always a deadline to get anywhere…even if just across the park. So, I have walked quickly my whole life…but now dealing with cardiovascular issues in my 50’s.

I must be the outlier, or I will only extend my life to normal spans?

2 Likes
3

I have read articles making this claim in the past. Although they are interesting, they raise more questions than answers for me. First, they often measure the gait for a few yards. Are they trusting their subjects to walk a ‘normal’ gate or telling them to walk as fast as they can? How do you measure the extent to which good health from other factors enables them to walk fast, versus walking fast increasing longevity?

I do take a brisk walk most mornings on the theory that it wakes me up and may be good for me, but I don’t really know how to measure it.

1 Like
4

The BMJ ran an article on this very topic years ago…

How fast does the Grim Reaper walk? Receiver operating characteristics curve analysis in healthy men aged 70 and over | The BMJ https://share.google/S7xcVcpLhvWKWnxCM

2 Likes
5

They had me do that “gait speed test” my first visit with the Physical Therapist, 2 weeks after I got my prosthetic leg. Since my balance was still poor at that point, I had to do the test with an aluminum walker. They can tell if you’re walking “faster than normal” because you won’t have a smooth gait. People aren’t going to be comfortable routinely walking with a less than smooth gait, so they slow down.

intercst

1 Like
6

This has been known/shown for awhile. Wow, 2.7 mph seems slow. I frequently train with a 40 pound pack, walking up and down hills, and average 3.4 mph.

Of course, you can do everything to increase your longevity and health span and be taken out by a drunk/distracted driver tomorrow.

3 Likes
7

VeeEnn: How fast does the Grim Reaper walk? Receiver operating characteristics curve analysis in healthy men aged 70 and over | The BMJ https://share.google/S7xcVcpLhvWKWnxCM

{{ Moreover, a sensitivity of 1.0 was obtained when a walking speed of 1.36 m/s (3 miles (about 5 km) per hour) or greater was used, indicating that no {{ 70-yr-old}} men with walking speeds of 1.36 m/s or greater had contact with Death.

Good news for me 1.36 m/s is 3 mph, I was walking 4 mph.

But as JLC points out, I can still get run down in a crosswalk. { LOL }}

intercst

1 Like
8

So on one end of the range is the person in a hospital bed. The other end of the range is a long-distance runner, aged 21.

How could the stats go wrong?

Meanwhile, we are measuring out our 1, 2, or three decades remaining, but with a study that blindly includes that 21-year-old.

9

Did you read the study? This is the data for the cohort 70 years of age and above.

Participants 1705 men aged 70 or more participating in CHAMP (Concord Health and Ageing in Men Project).

intercst

7 Likes
10

It’s not clear to me whether they normalized gait speed to a person’s height. Just as it’s not clear whether they normalize the ability to carry a weight to a person’s muscle mass.

I’m 5’3" tall and my husband is 6’2" tall. Surprisingly, I usually walk faster than him but that’s because I’m a little hyper. But if he wanted to he could walk much faster than me because of his greater stride length.

Similarly, the “ten pound weight carry” test is absurd since a small woman can’t be expected to be as strong as a large man.

Which is not to say that the conclusions are wrong. Properly normalized, elderly people who schlep along without energy probably won’t live as long as people who spring into action.

Wendy

7 Likes
11

They only do the measurement over a 3 meter (10 foot) distance. I’ve always been taught that if you want to move quickly, it’s better to make short rapid steps rather than 2 or 3 long ones, so there’s no benefit to having a large stride, over that distance.

intercst

1 Like
12

Going down tangents/rabbit holes, read an article the other day on stride vs turnover rate in sprinters and which is faster (longer stride or more strides). Basically neither, came down to optimizing the stride length. You can “over stride”, trying to cover more ground with each stride but it can effectively slow you down because of heal strike slowing forward momentum. Taking a bunch of shorter strides again slows you down because you never build up full forward momentum. Again, talking about sprinters, not sure the whole thing applies to walking but I’m sure some of it does.

2 Likes
13

@JLC the sprinters are the pinnacle of physically fit athletes. The test we are talking about is designed for elderly people, many of whom have other physical problems (e.g. heart failure, orthopedic problems) and some of whom have one foot in the grave. The test is designed to see who will die in one year or five years or maybe eke out another 10 years or more, not who will have the fastest sprint.

During the decision process for my heart valve (should I get TAVR or SAVR?) I showed my cardiologist a video of myself doing a handstand and told him that I do Zumba twice a week. That convinced him that I could live 15 years, which is why he recommended SAVR and ordered a large valve designed to accept a TAVR replacement when it wears out. A college friend of mine (my exact age) had TAVR a month earlier than I had my surgery. He already walks with a cane. He recovered from TAVR much faster than I recovered from SAVR. Time will tell which of us will survive longer.

Wendy

3 Likes
14

@WendyBG …yep. Most of these walking speed tests are iterations of the senior fitness test designed to assess whether someone is ready to transition from a care facility of some sort back to independent community living. Different distances used to assess different aspects of walking. The 10m walking test is the standard and it’s designed to measure the “organic”, volitional gait in someone who isn’t aware of when they’re being tested or a speed to aim for so as not to be able to game the test.

For practical purposes, the measured distance is part of a slightly longer walking route. The assessor walks alongside the individual being tested and nattering in a conversational way as a distraction…stop clock discreetly hidden from view. Hit the start button when passing the first marker and stop when passing the second

15

LOL

Hey, as long as you pass, the grave can wait. Fail, and they hand you a brochure.

Pete

16

I have a just over 3ft stride when walking straight-line. It made me very good at estimating distances for my scout badge. When I am walking long stride I am still smooth and I outpace most people around me.
My guess on that idea that short rapid steps is more of a fighting style or dodging situation. (So, yeah for the 10ft distance I would def shuffle.) Short rapid steps when trying to move a mile or two will not work, too much more energy involved.

1 Like
17

Sorry, I did not read it. But now going over it, is your quote for one of the studies involved? Or for those who were included in the 34k plus potential participants?

The participants were aged 65 and up. To a degree healthier candidates were required. There were over 34k possible participants.

To be specific about the “required” gait, anyone who could not make it for the test was not included. People do what they are proud of in the first place. There was an average that was good.

The question is what across the board made the average good? Were people excluded? There is no evidence either way. There is no statement defending the use of this average gait speed. edit I should say Mean Gait Speed.

Pooled analysis of 9 cohort studies (collected between 1986 and 2000), using individual data from 34 485 community-dwelling older adults aged 65 years or older with baseline gait speed data, followed up for 6 to 21 years. Participants were a mean (SD) age of 73.5 (5.9) years; 59.6%, women; and 79.8%, white; and had a mean (SD) gait speed of 0.92 (0.27) m/s.

18

So here is a problem. Do you walk with a lot of foam under your foot? Or do you walk in a gumshoe sneaker? If you walk in the latter you walk slower and will probably live longer. A lot of foam means you walk faster on springs. Gumshoe means you walk slower, but condition your legs.

These averages do not discuss physical conditioning of the legs. I switched a year ago to gumshoe Adidas Handball Spezials. It slowed me down. Now I am picking up speed again, and my legs are stronger. The Spezials have arch support and are a bit wider unlike most other Adidas offerings.

There were 17 528 deaths; the overall 5-year survival rate was 84.8% (confidence interval [CI], 79.6%–88.8%)and 10-year survival rate was 59.7% (95%CI, 46.5%–70.6%). Gait speed was associated with survival in all studies (pooled hazard ratio per 0.1 m/s, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.87–0.90; P <. 001). Survival increased across the full range of gait speeds, with significant increments per 0.1 m/s. At age 75, predicted 10-year survival across the range of gait speeds ranged from 19% to 87% in men and from 35% to 91% in women. Predicted survival based on age, sex, and gait speed was as accurate as predicted based on age, sex, use of mobility aids, and self-reported function or as age, sex, chronic conditions, smoking history, blood pressure, body mass index, and hospitalization.

19

This is the study.

https://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d7679

intercst

2 Likes