Is 8,500 the New 10,000 Steps? A Singapore Doctor's Read

A patient sat down in clinic last Friday and asked me a question I have started hearing every week. She had lost twelve kilograms over the past year on tirzepatide, was tapering off it under her endocrinologist's care, and was now staring at the next problem. "Doctor, what do I actually have to do to keep this off? Everyone keeps telling me ten thousand steps a day. Is that real?"

It is a fair question, and as of this week we have a much better answer than we did a year ago. A new systematic review and meta-analysis presented at the European Congress on Obesity in Istanbul, published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health in April 2026, has put a real number on the daily step count that actually helps prevent weight regain. The number is not ten thousand. It is around 8,500. And the reason it works is more interesting than the headline suggests.

Where 10,000 Came From (And Why It Never Was a Number)

Before we replace the number, we should know where it came from. The "10,000 steps a day" target is not a clinical recommendation. It is a marketing campaign from 1965. A Japanese clockmaker called Yamasa Corporation launched a pedometer in the run-up to the Tokyo Olympics and named it the manpo-kei, which translates literally as "ten-thousand-step meter". The kanji for 10,000 happens to look a little like a walking figure. The number was chosen because it sounded round, motivating and culturally pleasing, not because anyone had measured cardiovascular outcomes against it.

For sixty years that figure has lived in our watches, our HPB challenges and our group chats, untethered from any real data. Researchers have been slowly catching up. In 2022, Amanda Paluch and colleagues at the University of Massachusetts pooled fifteen international cohorts in The Lancet Public Health. They found a dose-response relationship between steps and all-cause mortality that flattened out at roughly 6,000 to 8,000 steps a day for adults over 60, and around 8,000 to 10,000 for adults under 60. Above those thresholds, more steps did not add much. Below them, fewer steps cost you years.

Then in July 2025, Ding Ding and colleagues at the University of Sydney published the most comprehensive synthesis we have so far, again in The Lancet Public Health. They pooled 57 prospective studies and looked beyond mortality. Compared with 2,000 steps a day, 7,000 steps was associated with a 47 per cent lower risk of dying from any cause, a 25 per cent lower risk of cardiovascular disease, a 38 per cent lower risk of dementia, a 28 per cent lower risk of falls and a 14 per cent lower risk of type 2 diabetes. Past 7,000 steps the curves flattened. The Sydney group's conclusion: 7,000 is a defensible target for the general population, 10,000 is fine if you can get there, but it is not where the magic happens.

The question that remained unanswered was different. What about the people who have already lost weight and are trying not to gain it back? That is the question the ECO 2026 paper just answered.

The ECO 2026 Meta-Analysis, in Numbers

The new paper, led by Dana Saadeddine with Professor Marwan El Ghoch at the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia and colleagues at the Beirut Arab University in Lebanon, did something quite specific. They asked: in adults with overweight or obesity going through a structured weight-loss programme, how many daily steps are linked to keeping that weight off?

The team screened the literature and identified eighteen randomised controlled trials that fit the criteria. Fourteen of them, involving 3,758 adults from the UK, the US, Australia, Japan and other countries, had the data needed for the meta-analysis. The average participant was 53 years old with a BMI of 31 kg/m², which is solidly in the overweight-to-obesity range. About half were in lifestyle modification programmes that combined dietary changes with step-count targets. The other half were either dieting alone or receiving no structured intervention. The programmes had two phases: a weight loss phase averaging just under eight months, and a weight maintenance phase averaging just over ten months.

Three findings stood out for me as a clinician.

First, the lifestyle group walked themselves up to about 8,500 steps a day. Both groups started at roughly the same baseline of 7,200 to 7,300 steps. The control group never moved off that. The lifestyle group climbed to an average of 8,454 steps by the end of the weight loss phase, and they were still walking 8,241 steps a day at the end of the maintenance phase, more than a year and a half in. Behaviour change held.

Second, more steps did not produce more weight loss in the loss phase. During the active dieting period the relationship between step count and kilos lost was weak. The dietary deficit and the resistance work were doing the heavy lifting. Walking added some energy expenditure, a fair amount of mood and probably some appetite regulation, but it was not the main driver of weight coming off.

Third, where the steps really earned their keep was in the maintenance phase. The lifestyle group lost about 4.4 per cent of their body weight during the active phase (roughly four kilograms in an average 100 kg adult). At the end of the maintenance phase they had held on to most of it, finishing about 3.3 per cent below their starting weight. The control group had no such buffer. Within the lifestyle group, those who increased their steps the most and held that increase regained the least.

Why This Pattern Makes Physiological Sense

The "steps protect maintenance, not loss" pattern is not a quirk. It fits a wider literature that we have known for years but rarely communicate clearly to patients.

Weight loss is mainly an energy-balance equation that lives at the dinner table. You reduce the calories going in, the body uses the calories already stored, and the scale moves. A 4,000-step walk burns somewhere between 150 and 200 kilocalories in most adults. That is meaningful, but it is a quarter of one teh tarik with kaya toast at the kopitiam. Trying to outwalk a bad diet does not work, which is why most pure exercise interventions show only modest weight loss in randomised trials.

Weight maintenance is a different beast. After successful weight loss, your resting metabolic rate drops by more than you would expect from your new body size alone. This phenomenon, called metabolic adaptation, was elegantly demonstrated in the long-term Biggest Loser follow-up by Kevin Hall and colleagues at the NIH in 2016, and has been replicated in many cohorts since. Ghrelin stays up, leptin and peptide YY stay down, and the body is doing its quiet best to bring the lost weight back. You need extra daily energy expenditure to plug that gap, and you need habits robust enough to hold for years. Walking does both. It is sustainable, joint-friendly, and at 8,500 steps a day it covers roughly the calorie shortfall created by metabolic adaptation in a moderately overweight adult.

That is also why the answer is not "do more". Once you cover the metabolic adaptation, adding extra steps does not add more weight protection, only modest extra cardiovascular benefit. The Saadeddine meta-analysis is saying 8,500 is the dose, not the ceiling.

The Singapore Reality

The Health Promotion Board's National Steps Challenge is now nine seasons in. It has enrolled over 2.1 million Singaporeans, a remarkable share of the adult population for a single mHealth programme. Published evaluations in the Journal of the American Heart Association have shown that the average participant starts at around 7,500 steps a day and pushes that up by 1,500 to 2,000 steps during an active challenge season, landing close to 9,000. After the challenge ends, most settle back to roughly 8,400 to 8,500. That is, almost by accident, very close to the ECO 2026 sweet spot.

The National Population Health Survey 2024 reported that 84.7 per cent of Singapore residents are meeting the WHO physical activity guideline, which is good news, but the local context still hides some traps. Most of that activity is "commuting activity", largely the brisk walking we do between MRT stations, hawker centres and offices. That counts, and it counts more than the rest of the world manages, but it tends to be front-loaded into Monday-to-Friday. The weekend dip in step count is real. The ECO 2026 finding is that the steps need to be daily, not weekly. A daily 8,500 beats a weekly 60,000 done in two big Sunday hikes, because metabolic adaptation runs every day.

And then there is the elephant in the consultation room. Singapore is now in its second year of widespread GLP-1 and GIP-GLP-1 receptor agonist use for weight loss. Tirzepatide and semaglutide have moved from endocrinology niches into mainstream practice. Around eight in ten patients who lose weight on these medications start to regain it once they taper or stop, mirroring what we see in the older lifestyle trials. For the patient I described at the start of this piece, the ECO 2026 data is the most actionable post-medication maintenance script we have. Walk roughly 8,500 steps a day, every day, for the rest of your life. The steps cannot replace the medication during active loss. They can quietly replace the metabolic adaptation buffer once the medication is gone.

What I Now Tell Patients to Do

The honest prescription that fits the 2022, 2025 and 2026 evidence together looks like this.

1. If your goal is to live longer and reduce disease risk, aim for 7,000 a day

This is the Ding 2025 number. Most of the mortality, cardiovascular, dementia and falls benefit is already on the table at 7,000 daily steps compared with 2,000. If you sit at a desk job in the CBD and currently log 4,000 to 5,000 steps on the watch, getting to 7,000 is the highest-yield change you can make. A 30-minute brisk walk added to your day adds roughly 3,000 to 3,500 steps. Do it after dinner if you also want better post-meal glucose control. Two of my previous posts cover the post-meal glucose data in more detail.

2. If your goal is to keep weight off after losing it, aim for 8,500 a day, every day

This is the new Saadeddine 2026 number. The daily consistency matters more than the absolute peak. A patient who walks 7,000 steps on weekdays and 12,000 on weekends will not get the same maintenance protection as one who walks 8,500 every day. Smooth your distribution. If your weekday count is low, take a brisk walk after lunch and another one after dinner, or do half your usual commute on foot.

3. Do not abandon strength training

This is the most common omission I see in patients chasing a step count. Walking protects your weight maintenance. Resistance training protects your muscle, your bone density and your resting metabolic rate. Two short, full-body strength sessions per week (30 to 45 minutes each) cost you less than two episodes of a Netflix show. The Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2025 update again put resistance training at the centre of midlife longevity for exactly this reason. Cardio extends lifespan. Strength extends healthspan. You need both.

4. Keep one harder cardio session in your week

Steps are mostly low intensity. If you want your VO₂max, which is the single best predictor of long-term cardiovascular mortality, to actually move, you also need one weekly session of higher intensity intervals. A 4-by-4 minute set on a stationary bike, a brisk hill walk, or a swim with hard 100 metre repeats. I covered this in detail in my Zone 2 piece earlier this month.

5. Measure honestly, not constantly

Your daily watch number is noisy. Your 30-day average is what matters. If your rolling four-week average has been 6,200, the question is not "did I hit 8,500 today?". It is "how do I move my four-week average to 8,500 over the next two months?". Small daily nudges beat heroic Sunday efforts.

What This Does Not Mean

Three honest caveats before anyone screenshots a single number out of this piece.

First, the Saadeddine 2026 paper is a meta-analysis of trial data, not a randomised trial of step counts themselves. The 8,500 figure emerged as the average step count of the maintenance-successful groups, not as an experimentally tested target. The mechanism is biologically plausible, the dose-response was internally consistent, but the next step is a trial that randomises people to 6,000 versus 8,500 versus 10,000 steps in maintenance and measures regain. That trial does not yet exist.

Second, "8,500" is not a magic threshold. Going from 4,000 to 7,000 is a much bigger health win than going from 7,500 to 8,500. The dose-response curve is steepest at the lower end. If you are starting from a sedentary baseline, please do not wait until you can hit 8,500 to begin. Start with 5,000, hold it for a month, then add 1,000 a month until you settle at a level that fits your week.

Third, walking is part of an exercise prescription, not the whole of one. Anyone with known coronary artery disease, recent cardiac events, uncontrolled hypertension, severe osteoarthritis, recent surgery, or significant lower limb injury should have an individualised plan from their treating doctor or a cardiac rehab team. A baseline cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) is what good longevity practice does before writing structured exercise prescriptions, because it tells you your actual VO₂max, your ventilatory thresholds and your safe upper heart rate range. Steps are the easiest, cheapest thing to start with, but they are not a substitute for proper assessment.

The Bottom Line

For sixty years we have been chasing a marketing number. The 2022 Paluch cohort meta-analysis already told us that 6,000 to 8,000 steps was where the all-cause mortality benefit lived. The 2025 Sydney synthesis sharpened that to 7,000 for general health outcomes. And now the 2026 ECO meta-analysis adds the maintenance-specific number: around 8,500 daily steps if your goal is to keep weight off after losing it. Three different research groups, three slightly different questions, three numbers that all land in the same neighbourhood. None of them is 10,000.

My patient with the tirzepatide taper went home with a small revision to her plan. Her watch goal moved from 10,000 to 8,500. Her two strength sessions stayed. Her after-dinner walk became non-negotiable. The biggest change was the relief on her face when I told her the number she had been chasing was a 1965 advertising slogan, and the number she actually needs is lower, simpler, and very achievable on a Sunday afternoon in any Singapore neighbourhood with a park connector.

If you have not had your cardiovascular risk, body composition or VO₂max formally measured, those are the three numbers that give your step count its meaning. Without them, 8,500 is just a watch notification. With them, it is a piece of a longevity plan.

References

1. Saadeddine D, Foglia M, Berri E, Raggi S, Itani L, El Ghoch M. Daily Steps During Nutritional Lifestyle Modification Programs for Obesity Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2026;23(4):522. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph23040522. Presented at the European Congress on Obesity (ECO 2026), Istanbul, 12-15 May 2026.
2. Ding D, Nguyen B, Nau T, Luo M, del Pozo Cruz B, Dempsey PC, et al. Daily steps and health outcomes in adults: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis. The Lancet Public Health. 2025;10(8):e668-e681. DOI: 10.1016/S2468-2667(25)00164-1
3. Paluch AE, Bajpai S, Bassett DR, Carnethon MR, Ekelund U, Evenson KR, et al. Daily steps and all-cause mortality: a meta-analysis of 15 international cohorts. The Lancet Public Health. 2022;7(3):e219-e228. DOI: 10.1016/S2468-2667(21)00302-9
4. Yao J, Lim N, Tan J, Müller AM, van Dam RM, Chen C, Tan CS, Müller-Riemenschneider F. Evaluation of a Population-Wide Mobile Health Physical Activity Program in 696,907 Adults in Singapore. Journal of the American Heart Association. 2022;11(11):e022508. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.121.022508
5. Hall KD, Kerns JC, Brychta R, Chen KY, Skarulis MC, Walter M, et al. Persistent metabolic adaptation 6 years after "The Biggest Loser" competition. Obesity. 2016;24(8):1612-1619. DOI: 10.1002/oby.21538
6. Wilding JPH, Batterham RL, Davies M, et al. Weight regain and cardiometabolic effects after withdrawal of semaglutide: The STEP 1 trial extension. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism. 2022;24(8):1553-1564. DOI: 10.1111/dom.14725
7. Chen LK, Hsiao FY, Akishita M, Assantachai P, Lee WJ, Arai H, et al. A focus shift from sarcopenia to muscle health in the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2025 Consensus Update. Nature Aging. 2025;5(11):2164-2175. DOI: 10.1038/s43587-025-01004-y
8. Mandsager K, Harb S, Cremer P, Phelan D, Nissen SE, Jaber W. Association of Cardiorespiratory Fitness With Long-term Mortality Among Adults Undergoing Exercise Treadmill Testing. JAMA Network Open. 2018;1(6):e183605. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.3605
9. Ministry of Health Singapore. National Population Health Survey 2024 Report. Singapore: MOH; 2025. URL: moh.gov.sg/nphs-2024
10. Health Promotion Board, Sport Singapore. Singapore Physical Activity Guidelines 2022. HealthHub. URL: healthhub.sg/programmes/moveit