In a prospective study of 55,137 adults, followed for a mean of 15 years, runners had 30 percent lower all-cause mortality and 45 percent lower cardiovascular mortality than non-runners. That translated to about a three-year gain in life expectancy.
The analysis was published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology by Duck-chul Lee and colleagues.
The catch, and the reason walking is not the poor cousin here, sits inside a companion body of work.
When walking and running are matched by the calories they burn rather than by minutes on the clock, the health benefits look remarkably similar.
Also read: How to get more out of your walks
In a large comparison of walkers and runners published in Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology, researchers matched the two groups by calories burned.
Equivalent energy expenditures produced similar reductions in high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes and coronary heart disease.
How much should you run?
The mortality benefit held even for people who barely ran.
Adults who logged fewer than 51 minutes a week, ran under six miles, or moved slower than six miles per hour still had lower mortality than non-runners.
Also read: Some common medications prescribed to older adults may be doing more harm than good
Persistence mattered most. Adults who kept running steadily across a six-year window carried the largest reduction, with roughly a 29 percent lower risk of death from any cause and about a 50 percent lower risk of death from heart disease or stroke.
Where walking closes the gap
A pooled analysis of more than 50,000 British walkers, led by Emmanuel Stamatakis at the University of Sydney, was published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine.
It linked a brisk or fast pace to about 24 percent lower all-cause mortality and 21 percent lower cardiovascular mortality than a slow pace. Among adults aged 60 and older, a fast pace was tied to roughly a 53 percent lower risk of dying from cardiovascular disease.
A separate UK Biobank analysis published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings tied habitual brisk walking to a longer life expectancy at every category of body weight, from underweight to severely obese.
Also read: What grows in your child's gut in early life may predict type 1 diabetes years before it appears
Habitually brisk walkers reached about 87 years in women and 86 years in men. Slow walkers with very low body weight sat at the other end, around 72 years in women and 65 years in men.
What that means for your week
Running is more time-efficient. A short jog and a longer brisk walk can burn the same calories, but the run finishes in a fraction of the time.
For adults who tolerate the impact, adding a few short runs is the fastest route to the mortality curves the JACC study describes.
Brisk walking closes most of the gap for everyone else. In practical terms, brisk means roughly 3 to 4 miles per hour, or a pace that leaves you slightly out of breath but still able to talk.
Also read: Your child's pupils may reveal how well their ADHD medication is working
A slower stroll is better than sitting, but the mortality signal in the data lives in the pace.
Anyone with heart disease, joint problems or a long stretch away from exercise should check with a doctor before ramping up.
Also read: Millions may lose GLP-1 drug coverage as employers and insurers cut benefits
This article is made and published by Ida-Marie Palm Varbæk, who may have used AI in the preparation.