The short answer: "Japanese walking" is interval walking training, developed by researchers in Matsumoto, Japan. You alternate 3 minutes of fast walking with 3 minutes of slow walking, for at least five rounds, four or more days a week. In a 2007 randomised trial of 246 middle-aged and older adults, five months of it improved aerobic fitness, thigh strength and blood pressure more than steady, moderate walking did. It is one of the better-tested walking methods, though most of the evidence comes from one research group and one small trial in diabetes.
| What the program involves | |
|---|---|
| Fast phase | 3 minutes at 70% or more of your peak walking capacity (hard; in the studies, set individually) |
| Slow phase | 3 minutes at about 40% (an easy, recovering pace) |
| One session | At least 5 fast-and-slow sets, about 30 minutes |
| How often | 4 or more days a week |
| How long the studies ran | 5 months in the Japanese trials; 4 months in the Danish diabetes trial |
The 2007 trial
The study that started the trend was published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings (Nemoto, Gen-no, Masuki, Okazaki and Nose, 2007). It enrolled 246 middle-aged and older adults, 60 men and 186 women with an average age of 63, and divided them into three groups for five months: no walking training, steady walking at a moderate intensity, and interval walking at the schedule in the table. The interval group had larger increases in thigh muscle strength and peak aerobic capacity than the steady walkers, and a larger reduction in resting systolic blood pressure (P = .01). The authors concluded that interval walking may protect against the age-related rise in blood pressure and loss of strength and fitness. Participants were monitored closely during the first month while they learned the method and wore accelerometers to measure intensity.
Secondary write-ups often quote a drop of about 9 mmHg in systolic blood pressure and strength gains of up to 17%. We haven't confirmed those figures in the paper itself, so treat them as approximate.
Later results from the same group
In 2019, the same researchers (Masuki, Morikawa and Nose, Mayo Clinic Proceedings) analysed 679 people with an average age of 65 who completed the five-month program. Estimated peak aerobic capacity rose by 14% on average and a composite score for lifestyle-related disease fell by 17%. Participants averaged 88 minutes a week of fast walking, but this varied a lot (standard deviation 65 minutes), and those who did more fast walking improved more. This was not a comparison with a control group, so it shows the program's results and the importance of the fast phases rather than proving the method beats alternatives.
Type 2 diabetes
A Danish randomised trial published in Diabetes Care (Karstoft and colleagues, 2013) tested interval walking in people with type 2 diabetes for four months, against continuous walking matched for energy expenditure and against no training. Sessions were longer than in the Japanese program: 60 minutes, five times a week. Adherence was high (89%). Aerobic fitness rose 16.1% in the interval group only; body mass, fat mass and visceral fat fell in the interval group only; and mean and peak glucose on continuous monitors fell in the interval group, while glycaemic control worsened in the no-training group and continuous walking simply held it steady. It was a small trial, and a later review by the lead author notes that a subsequent trial with lower adherence showed less convincing effects. A 2017 meta-analysis of aerobic interval training in type 2 diabetes (not only walking) found modest advantages over continuous training, for example HbA1c 0.28 percentage points lower. See walking and blood sugar.
How fast is "fast"?
In the studies, intensity was set individually from a walking test and checked with accelerometers: at least 70% of peak capacity for the fast phase and about 40% for the slow one. Without that equipment, a reasonable stand-in is that the fast phase should feel hard, with breathing heavy enough that you can only speak in short phrases, while the slow phase lets you recover. Cadence can help: the CADENCE-Adults research found about 100 steps a minute is moderate intensity and about 130 is vigorous (power walking has the details). Those are our practical suggestions, not the trial's method. The Japanese instructions describe the fast phase as brisk walking with a long stride and arm swing.
Trying it
This part is practical advice. A phone timer or a watch with interval alerts is enough. Start with the five rounds, and if three minutes of hard walking is too much at first, shorten the fast phase and build up, which is how many programs adapt it. A half-hour session at 100 to 130 steps a minute adds roughly 3,000 to 3,900 steps (our arithmetic). The trials screened participants, and the fast phases are vigorous, so if you have heart disease, high blood pressure that isn't controlled, chest pain or dizziness on exertion, or you haven't exercised in a long time, check with a doctor first. If you'd like to log your sessions, StepMax, our own free app, has a walk timer that records time, pace and steps: Android, iPhone.
How it fits with other walking
Interval walking packs more vigorous activity into a short session. It doesn't replace the evidence on daily steps, where benefit mostly levels off around 7,000 a day (how many steps you need). The two fit together: interval sessions on a few days, and ordinary walking the rest of the time. For other ways to raise intensity, see incline walking and Nordic walking; for older adults, walking for seniors.
Sources
- Nemoto K, Gen-no H, Masuki S, Okazaki K, Nose H. Effects of high-intensity interval walking training on physical fitness and blood pressure in middle-aged and older people. Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2007;82(7):803-811. researchgate.net
- Masuki S, Morikawa M, Nose H. High-intensity walking time is a key determinant to increase physical fitness and improve health outcomes after interval walking training in middle-aged and older people. Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2019. sciencedirect.com
- Karstoft K, Winding K, Knudsen SH, et al. The effects of free-living interval-walking training on glycemic control, body composition, and physical fitness in type 2 diabetic patients: a randomized, controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2013;36(2):228-236. PubMed
- Karstoft K, et al. Health benefits of interval walking training (perspective). Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism. 2024. cdnsciencepub.com
- Aerobic interval training and cardiometabolic health in patients with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis. 2017. PMC
- Tudor-Locke C, et al. Walking cadence (steps/min) and intensity in 21-40 year olds: CADENCE-adults. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2019. PMC
How we checked: the trial details come from published abstracts, journal summaries and a medical news report of the 2007 trial, checked on October 13, 2026. The 9 mmHg and 17% figures appear only in secondary sources. The meta-analysis included interval training other than walking. The practical guidance on effort and cadence is our own suggestion, not the trials' method. This article is for informational purposes and does not replace medical advice. This is general information, not medical advice.