How to Start Working Out as a Beginner: What the Evidence Supports

An inactive healthy adult does not need a gym or a 150-minute first week. Official guidelines endorse starting with small amounts, and observational research links about 7,000 daily steps and modest strength training to lower mortality. Most of that evidence is observational, so it shows association rather than proof of cause.

A healthy adult who has been inactive can start exercising with small amounts of activity and build toward the standard weekly targets over time. Federal guidance sets those targets at 150 to 300 minutes of moderate aerobic activity a week plus muscle-strengthening on 2 or more days, but it does not ask beginners to reach them at once. Brisk walking counts, and nothing in the guidance reviewed here requires a gym.

The question matters because most Americans fall short. A 2018 JAMA summary of the federal guidelines put the share of US adults and adolescents who are insufficiently active at about 80%. That figure is old, and a current national estimate was not available for this article, but the gap it describes explains why official advice is written with the least active people in mind.

The evidence behind that advice is strong in some places and thin in others. The weekly targets are consistent across US and international guidelines. The finer questions, such as exactly how many steps to take or how much lifting is enough, rest mostly on observational studies that can show association but not proof of cause.

What the official guidelines ask for

The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans, 2nd edition, published by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in 2018, say adults should do 150 to 300 minutes a week of moderate-intensity aerobic activity for substantial health benefits. The alternative is 75 to 150 minutes of vigorous activity, or an equivalent mix of the two. Adults should also do muscle-strengthening activity of moderate or greater intensity on 2 or more days a week, working all major muscle groups.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) translates this into plain terms. Its example for the aerobic target is 30 minutes of moderate activity on 5 days, and it says the time can be broken into smaller chunks. CDC also treats one minute of vigorous activity as roughly equal to two minutes of moderate activity, which is how the 75-minute and 150-minute figures line up. Moderate activity is the kind of effort brisk walking represents.

• Moderate aerobic activity: 150 to 300 minutes a week (HHS and WHO)
• Vigorous aerobic activity: 75 to 150 minutes a week
• Muscle-strengthening: 2 or more days a week, covering all major muscle groups
• Combination: a mix of moderate and vigorous activity can substitute for either one alone

The World Health Organization (WHO) reached nearly identical numbers in its 2020 guidelines, published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine by Bull and colleagues. Adults should do 150 to 300 minutes of moderate or 75 to 150 minutes of vigorous aerobic activity a week, or an equivalent combination. The paper describes the adult weekly-volume recommendations as strong and based on moderate-certainty evidence, and it recommends muscle-strengthening for all age groups.

The agreement between the two sets of guidelines is less independent than it looks. A paper from the WHO guideline development group explains that WHO's evidence reviews updated the syntheses done for the US 2nd edition. The two documents therefore draw on a shared body of research, and their consistency reflects that overlap as much as separate confirmation.

Starting small is the guidance, not a shortcut

A common assumption is that a beginner must reach 150 minutes in the first week. HHS's own question-and-answer page says otherwise: inactive people should begin with small amounts and work up to 150 minutes plus two strength days over time. HHS reasons that people who start small may be more likely to stick with exercise than those who attempt the full amount at once. That is a reasoned argument rather than a result from a cited trial, and the research reviewed for this article did not include trial evidence on the best rate of build-up.

The principle underneath is that some activity is better than none. The HHS guidelines say adults who sit less and do any amount of moderate-to-vigorous activity gain some health benefits. The JAMA summary of the guidelines adds that people doing the least activity benefit most from even modest increases, and that more activity brings further benefit. The WHO guidelines reaffirm the same message.

Short sessions count

Older guidance counted aerobic activity only in bouts of at least 10 minutes. The 2nd edition of the US guidelines dropped that requirement, according to HHS's question-and-answer page, and the 2020 WHO guidelines did the same. A commentary on the WHO guidelines notes that behavioral researchers see this as an opening for more flexible public messaging. For a beginner, it means a 10-minute walk after dinner is not disqualified because it is brief.

Practical starting points from CDC

CDC's getting-started page suggests reducing sitting time and adding movement, for instance by walking before or after dinner. It also suggests finding three 30-minute slots in the week and considering a group such as a class or hiking club. The WHO guidelines recommend limiting sedentary time for adults, though the evidence was insufficient to set a threshold and the recommendation was described as conditional in the adult table.

CDC also offers a safety statement. People who have been inactive, have a disability or have overweight should talk with a doctor before starting vigorous-intensity activity, while moderate activity is described as safe for most people. That is CDC's guidance, not a calculated risk estimate. Older adults, pregnancy, chronic disease and injury are covered by separate guidance and fall outside this article.

Walking and the 10,000-step figure

Step counters have made 10,000 a familiar daily goal, but the number has no official standing. A 2022 meta-analysis of 15 cohorts in Lancet Public Health stated that no evidence-based public health guidelines then recommended a number of steps. A 2025 Lancet Public Health review by Ding and colleagues described 10,000 as an unofficial target that persisted for decades without a clear evidence base.

What the 2025 review found

The 2025 paper was a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of 57 studies, 31 of which went into the pooled analyses (about 24 cohorts, per press and secondary summaries). Using 2,000 steps a day as the reference, it found that 7,000 steps was associated with a 47% lower risk of death from any cause (hazard ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.46 to 0.60), according to a summary from the American College of Cardiology. The table below lists the other outcomes reported at 7,000 steps.

The falls figure comes from the authors' press release rather than the paper's text. The table also shows why caution is warranted: cardiovascular mortality rests on only 3 studies and shows high heterogeneity (I² of 78.2%), meaning the studies disagreed considerably. The reductions are relative, and no baseline risk was supplied, so they cannot be converted into absolute changes in anyone's chances.

Gains taper after about 7,000

According to the paper's full text, 10,000 steps was associated with about 10% lower all-cause mortality than 7,000 steps. For several outcomes, the difference between 7,000 and higher counts was not statistically significant. At the low end, the authors' press release says about 4,000 steps a day was linked to better outcomes than about 2,000.

The earlier 15-cohort meta-analysis points the same way. Mortality risk fell progressively with more steps and then leveled off at about 6,000 to 8,000 steps for adults 60 and older and about 8,000 to 10,000 for adults under 60. Taken together, the two papers suggest 10,000 is a point on a curve of diminishing returns rather than a threshold.

How far to trust the numbers

Both papers pool prospective cohort studies, so they show association, not causation. Healthier or wealthier people may walk more, and illness can lower step counts, which would make walking look protective even if it were partly a marker of good health. The authors' own discussion of these limits was not available for this article.

The 2,000-step reference is also a very low baseline, so a 47% reduction compares 7,000 steps with an extreme low-activity group, not with a typical beginner. The Lancet page lists a correction to the 2025 paper, which was not reviewed here. Step counts also reflect pace or intensity only roughly, according to the authors. Coverage by ScienceDaily and similar outlets rests on this single paper and is not independent confirmation.

Strength training: how much and what it is linked to

CDC describes muscle-strengthening as work on the major muscle groups (legs, hips, back, chest, abdomen, shoulders and arms) to the point where another repetition would be hard without help. Its guidance is 8 to 12 repetitions per activity, which counts as one set. At least one set is the minimum, and two or three sets bring more benefit.

CDC's sample week shows how this fits with walking: five 30-minute brisk walks plus two weight-training days meets the guidelines. That pairing is one illustration, and the agency's own description shows that a gym is not a requirement for the aerobic half.

What the cohort research shows

A 2022 systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohorts by Momma and colleagues in the British Journal of Sports Medicine found that muscle-strengthening activity was associated with lower all-cause mortality and with lower risk of major non-communicable diseases. It reported dose-response associations. Only the introduction of that paper was available for this article, so its specific percentages are not reported here.

A 2021 review in the Journal of Internal Medicine by Giovannucci and colleagues reports that a protective association appears at relatively low volumes, such as 1 to 2 hours a week. It cites one large cohort, not named in the retrieved text, in which meeting the strength guideline carried a hazard ratio for all-cause mortality of 0.89. Meeting the aerobic guideline carried 0.71, and meeting both carried 0.60. These are single-cohort figures and should be read that way.

The dose-response picture is less settled. A 2022 meta-analysis by Shailendra and colleagues, covering only 4 dose-response studies, found a possible U-shaped relationship between weekly resistance-training volume and all-cause mortality, with larger volumes giving smaller or no added reduction. Secondary sources report different size estimates for the reduction, so the exact figure is unresolved. A 2021 meta-analysis found strength training associated with lower kidney cancer incidence and lower total cancer mortality, but its authors say whether it prevents cancer in general remains uncertain.

Most of these studies rely on self-reported exercise. The Giovannucci review notes that some large studies were inconsistent for cardiovascular disease and that dose-response evidence on cardiovascular risk is lacking. A 2024 paper in the International Journal of Epidemiology says more research is needed to raise certainty that muscle-strengthening lowers mortality. The strength-training mortality literature is thinner than the aerobic literature.

What may change: new federal guidance on steps and strength

The absence of an official step target may not last. On October 9, 2026, HHS announced it was seeking public comment on a Supplement: 2027 Steps and Muscle-Strengthening Guidance to the 2nd edition, according to the Federal Register notice (91 FR 64935). HHS says the supplement will add to the current recommendations, not replace them. A date of November 12, 2026 appears in the notice and looks like the comment deadline, though that detail should be verified against the notice itself.

A larger revision is planned. HHS and a journal of the American College of Sports Medicine say a 3rd edition of the guidelines is anticipated for 2028, with listed topics that include steps, wearables and the 24-hour movement cycle. What the new guidance will actually say is unresolved. Until it is issued, the 150-minute and two-day targets remain the standing recommendation.

Limits of the evidence

The guidelines are population-level targets built from epidemiological evidence. They describe what groups of active people look like compared with groups of inactive ones. They do not prescribe a schedule for any one person, and the case for gradual starts is a plausibility argument from HHS.

What it adds up to

The sources converge on a modest message. The standard targets exist, but beginners are told to begin well below them, short sessions count, and the largest gains per minute go to the least active. A walk of 10 or 30 minutes and a pair of weekly strength sessions are within the guidance, and none of it depends on a gym.

What bears watching is the federal comment process and the 2028 edition, which could put an official number on steps and refine strength-training advice. Even then, the underlying studies will largely remain observational. The practical evidence is consistent that moving more than before is the aim, and that the first small step is the one the guidelines count.

Frequently asked questions

How much exercise should a beginner do per week?

Federal guidelines set the adult target at 150 to 300 minutes of moderate aerobic activity a week, plus muscle-strengthening on 2 or more days. HHS advises inactive people to start with small amounts and build toward that target over time. Reaching it immediately is not required.

Do workouts have to last at least 10 minutes to count?

No. The 2nd edition of the US guidelines and the 2020 WHO guidelines both dropped the older 10-minute minimum. CDC also says the weekly total can be broken into smaller chunks.

Is 10,000 steps a day necessary?

No official US step target exists. A 2025 Lancet Public Health review found that about 7,000 steps a day was associated with a 47% lower risk of all-cause mortality than 2,000 steps. Reductions beyond 7,000 were smaller, and the evidence is observational.

Do beginners need a gym to start working out?

The sources reviewed do not require one. CDC counts brisk walking as moderate activity, and its sample week combines five 30-minute brisk walks with two weight-training days.

Should a beginner see a doctor first?

CDC says people who have been inactive, have a disability or have overweight should talk with a doctor before starting vigorous-intensity activity. It describes moderate activity as safe for most people. This is general guidance, not personal medical advice.

Sources

1. Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans, 2nd edition: Executive Summary , U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (ODPHP)
2. Physical Activity Guidelines Questions & Answers , U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (ODPHP)
3. Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans (landing page) , U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (ODPHP) (2026-10-09)
4. Announcing Solicitation of Written Comments To Inform the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans, 2nd Edition Supplement: 2027 Steps and Muscle-Strengthening Guidance , Federal Register
5. Get Involved: Contribute to the Next Edition of the Physical Activity Guidelines , U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (ODPHP)
6. Call to Action: Contribute to the Development of the Third Edition of the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans , Translational Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine
7. Adult Activity: An Overview , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
8. What Counts as Physical Activity for Adults , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
9. Adding Physical Activity as an Adult , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
10. Steps for Getting Started With Physical Activity , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
11. The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans , JAMA (2018-11-20)
12. World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour , British Journal of Sports Medicine (2020-11-23)
13. World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour (full text) , British Journal of Sports Medicine via PubMed Central (2020-11-23)
14. Advancing the global physical activity agenda: recommendations for future research by the 2020 WHO physical activity and sedentary behavior guidelines development group , International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity (2020-11-26)
15. Everything counts in sending the right message: science-based messaging implications from the 2020 WHO guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour , International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity (2020-11-04)
16. Daily steps and health outcomes in adults: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis , The Lancet Public Health (2025-07-23)
17. Daily steps and all-cause mortality: a meta-analysis of 15 international cohorts , The Lancet Public Health
18. How Many Steps a Day to Reduce CVD and CV Death? , American College of Cardiology (2025-07-30)
19. The Lancet Public Health: Aiming for 7,000 daily steps can reduce risk of chronic diseases, cognitive decline, and death, finds new study , EurekAlert
20. Muscle-strengthening activities are associated with lower risk and mortality in major non-communicable diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies , British Journal of Sports Medicine
21. Muscle-strengthening activities and risk of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, cancer and mortality: A review of prospective cohort studies , Journal of Internal Medicine
22. Muscle-strengthening activities and cancer incidence and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies , International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity (2021-05-29)
23. Weight training and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular disease and cancer mortality among older adults , International Journal of Epidemiology

This article was drafted with the help of AI and reviewed by Jaroha editors before publication.