To Europeans a 6km walk isn't much at all they'd walk 1km or 2km to a store but in the USA or Canada anything over 250m is a drive. So I'd say to people in the US and Canada 6km seems like a hike but to others it's just a very short walk.
That's a bit uncharitable towards Americans. Yes, it's a very car-centric society in most places, but they also have a very strong outdoor/hiking/camping culture.
It's not uncharitable. Yes, some Americans really are serious hikers, but the idea that this is common among Americans is fantasy. Most Americans don't hike at all and couldn't hike a mile in mountainous terrain because they're too fat or otherwise out-of-shape. Meanwhile, some others are mega-hikers who can hike rim-to-rim and back in the Grand Canyon in a day. It's the same way with American cyclists: most can't ride a bike much at all, while the ones who can are frequently close to pro-level. America is a land of extremes, but with an obesity rate of well over 50%, it is not a place where normal, everyday people are serious hikers.
> Most Americans don't hike at all and couldn't hike a mile in mountainous terrain because they're too fat or otherwise out-of-shape.
You obviously know very little about America. First of all, most Americans aren't so fat they can't walk around. Second, I'm really fat (far more than average) and even I can hike a mile in mountainous terrain. Not only can I, I have and will again. It's taxing (which it shouldn't be), but it's quite manageable. Walking a mile isn't that much in the grand scheme of things.
So yeah, not only is it uncharitable, your attempt to defend it shows your own ignorance both of Americans and of what level of activity is possible even for those who are overweight. Bad show, sir.
Ignorance of Americans? I am American! I know my home country all too well. The stats don't lie: more than half of Americans aren't just overweight, they're obese. "Can't walk a mile" isn't meant to be taken literally; of course an obese person can struggle to hike a mile, but I guess I should always count on autistic HN users to take everything literally.
Wait how are people meant to interpret sweeping, quantitative statements on American capacity for exercise in the context of criticizing the reporting of a disabled man now able to walk, unaided, a moderate distance?
Walking 6 km takes about an hour if you are fast. So I don't think that qualifies as a very short walk. Also most europeans would rather drive that distance as well.
For another point of context, to my father, an Australian born in 1935, 6 km | 3.7 miles is the distance he walks every morning after he gets up at 4 am or so.
Sounds a bit fancy for an Aussie farmboy, former shearer .. I looked it up and he more or less moves at that pace anyway - maybe due to being in the navy and having had to march (for a short stint, then five years in engine rooms) - but most likely because we've always walked a lot to get places and why waste the time going slow.
He's still pretty active, he maintains sections of the Bibbulmun Track (1,000 km walking track here in the lower corner of the state) shovels the odd few tonnes of manure, splits wood by hand, etc.
Having grown up in a depressingly car-dependant suburb in the US, I moved to a walkable city specifically so that I could enjoy that aspect of my life. I reguarly walk more than 7 miles (11.3 km) per day. Although rare, there are walkable places in the US, and people who enjoy walking.
If you're going for these walks every day, that honestly seems like an enormous waste of time.
Go for a run, then get back to something productive or novel or mind-expanding.
You're a once-in-a-universe spark. All of the things since the big bang led to you now, and you will never be again. This is it. The universe exists for you now, and you have this one singular play through.
One thing I've realised is that time spent walking is never wasted.
During a walk you can think more clearly, or you can listen to a (mind-expanding) podcast, or you can walk with friends or your partner which counts towards building & strengthening relationships. That's without even considering the health benefits.
If you drive somewhere you could walk, that time really is wasted - because you should be focusing on not killing anyone instead of on anything interesting.
Same walk over and over? Could be a nice walk! I repeat the same walks, because I live near a park and a beach. I could roam the streets randomly instead, but that wouldn't be better.
Running is better for cardio, sure, but I tended to find that changing clothes, warming up, running 5K, recovering and taking a shower takes close to an hour - and I could have walked that 5K in the same time and not been exhausted for the rest of the morning. Longer distances are more worth it but regular 10-20K runs turned out to be bad for my knees.
Walks occupy enough of my mind to let it only have one or two conversations going on inside it at a time. It also stops me from doing lots of other things, and removes the feeling of "oh but you should also..." because I can't, I'm not at the computer. Those combined means that while getting some gentle exercise I can properly think through some things.
