Why Walking Weakens Wee Ones

A study of energy consumption among human walkers of various sizes finds that children tire more easily not due to any differences in stride style--they just need more steps to cover the same distance. Karen Hopkin reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

If you’ve ever had to pick up and carry a tired child through the mall, you know that walking sometimes tuckers out the toddlers. Now scientists think they know why. The results appear in the Journal of Experimental Biology. [P. Weyand et al., "The mass-specific energy cost of human walking is set by stature," J. Exp. Biol., link to come]

Larger animals tend to use less energy per gram of body mass than smaller ones do, even at rest. But what happens when they’re in motion? Researchers recruited walkers of different ages and sizes, from a three-foot-tall kindergartner to a six-foot adult. While the subjects logged miles on the treadmill, the scientists measured their stride and metabolism.

And they found that people pretty much walk the same way, regardless of their stature. If you scaled a five-year-old up to be six-and-a-half feet tall, the giant child would lope along just like a similarly sized adult.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


What’s more, walkers of all heights use the same amount of energy per step. That means that big people don’t conserve energy by strolling in a more economical style. They expend less energy because—just as you may have always suspected—they simply need fewer strides to cover the same ground. Which means that for some people a walk in the park ain’t necessarily a walk in the park.

—Karen Hopkin

[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe