51–60 of 151 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
.
Saturated fats are not associated with all cause mortality, CVD, CHD, ischemic stroke, or type 2 diabetes.... [1] The current available evidence found no significant difference in all-cause mortality or CHD mortality, resulting from the dietary fat interventions. [2] [1] Intake of saturated and trans unsaturated fatty acids and risk of all cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, and type 2 diabetes: systematic revie…
> The health benefits of running short or long distances are so overwhelmingly positive that they swamp potential dangers.
Look at a male Olympian long distance runner's physique. Is that what you want to look like? You probably won't get there, but is that a worthwhile goal? Whereas a short or mid distance runner looks more normal and healthy. This tells me that I probably want to run shorter distances. In fact, I never run more than a mile, but do it quickly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The vast majority of the top runners in the Olympic and other world-class marathons are well under 6 feet tall , with most closer to 5 feet tall. Sprinters, on the other hand, are well over 6 feet. Are you suggesting distance running makes people shorter?
That is not the truth. While generally not over 6 feet tall, the Olympic distance runners had a very normal height distribution. One of the shorter, Hillary Bor, is still 5' 7".
http://www.runnersworld.com/sweat-science/the-incredible-shr...
I'm a cross-country runner averaging 30+ miles a week. I don't see any harm. It's had a great impact on me. I feel healthier and more fit. Some articles just don't make sense.
This isn't quite the article's subject, but... For a very rough wedge, suppose there were some other activity which didn't have all the positive perceptions around running, which created painful and debilitating injuries requiring medical attention as a matter of course, whose participants could all expect to require specialized medical equipment to go about their lives for a period of weeks to months, several times…
Maybe that coach had some bad ideas.
I ran 80-90 miles per week while in college and continued running 20-30 per week for a couple of years after until my knee stopped cooperating (I'm really looking forward to knee surgery in October). I have experienced some of the described symptoms (irregular heartbeat and etc), but wouldn't have done much differently. Honestly, this article basically boils down to 'do what your body can handle'. People are differen…
Yeah, until I couldn’t run through the pain any more. Quit running track, bloated up like Pacheco’s pig. Found out later that I wore grooves through the cartiledge and into my bones.
Also, discovered that if I ran on my toes instead of heel strikes I can run now without pain. Its juts ingrained to hate it now.
Look at a male Olympian long distance runner's physique. Is that what you want to look like? You probably won't get there, but is that a worthwhile goal? Whereas a short or mid distance runner looks more normal and healthy. This tells me that I probably want to run shorter distances. In fact, I never run more than a mile, but do it quickly.
Look at a male Olympian long distance runner's physique. Is that what you want to look like? You probably won't get there, but is that a worthwhile goal? Whereas a short or mid distance runner looks more normal and healthy. This tells me that I probably want to run shorter distances. In fact, I never run more than a mile, but do it quickly.
Interesting logic. I do want to look like that. How many miles do I have to run until I turn into a 5'6" Kenyan man?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is not the truth. While generally not over 6 feet tall, the Olympic distance runners had a very normal height distribution. One of the shorter, Hillary Bor, is still 5' 7".
Olympics aren't a great test for this. Look at top marathon runners size over time. http://www.runnersworld.com/sweat-science/the-incredible-shr...
The article frames the question as a sort of strawman in some ways. Rather than ask "is running good or bad for you?" you could ask "is an alternative form of exercise, that has fewer damaging side effects, better?" For example, would you be just as well off walking, skiing, or biking? My understanding is the answer to that is even less clear.
The article focuses on heart health (where on first look, I was expecting joint damage) so any high cardio exercise could lead to this, if taken to an extreme. Running probably engages this more easily since it works the whole body for longer periods. Biking is my personal go-to exercise but it's not without its risks from traffic, pollution, or in the winter, black ice. Still, it's otherwise nonproductive commute ti…
It doesn't get below freezing where I live so I haven't had to contend with this personally, but when my friend lived in Boston and cycled throughout the winter, he got the Finnish studded snow tires for his bike:
http://www.icebike.org/the-ultimate-guide-to-winter-bike-tir...
He said it made him feel a lot safer. (That page mentions a concern that there are failure cases related to inappropriate tire pressure that may reduce traction compared to regular tires, but it seems like they normally increase traction by a huge amount.)