Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Get Running with Couch to 5K

nhs.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 232 posts

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#91

Post by rainsford »

DoughnutHole wrote: post #41
rainsford wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That article makes a good argument, but I feel like it misses the potentially more significant issue that running is an actively bad choice of exercise for a lot of people even if they want to focus on cardio. It's harder on the body than a lot of other cardio exercises, particularly for the target audience of things like "couch to 5k". It's definitely better for you than sitting on the couch, but only if you stick w…

Running has the advantage of cost and simplicity. A pair of running shoes and a very simple free programme like couch to 5k and you're set. The only exercise I can think of with a lower barrier to entry is walking. Every able-bodied person knows how to run, even if they can't go very fast or far. Strength training has a higher barrier to entry - weight training requires a gym membership or your own weight room, and y…

That's a fair point...running does have a fairly low barrier to entry, which is definitely an advantage in picking it up as an exercise. I'd still lean towards walking as a better choice for sedentary people though, at least as a "get off the couch" goal. It takes longer, but the lower potential for injury and less strenuous nature of the activity might make it a better exercise habit for some folks.

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#93

Post by infamousclyde »

lottin wrote: post #7

Running is better than sitting on the coach. But strength training is better than running. Why you should not be running , by Mark Rippetoe: https://startingstrength.com/article/why-you-should-not-be-r...

I hope members of this community can recognize that fitness is not this binary.

I will acknowledge my bias here-- my partner recently represented our country in the Olympics as a track athlete, and I believe I have achieved intermediate results in both running (sub-35 minute 10k) and lifting (the 1000 lbs club) which hopefully affords me some perspective from both sides of the track. We scrolled through this article this morning together and had a good laugh.

This entire article reads as an ode to muscle mass, which is not everyone's goal. Regardless, here were some zingers that stood out:

"Quite literally, the more you run, the better you are at running and the worse you are at being strong." -- I mean... And? With a more developed aerobic system, you recover faster between bursts of intense effort. You can play with your kids longer, run with your dog more, hike further... I could go on.

"Excessive amounts of endurance activity can, and almost always does produce adverse physical effects. Look at competitive marathon runners: the people who win the big races are skinny, just like the typical 80-year-old."

Outrageous. Again, Mark Rippetoe has demonstrated some misplaced association between muscle size and health. I guess you can wave your hand at an elite runner and make an asinine comment like, "Thank goodness I don't look like that!", but keep in mind that running below 3:00 min/km (4:48 min/mi) for 42.2 kilometres requires extraordinary fitness, and the contrast to "the typical 80 year old" is as silly as it is rude.

I digress. Running is magical-- put a pause on it if you're prioritizing muscle mass, but to write it off entirely is a mistake.

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#96

Post by criley2 »

twawaaay wrote: post #60
dweekly wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Run! Even an hour of running over the course of a week has proven benefits to morbidity and mortality. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4131752/ "Running, even 5-10 minutes per day and slow speeds <6 mph, is associated with markedly reduced risks of death from all causes and cardiovascular disease."

I think all those studies that say running even 5-10 minutes makes you almost invulnerable from death should be taken with caution. One problem is that people who run regularly are just different from people who do not. People who will run will make a lot of other choices that are also better for their health, for various reasons like being probably more intelligent (to see the reason), having means (to be able to ca…

This is a classic example of correlation and causation. You're basically saying that running is correlated with a longer life, not causative of it. Causality is undergraduate level science and any paper of any quality will discuss causality and correlation in depth.

For example, in the study that we are discussing here, it says

> It is possible that healthy people may run more, which could lead to reverse causality. However, we found consistent mortality benefits in runners in both healthy and unhealthy individuals

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4131752/

You can read more if you want to understand more about how they handle these factors.

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#97

Post by jeltz »

rainsford wrote: post #91
DoughnutHole wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Running has the advantage of cost and simplicity. A pair of running shoes and a very simple free programme like couch to 5k and you're set. The only exercise I can think of with a lower barrier to entry is walking. Every able-bodied person knows how to run, even if they can't go very fast or far. Strength training has a higher barrier to entry - weight training requires a gym membership or your own weight room, and y…

That's a fair point...running does have a fairly low barrier to entry, which is definitely an advantage in picking it up as an exercise. I'd still lean towards walking as a better choice for sedentary people though, at least as a "get off the couch" goal. It takes longer, but the lower potential for injury and less strenuous nature of the activity might make it a better exercise habit for some folks.

I agree, but it all depends on how you define "get off the couch". Some people walk moderate amounts already and for those starting running makes a lot of sense, while others move so little in their life that walking is the best first step. It is also perfectly fine if walking is the only step, but at least in my case I felt huge health benefits from going from walking moderate amounts to running (I still walk, but a bit less).

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#98

Post by twawaaay »

OJFord wrote: post #87
twawaaay wrote: post #48

Personally, I think aren't many better return on investment activities than spending half an hour every day on a morning jog. You can run more than that but I think half an hour steady state easy run each morning gives you 80% of results. If you love running (I do), knock yourself out. But that half an hour is enough to do wonders to your health over long periods of time with minimum chance for negative consequences.…

Personally I think (I don't do !) I'd rather go harder/faster/longer less often. Getting ready for and then showering etc. after such a brief activity every day is just annoying isn't it?

I shower every day anyway, so I don't count shower time as cost of running. I head out first thing in the morning immediately after I get up and then shower immediately after I come back. Which I think is a terrific way to start my day.

Does it take time? Yes, it does, but only if you look at it in this simplistic way. Even if I did not enjoy running itself, it makes the rest of the day feel better for me which I think makes up for the time "wasted".

I also use my runs to listen to news, audiobooks or podcasts. I am walking every day in the evening and I use that time to listen to audiobooks and also get some grocery, etc. -- trying to get as much from the time I spent on walks as possible.

If I don't listen to something I am trying to be productive by rethinking things that happened to me, preparing arguments for upcoming meetings, thinking through other problems that I have at the moment.

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#99

Post by sobriquet9 »

Having done Couch to 5K, I can say 9 weeks is too short. I understand that a longer, more realistic time frame would mean fewer people will attempt it, but such quick growth makes injuries more likely. Lungs and heart adopt faster than ligaments. I ended up hurting my knee, which set me back by a couple of months.

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#100

Post by para_parolu »

MarcScott wrote: post #39

I did this about four years ago. I hated it. Even running with my collie or listening to audio books didn't help. It just felt like a miserable chore, every time I put on my running shoes. In the end I just quit. Now I hike every weekend, at least 10 miles, which lets me go out with family and friends. I also do various martial arts with my son, which as a shared activity is so much more enjoyable. The only time I'll…

I’m happy other people have similar experience. I enjoy physical activity but running is just too boring.
Post reply on HN