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

181–190 of 232 posts

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#181

Post by gghhzzgghhzz »

sw030695 wrote: post #136
Fargren wrote: post #117

I have a question that this is probably not the best forum for: I don't run, but know plenty of people who do. Everyone is running what I would call marathon-style, by which I mean their goals are measured in how far they can reliably run/ how fast they can do a relatively long distance, 5K being the lower bound. To me, running shorter distances very fast seems just cooler and more exciting, say 500 meters. 100 meter…

5km is considered a short distance run. Within a few weeks, it's something that should be achievable in sub-20/25 minutes. In the UK, there's a volunteer led organisation called parkrun which hosts 5km runs/races in over 1000 parks around the country every Saturday. It's quite popular. My local race consistently get 300+ entrants each week. Worth checking out: https://www.parkrun.org.uk/ 5km, 10km, half marathon and…

> Within a few weeks, it's something that should be achievable in sub-20/25 minutes.

I wish it was that easy.

I trained hard for a year and barely made it under 24.

I guess it depends on age and if you are carrying around a bit of extra weight.

5K is a wonderful distance though. You can walk it in an hour, walk / jog it in 40, jog it in 30 .. then a whole world of gradual improvements and mind games open up to get you from there to 20 mins.

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#182

Post by OJFord »

Retric wrote: post #153
OJFord wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I shower every day anyway, so I don't count shower time as cost of running. So do I, and there's no way I could go out for a run before it - so the post-run one would be additional, that's why I count it as a cost.

If you shower every day you aren’t noticeably dirty in the morning and you will get sweaty either way so why not?

A combination of how I feel and how my hair looks beforehand. There's no way I'd go out first, for anything, wouldn't answer the door.

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#183

Post by wintermutestwin »

jeltz wrote: post #90
wintermutestwin wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Couch" pretty much = bad posture = bad joints.

That is way too strong assertion. Not all couch potatoes have that bad posture, especially those who used to exercise in the past and stopped and bad posture does not necessarily mean bad joints. Very few of my friends who are around 40 have bad joints, including the couch potatoes. The bad joints will probably catch up with them in time but e.g. my dad was a couch potato from 45 to 67 without any issue. It was only…

I said "pretty much" to soften the absolutism of my statement. I should have said "bad posture + running = bad joints."

You do make a good point about prior athleticism as it can promote good joint health.

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#184

Post by nerdface »

dmje wrote: post #120

Been a runner for 30+ years. I love it. I've got 5 bits of advice for anyone starting out. Firstly, just go. As the old trope says, the hardest bit is the distance between couch and front door. Don't even think about it, don't look at the weather, don't worry about that little voice in your head telling you how cold it is. Just get your kit on and go. Once you're outside you're on your way. Secondly - give some focus…

Which running shoes have you found best?

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#185

Post by Someone1234 »

rconti wrote: post #162
Someone1234 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most effective sports at burning energy I'm pretty sure it is one of the least effective sports at burning energy. Humans have evolved to be highly efficient runners, therefore we exert less energy when we run (plus compared alternative we're under-using our upper bodies). Swimming is almost certainly the most effective sport for burning energy. That being said: Losing body fat from exercise is a bad strategy anywa…

[citation needed] I've spent a lot of time running and cycling, and personally, I can burn 800 calories an hour running, and 600 cycling. I can easily sustain heartrates of 150-160bpm but struggle to break 130 swimming. Found a few source that also put running at the top. https://revelsports.com/which-sport-burns-the-most-calories/

Your link is to an autogenerated content farm. So [Citation Needed] from you too. Here's an actual source:

https://www.health.harvard.edu/diet-and-weight-loss/calories...

Running at normal sustained speeds is only 240-336, Elliptical is 270-378, Aerobics 300-420, Stationary Bicycling 315-441, etc.

Keep in mind 6 MpH is considered Vigorous, and you're talking about 10 MpH sustained to get good calorie burn which just isn't realistic outside competitive levels or for short sprints (which isn't what we're discussing).

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#186

Post by lottin »

iamacyborg wrote: post #137
lottin wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your concern is looking healthy and athletic, you need a decent amount of muscle mass and a low percentage of body fat. Running helps with none of that.

Doing hill strides will build some serious legs and running every day (while maintaining an appropriate diet) will be more than enough to reduce your body fat.

Reducing body fat requires careful dieting and exercise. First, you need to be in a caloric deficit, which involves eating less calories than usual. Second, when you're in a caloric deficit, you'll lose both fat and muscle. Lifting weights becomes absolutely crucial, otherwise you will lose a lot of muscle.

Hill strides don't build strong legs. I did a lot of cycling in my youth, and I thought I had strong legs—since they seemed slightly larger than average—but I didn't. When I had to do something that required actual strength, such as kicking a ball, it turned out I was rubbish.

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#187

Post by igouy »

FartyMcFarter wrote: post #175
igouy wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Given the impact running has on the joints Now try to find some evidence that the impact is damaging rather than a stimulus.

It's both depending on context (including age, body type, level of fitness etc). If you build gradually towards running fast and for long distances, it's a stimulus. If you run significantly beyond your current ability, it does damage.

Opinion not evidence :-)

Being sedentary causes damage, so the question is do runners suffer more damage.

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#188

Post by igouy »

googlryas wrote: post #22
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 generally agree with the advice, but anyone in good health should be able to run a 5k. It's literally 20ish minutes of exercise. Beyond that is when the negative effects of running start to come into play.

Average finish time: 00:29:02

Finishes: 44,009,780

https://www.parkrun.org.uk/

Re: Get Running with Couch to 5K

#190

Post by FartyMcFarter »

igouy wrote: post #187
FartyMcFarter wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's both depending on context (including age, body type, level of fitness etc). If you build gradually towards running fast and for long distances, it's a stimulus. If you run significantly beyond your current ability, it does damage.

Opinion not evidence :-) Being sedentary causes damage, so the question is do runners suffer more damage.

I think you missed my point. I wasn't comparing running to being sedentary. I was comparing running sensibly to running recklessly (as some beginners do).

This isn't exclusive to running either. It can happen with any physical activity.

Post reply on HN