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

Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 148 posts

Re: Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport

#131

Post by paulddraper »

theparanoid wrote: post #73
paulddraper wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#1 and #2 seem reasonable points, but > very inefficient at improving fitness Efficiency relative to what? Time? Joules? Cost? I'm skeptical running is "inefficient" at improving fitness.

Body weight exercises such as pull-ups, sit-ups, and push-ups are the best for fitness.

I think calisthenics are great, but they focus more on muscular strength than cardiovascular.

There are only so many push-ups you can do before your muscles are fatigued. Running, swimming, and cycling are better for cardio because you can do them for great lengths of time.

Re: Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport

#132

Post by ultra-jeremyx »

A few years ago I got into MUT (mountain/ultra/trail) running and have been amazed by the mental health benefits it has had on my life. I have come to realize that it's because human beings are natural endurance athletes but the evolution of our minds has far outpaced our biology. Most people just don't use their bodies for what they were evolved for. For me, engaging in regular endurance activities led to great fitness, and more importantly, happiness.

As a developer, I find that taking a mid-day break from coding to run for an hour or two in the mountains refreshes my mind and clarifies my thinking in the afternoon. I often end up solving coding problems when I stop thinking and focus on the moment in running, and then--BAM--out of nowhere a solution will pop into my head.

Re: Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport

#133

Post by azemetre »

revelation wrote: post #117
njs12345 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 1 hour run for me burns 1000+ calories: https://www.strava.com/activities/800853045 Of course it's possible to eat 1000 calories' worth of food in one sitting, especially if you're eating something with tons of carbs in. But if you keep your diet roughly the same and go on a 1 hour run three times a week, you'll definitely start losing weight..

You are not burning 1200 calories in a hour run at 10min/mile. At an average 25% efficiency that is the equivalent of producing 350W on an ergo for a whole hour, which is well beyond the genetic ability of the vast majority of the population. (The idea that sport can't help you lose weight is still ridiculous of course, even if you are only burning 600 calories per hour. Bad habits make you overweight and establishin…

May I ask how you came to this calculation? I have a relative in my family that regularly touts they are burning 3,000 calories on an elliptical for an hours worth of use.

It'd be nice to have an outlandish comparison to put towards their claim.

Re: Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport

#134

Post by [deleted] »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #122
Humdeee wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit more complex than the commonly spouted calories in/calories out argument. There is still a lot that we don't know with regards to metabolism. I am usually a higher mileage runner during spring to fall months (70-90km / week) and although I scale my eating to offset my calories burned, I will still lose weight. I will not provide a citation but it's quite widely known that metabolism increases as the body n…

That's the consumer-side of it. The supply-side argument is what's usually 'spouted': if you're gaining weight, its because too many calories in. Full stop. Of course the body can/will waste calories, burn them at a higher rate depending on other things. That's not most peoples' problem though: unexpectedly losing too much weight. There's not a billion-dollar industry around that issue.

[deleted]

Re: Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport

#135

Post by revelation »

azemetre wrote: post #133
revelation wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not burning 1200 calories in a hour run at 10min/mile. At an average 25% efficiency that is the equivalent of producing 350W on an ergo for a whole hour, which is well beyond the genetic ability of the vast majority of the population. (The idea that sport can't help you lose weight is still ridiculous of course, even if you are only burning 600 calories per hour. Bad habits make you overweight and establishin…

May I ask how you came to this calculation? I have a relative in my family that regularly touts they are burning 3,000 calories on an elliptical for an hours worth of use. It'd be nice to have an outlandish comparison to put towards their claim.

You start with gross efficiency, which for humans is going to be 20-30%. So when the tool says you expended 1200 calories and you assume an average efficiency of 25%, that means you produced 1200/4 = 300 kcal of actual work and 1200-300 = 900 kcal in excess heat.

The 300 kcal of work equate to ~349 Watt hours as WolframAlpha will tell you, so if you want to produce that in a single hour you need to continuously put out 349 Watts.

Now we have put lots of humans on scientific ergos which can accurately measure work, and that is a very high number for a single hour for any individual. There is a chart here that gives you the kind of work rates achievable by category:

http://d4nuk0dd6nrma.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/...

It's normalized by weight but it's more accurately height, someone weighing 300lbs isn't suddenly going to produce more power than at a normal weight. The number you're looking for is "FT" or Functional Threshold, which is generally assumed to be around the absolute maximum average power sustainable for an hour. At the end of that you should fall over and puke your guts out. So for someone doing 350 Watts for a hour, that would put them at world class or domestic pro level.

Re: Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport

#136

Post by naasking »

azemetre wrote: post #133
revelation wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not burning 1200 calories in a hour run at 10min/mile. At an average 25% efficiency that is the equivalent of producing 350W on an ergo for a whole hour, which is well beyond the genetic ability of the vast majority of the population. (The idea that sport can't help you lose weight is still ridiculous of course, even if you are only burning 600 calories per hour. Bad habits make you overweight and establishin…

May I ask how you came to this calculation? I have a relative in my family that regularly touts they are burning 3,000 calories on an elliptical for an hours worth of use. It'd be nice to have an outlandish comparison to put towards their claim.

They would have to chug harder than a train to burn 3,000 calories on an elliptical. Chances are it's less than 1,000 calories [1].

[1] http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/08/07/walking-vs-elliptic...

Re: Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport

#137

Post by tempestn »

throwanem wrote: post #97
tempestn wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, this depends on how you define both "best" and "fitness". What's best depends a lot on what someone enjoys. I would rather do an activity I enjoy for 40 minutes than get the same benefit doing something I hate for 20. Likewise, fitness means different things to different people and at different times. You may be focusing on cardio-vascular fitness, or on strength, or speed, or weight loss, or performance in a…

Or, you know, "do something". Throwing a bunch of complexity and equipment cost at someone who doesn't currently exercise at all isn't likely to help anything much. Pushups and situps require only a clear stretch of floor.

Sure! If you're just getting started and can stick with that, maybe that's best for you! Just not for everyone.

Re: Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport

#138

Post by CJefferson »

dspillett wrote: post #94
CJefferson wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The knees is still out. One problem with studying long term runners, I'd often people who get knee pain drop out. That's me -- went to various physios, they all agree I've messed up my knees, and won't ever recover enough to take up running again.

Like the back problems sometimes associated with rowing, a lot of knee issues from running are due mainly to bad form. If you over-stride, particularly down-hill (and going "too fast" down hill instead of managing your pace/stride is a recipe for over-striding) the knees will be too straight during impact and so experience excessive impact force (and therefor potential damage) that would otherwise be absorbed by musc…

While form is important, it doesn't fix fundamental joint problems unfortunately. I was checked fairly carefully by a couple of NHS physios, who both agreed it was joint problems, not bad form.

Re: Running as a Thinking Person’s Sport

#140

Post by brokenmachine »

cylinder wrote: post #5

Man, NYT seems to run a piece about exercise and health, especially mental health, and especially running, almost daily. We get it. Personally, I hate running. I like thinking.

Why can't you think while you run? I guess if you're really out of shape, running is so difficult that you can't think.

I run trails, and when I run is the time I get the most thinking done! I listen to podcasts and music, and sometimes just listen to the wildlife around. It's definitely my most concentrated thinking time though.

Post reply on HN