Tuesday, June 19, 2007

They're STILL Everywhere

I saw them again this morning.

I bet you've seen them too.

There's the 40-ish woman with the funny, abbreviated, duck-like gait pattern. The guy whose pushing 50 who looks like he's on the verge of death. The scrawny 20-something newlywed in the oversized t-shirt. And of course, the new Mom pushing Junior in the fancy carriage.

Yep. They're runners.

Every since the "running revolution" in the 70's, countless people have taken to the road in an effort to get in shape because they either read somewhere or someone told them that aerobic exercise is the key to fat loss or that it'll help them live longers.

I don't run.

It's boring.

It makes me all sweaty, my heart races, my breathing quickens, and I get a little queazy in my gut. (BTW, theses are all common symptoms during a heart attack)

My friend ran the Indianapolis Mini-Marathon back in May. 13.1 miles with a scenic view of the Indy 500 track as part of route.

It took him an hour and 20 mintues.

It takes me less than 15 mintues to go 13.1 miles. I take a car like most normal people.

Now I understand that some of you actually like the feeling you get from running, so by all means continue if you like. It will contribute to your health to some degree (keep in mind that your orthopedic health is put at risk from overuse injuries).

My question for you is why you're doing it.

For your health?

Well, there's no magic in running long distances or having high aerobic capacity. When it comes to longevity, it's all about burning calories.

Get this...longshoremen, not known for a lifetime quest in search of the secrets of health, have been shown to be at lower risk of heart attacks than their Harvard-educated, casually exercising counterparts.

How can this be?

Well, the longshoremen burned a helluva lot more calories than the regular exercisers by performing heavy lifting, carrying, pushing, and pulling. Not by running.

Well, it's certainly great for fat loss, right?

Intially, maybe, but its contribution to a fat loss program drops off quickly as running-specific fitness increases. If you're running for fat loss, you've probably experienced such a phenomenon where you initially dropped some fat but plateaued quickly.

Why? It's easy to become aerobically fit and the body becomes more efficient very quickly, so you actually use fewer calories to cover the same distances. Fewer calories burned means less or no fat loss AND less contribution to health (there's also some evidence that you'll get fatter).

So what's the best way to lose fat and burn a lot of calories?

To answer, I'll borrow from a program by my friend Alwyn Cosgrove called Real World Fat Loss.

In it Alwyn explains the hierarchy of activities that have been shown in the research literature AND in the real-world for faster, effective fat loss.

Here's the hierarchy of fat loss:

1. Metabolic Resistance Training
2. High Intensity Anaerobic Interval Training
3. High Intensity Aerobic Interval Training
4. Steady State High Intensity Aerobic Training
5. Steady State Low Intensity Aerobic Training

At best, long distance running falls into level 4 which makes it a weak recommendation for fat loss.

Alwyn's wife, Rachel, is an up-n-coming triathlete who must run a great deal to train for her races. Does she then use long distance running as a component of training for her female fat-loss clients?

Nope. It's just not effective.

In fact, proper fat loss training following the hierarchy above will actually increase the number of calories you burn (these calories will come from fat by the way) AFTER you exercise. Alwyn has termed this Afterburn.

So not only will you burn more fat, but you'll increase your health by burning more calories.

Now, like I said, if you like to run, then run. But before you do, decide why you're running. If it's for reasons other than the joy of running, there's a better way.

Bill

P.S. Mike Boyle has a couple articles directed toward running and orthopedic health especially for women. The first is calle Why (Most) Women Shouldn't Run and part 2 is Should Women Run.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

"longshoremen . . .have been shown to be at lower risk of heart attacks than their Harvard-educated, casually exercising counterparts"

Is there an article that actually makes this comparison? If so, what is the citation.

Bill Hartman said...

RS (Ralph) Paffenbarger did the study. It's on Pubmed.

Bill

Anonymous said...

last time I watched some runners it occured to me that they were all fat (apart from the really fast ones) and none of them was smiling (apart from the really fast ones). So I had to conclude that it wasn't much effective for fat loss and they weren't enjoying it much either. Unless you're one of those really fast ones. Now you could ask yourself if they became fast and lean doing that stuff, or if they got lean first and that just made them go faster (because they sure don't look like they had much excess musscle tissue to carry with them).

Nice article !

FishrCutB8 said...

You know what, I run because I like to run. When I get "bored" I swim and bike...and occasionally lift weights....and box...and hike...and read your blog.

Anonymous said...

hey, c'mon. we're all aware of the dire consequences that might occur if they re-release jurassic period animals into the present day biosphere. even a car can't outrun a velociraptor.