so maybe Charlie's idea is working for rowing? So how come you didnt want to try it for running? I guess w that horrible injury setback you had you understandably didnt want to risk it...but you can do similar things on elliptical, treadmill or pool running that might be a safer way to approximate the same fitness.
Well as some of the other old guys on a/p have found, running just isn't comfortable or possible in the older years. For me, the limitation is a disconnected achilles tendon suffered in a freak accident about 8 years ago.
Nevertheless I continue to hobble on. And this year placed #3 in the runner's circuit in NE Illinois; I'll pick up my award at a runners' banquet in February. I still enjoy running, even at a 15+min/mile pace. And my Nordic Trak workouts approximate an elliptical machine. But I think treadmills are stupid for a slow pace...why not go outside and save the electric bill? And if I'm in a pool, I'm going to swim laps, not put on a flotation vest and jog. Sorry.
Anyway as this recent NYTimes article
noted, running is a much more complex activity than previously believed:
....Running seems to require a greater amount of high-level thinking than most of us might imagine. The sport seems to change how the brain works in surprising ways, according to a new report....
Thought-provoking, I suppose, but a sample of 11 test subjects is not very convincing, besides they don't say whether the sedentary subjects are also collegiate, which might make a difference in the way they think. Or account for the fact that the sedentary young men might be sedentary because of the way they think, not the other way around. Or that the diet or some other factor in sedentary life doesn't produce differences, rather than running itself. Or that running is actually the trigger for the different brain activity, rather than any kind of physical activity vs. sedentary life. Its a huge stretch, like most of these 'studies'. Science has hit a plateau, and should take a back seat to common sense more often than not.
...Science has hit a plateau...
Nonsense. Granted it was a small, all-male sample. But in this era of reduced medical spending, and much more medical needs, there are fewer and fewer gold-standard double-blind studies possible. For instance, did you hear that in less than two years a consortium of doctors has developed a vaccine for Ebola that so far has tested to be 100% effective?
As an old guy, beset with an increasing number of physical and medical problems, I find that you have to have a philosophical approach to your life and any treatment you accept. I'm a skeptic more times than not. But I do a lot of reading. And weigh each claim and cure, not only against the evidence, but also in comparison to my philosophical identity: how does it conform to the life I want to live?
I have learned a great deal from other old guys on a/p, and their approach to ageing. Ultimately we're all going to die; there's no cure for that. But in the meantime my rule of thumb is to optimize the QUALITY of my life; not necessarily the QUANTITY. And I'm very happy to accept that running is much more beneficial than we might have thought.
You prove the current internet media dictum 'people believe the 'news' they want to believe'. In this case, it could be a positive thing.
btw, replying 'nonsense' w no further explanation does not bode well for meaningful discussion, though I do agree w your somewhat unrelated comments following. enjoy your holidays!
Ha ha! And no more true than our anticipation of the recent election. All those talking heads on TV who were so so wrong! But for many Americans, it WAS a positive thing!
The 'Nonsense' comment was supposed to relate to your claim that science was plateaued. And the following paragraph was supposed to refute that by showing that (1) Ebola has apparently been cured in record time, and (2) the increasing difficulty of obtaining large-group double-blind studies that formerly were the 'gold standard' of scientific research. Nevertheless Ebola was cured quickly
, without extensive testing or studies.
ok, got it. modern medicine's greatest triumphs have been in the infectious disease category for sure. And surgery has improved quite a bit over the last 500 years, though I was surprised to read of a case where a nobleman in the 16th century had something like 12 operations on his wounded leg because in his vanity he wanted it to look attractive and the first ones were botched. Ironicallly, it shortly after became a moot point because he disengaged from the search for wealth, power and physical attractions.