3 ms·
You're attributing malice that just wasn't there. The anecdote was meh, not the person or the drive behind it. Honestly, I find your personal attacks and comme
by xiaoma 11y ago
You're attributing malice that just wasn't there. The anecdote was meh, not the person or the drive behind it.
Honestly, I find your personal attacks and comments about how you believe I perceive myself to be the only nasty behavior on this thread.
> If you don't care for my anecdote, fine. Your own's even less relevant to most people.
I disagree. Maybe this analogy can make where I'm coming from clearer:
There are certain postures that are easier on the back than others when digging with a shovel. Imagine you have a single data point from someone who grew some vegetables in their backyard and did a bit of shoveling every weekend and a single data point from someone who worked as a tree planter in Ontario for three consecutive summers and spent long hours every day digging and planting.
I believe that neither would be scientific or conclusive, but that if all else were equal, then knowing how the posture/technique that worked for the tree planter would be more useful. I would go with that until encountering problems or taking on something more demanding than what the tree planter did.
- notacoward 11y agoBesides the fact that data (which I have cited and you have not) beats any anecdote, your analogy is awful. For one thing, since I happen to know people in the tree business, I can assure you that the pros use equipment the amateur isn't likely to have. It's a different activity. Second, people are broadly similar when it comes to how their bodies will handle tree planting. There's no huge difference in speed and resulting stresses on the body. What's likely to injure one person is likely to injure another, even if one is twenty and fit while the other is fifty and overweight. By contrast, few runners will ever be operating in the same milieu as someone who's competitive at the college level. Most have never been capable of it, and almost none once they've passed forty. Injury risks are most definitely not comparable across the two groups. You're an outlier. You should be proud of that, and clearly are, but you want to have your cake too. You want to believe, contrary to the evidence I've cited, that your outlier's experience is relevant for people who have never had the benefit of working with professional coaches and trainers, for whom any likelihood of that is decades behind them, who might have struggled with all sorts of mid-life health issues before they took up running. That's the typical beginning runner who needs to know this stuff. They're ill served by your willingness to hold forth without benefit of relevant experience or familiarity with the actual science of the matter. Was there ever any rational expectation that your anecdote - which is the only thing you offered, in contrast to what you were supposedly answering - would help anyone else avoid injury? If not, then why did you feel the need to speak up?
- xiaoma 11y agoYeah, it was to help others avoid injury. I really do think that the biggest factor is taking easy days as well as easy weeks. >"They're ill served by your willingness to hold forth without benefit of relevant experience or familiarity with the actual science of the matter." This is really rude and makes more uncharitable assumptions. The fact is I have helped a lot of friends and family members of various ages and sizes get into running without injury, and to go through marathon programs in some cases. While I've read more books and journals on running than most people ever will, I don't think trading links to them with angry people on the internet is productive. Have a good day. tldr; Take easy days. Take easy weeks. Listen to your body.