6 ms·

You write... > Some people can handle 120 miles per week after you... > ran 80-90 miles per week [...] I'm really looking forward to knee surgery in October)

You write... > Some people can handle 120 miles per week after you... > ran 80-90 miles per week [...] I'm really looking forward to knee surgery in October) Apologies for being a bit harsh but the cause-effect-relationship is crystal clear. Extensive running puts a tremendous strain on our knees. You don't need to be a doctor, scientist or professional runner to know this. And just 20-30 miles/week over a long period is already way too much for the majority. Most will write, 'nah that works great for me, I run that amount for many years and my knees are in perfect shape'. Just wait till you're older and then it's pay back time.

cup 10y ago
Actually there is some evidence that running is good for your knees. Either way I think the health benefits of running clearly outweight any damage they do to your knees.
pg314 10y ago
It is not clear that running is bad for the knees. Recent studies ([1], [2]) find no evidence of any adverse effects, rather the contrary (lower incidence of knee osteoarthritis in the running group). One possible explanation is that the runners were less likely to put on weight over the years, leading to lower day-to-day stresses on the knees. [1] Eliza Chakravarty et al. "Long distance running and knee osteoarthritis: A prospective study," American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2008, 35(2), 133-138 [2] David Felson et al., "Effects of recreational physical activities on the development of knee osteoarthritis in older adults of different weights: The Framingham Study," Arthritis & Rheumatism, 2007, 57(1), 6-12
- greenspot 10y ago
  > It is not clear that running is bad for the knees I wrote 'extensive running'
  - pg314 10y ago
    You didn't define 'extensive'. Is it 20-30 miles/week over a long period, which you claim is already way too much for the majority? If I read study [1] correctly the runners were running 3.5 hours a week at the beginning of the study, which would be around 20 miles/week. That same group had a lower incidence of osteoarthritis than the control group. Do you have any evidence to back up your claim?
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - saiya-jin 10y ago
    its far from crystal clear - each body is different, what builds one breaks another one (even if fitness levels are similar). genetics is not fair. our bodies require challenge, otherwise they get weak and fragile. challenge too much, it will break. this point of diminished return is again different for each of us, and varies over time for same person. BUT - if you give it enough time to fortify itself - I don't mean muscles, they grow faster than rest of the body. I mean when bones, tendons, ligaments and generally joints catch up (ie for climbing it takes years of gradual progression to train your fingers), they hold the body together better (knees, feet, spine etc.) and can manage stress put on it, even till high age. I have a friend who is 80 year old mountain guide and he still climbs easier stuff. But to find the balance, the edge of benefits vs losses that is never stable and unique to each of us is very hard
  - irongeek 10y ago
    Where is the research you are citing? Running is not bad for the knees period. You do not define extensive or what you are basing your opinions on. Bad knees can be the result of many, many things, including an injury which may have been the result of twisting your knee rising from a chair.
- raverbashing 10y ago
  Or shoes with shock absorption are more prevalent now
dlubarov 10y ago
I've managed to avoid injury by being paranoid. Whenever my knees start bothering me, I reduce milage for a while until they feel 100% normal. The trouble is, when someone signs up for a big race, they feel pressured to stick with their training plan in spite of any discomforts.
Ma8ee 10y ago
In my experience the untrained people are the ones that gets problems early when they age. If you can't run when you are 50, don't expect to walk without problems when you are 70. If you are a decent runner when you are 60, you have a good chance of being in quite good shape when you are 85.
iklos89 10y ago
> ... the cause-effect-relationship is crystal clear. That must have been one of the most ignorant statements I read on HN. > Just wait till you're older and then it's pay back time. Well guess what, I know 70-year-olds still running a sub 3h marathon.
- odaymansour 10y ago
  Please avoid a harmful tone when replying here, there's no need for that :) As for the 70 year-olds still running marathons, I've heard of plenty more 25 year-olds dying of heart attacks. Anecdotes are not enough here it seems.
nbschulze 10y ago
I don't think you know anything about the cause and effect relationship considering you have no idea who I am let alone what is wrong with me knee. I haven't been running like that since I was in college. I wore down cartilage in my knee while running through pain I had been having for a while. I wasn't taking care of myself the way I should have been. If you take the time and care to make sure you stay healthy, 20-30 miles a week is nothing. If your logic held than 'pay back time' should have happened for my peers a long time ago, they all ran more mileage than I did and some still run 100 plus miles per week. If there is some magic number of miles knees get, they would have hit it a long time ago. That is not how it works. People are different, bodies are different, you just need to make sure you take care of yourself and don't ignore the maintenance.
- greenspot 10y ago
  > I don't think you know anything about the cause and effect relationship considering you have no idea who I am let alone what is wrong with me knee. Why are you getting aggressive? You have your opinion, I have my opinion, no need to snap. > People are different, bodies are different Ok, I agree. But why do you then generalize yourself few sentences before and tell us that '20-30 miles a week is nothing' and treating everybody the same? I think, I was more differentiating, I said 20-30 miles/week for a long period is already too much for the majority—not for all. > I wore down cartilage in my knee while running through pain I had been having for a while Ok, doesn't really make your stance better. Who says that every other runner is so wise and stops running while having a pain? Maybe most of them do the same mistake like you did? Maybe they just want to win, just want to outperform other runners, just fear loosing or just want to prove themselves that they can run more than last week—all while slowly crushing their knees. And maybe it's the dynamics or game mechanics of running itself—it's not that easy to stop. Sorry, but the cause-effect-relationship is getting even clearer with your last comment. Extensive running can get quickly dangerous and the problem is that the runner might realize this too late.
  - qqw1qqw1 10y ago
    Except you still don't know what's the matter with his knee, and you definitely don't know what caused it. It seems a bit premature to assume that overtraining was the cause, and it's pretty ridiculous to imply that because some runners have hurt their knees, it is unsafe, or pointless.
SunTzu55 10y ago
Older dude here. I've been running 30-40 miles a week for 20+ years, with no negative effect on my knees. Majority of people in my running group (some of whom are even older) fall into the same category: long-distance runners, minimal wear-and-tear. Obviously not everybody experiences 'payback' for a life of running; in fact, I'd argue a significant percentage of runners don't experience crippling side-effects over the course of their lifetimes.
justin66 10y ago
> Just wait till you're older and then it's pay back time. Of course, the cardiovascular benefits of running mean you're a lot more likely to live long enough for pay back time.

cup 10y ago

Actually there is some evidence that running is good for your knees. Either way I think the health benefits of running clearly outweight any damage they do to your knees.

pg314 10y ago

It is not clear that running is bad for the knees. Recent studies ([1], [2]) find no evidence of any adverse effects, rather the contrary (lower incidence of knee osteoarthritis in the running group). One possible explanation is that the runners were less likely to put on weight over the years, leading to lower day-to-day stresses on the knees. [1] Eliza Chakravarty et al. "Long distance running and knee osteoarthritis: A prospective study," American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2008, 35(2), 133-138 [2] David Felson et al., "Effects of recreational physical activities on the development of knee osteoarthritis in older adults of different weights: The Framingham Study," Arthritis & Rheumatism, 2007, 57(1), 6-12

greenspot 10y ago
> It is not clear that running is bad for the knees I wrote 'extensive running'
- pg314 10y ago
  You didn't define 'extensive'. Is it 20-30 miles/week over a long period, which you claim is already way too much for the majority? If I read study [1] correctly the runners were running 3.5 hours a week at the beginning of the study, which would be around 20 miles/week. That same group had a lower incidence of osteoarthritis than the control group. Do you have any evidence to back up your claim?
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- saiya-jin 10y ago
  its far from crystal clear - each body is different, what builds one breaks another one (even if fitness levels are similar). genetics is not fair. our bodies require challenge, otherwise they get weak and fragile. challenge too much, it will break. this point of diminished return is again different for each of us, and varies over time for same person. BUT - if you give it enough time to fortify itself - I don't mean muscles, they grow faster than rest of the body. I mean when bones, tendons, ligaments and generally joints catch up (ie for climbing it takes years of gradual progression to train your fingers), they hold the body together better (knees, feet, spine etc.) and can manage stress put on it, even till high age. I have a friend who is 80 year old mountain guide and he still climbs easier stuff. But to find the balance, the edge of benefits vs losses that is never stable and unique to each of us is very hard
- irongeek 10y ago
  Where is the research you are citing? Running is not bad for the knees period. You do not define extensive or what you are basing your opinions on. Bad knees can be the result of many, many things, including an injury which may have been the result of twisting your knee rising from a chair.
raverbashing 10y ago
Or shoes with shock absorption are more prevalent now

dlubarov 10y ago

I've managed to avoid injury by being paranoid. Whenever my knees start bothering me, I reduce milage for a while until they feel 100% normal. The trouble is, when someone signs up for a big race, they feel pressured to stick with their training plan in spite of any discomforts.

Ma8ee 10y ago

In my experience the untrained people are the ones that gets problems early when they age. If you can't run when you are 50, don't expect to walk without problems when you are 70. If you are a decent runner when you are 60, you have a good chance of being in quite good shape when you are 85.

iklos89 10y ago

> ... the cause-effect-relationship is crystal clear. That must have been one of the most ignorant statements I read on HN. > Just wait till you're older and then it's pay back time. Well guess what, I know 70-year-olds still running a sub 3h marathon.

odaymansour 10y ago
Please avoid a harmful tone when replying here, there's no need for that :) As for the 70 year-olds still running marathons, I've heard of plenty more 25 year-olds dying of heart attacks. Anecdotes are not enough here it seems.

nbschulze 10y ago

I don't think you know anything about the cause and effect relationship considering you have no idea who I am let alone what is wrong with me knee. I haven't been running like that since I was in college. I wore down cartilage in my knee while running through pain I had been having for a while. I wasn't taking care of myself the way I should have been. If you take the time and care to make sure you stay healthy, 20-30 miles a week is nothing. If your logic held than 'pay back time' should have happened for my peers a long time ago, they all ran more mileage than I did and some still run 100 plus miles per week. If there is some magic number of miles knees get, they would have hit it a long time ago. That is not how it works. People are different, bodies are different, you just need to make sure you take care of yourself and don't ignore the maintenance.

greenspot 10y ago
> I don't think you know anything about the cause and effect relationship considering you have no idea who I am let alone what is wrong with me knee. Why are you getting aggressive? You have your opinion, I have my opinion, no need to snap. > People are different, bodies are different Ok, I agree. But why do you then generalize yourself few sentences before and tell us that '20-30 miles a week is nothing' and treating everybody the same? I think, I was more differentiating, I said 20-30 miles/week for a long period is already too much for the majority—not for all. > I wore down cartilage in my knee while running through pain I had been having for a while Ok, doesn't really make your stance better. Who says that every other runner is so wise and stops running while having a pain? Maybe most of them do the same mistake like you did? Maybe they just want to win, just want to outperform other runners, just fear loosing or just want to prove themselves that they can run more than last week—all while slowly crushing their knees. And maybe it's the dynamics or game mechanics of running itself—it's not that easy to stop. Sorry, but the cause-effect-relationship is getting even clearer with your last comment. Extensive running can get quickly dangerous and the problem is that the runner might realize this too late.
- qqw1qqw1 10y ago
  Except you still don't know what's the matter with his knee, and you definitely don't know what caused it. It seems a bit premature to assume that overtraining was the cause, and it's pretty ridiculous to imply that because some runners have hurt their knees, it is unsafe, or pointless.

SunTzu55 10y ago

Older dude here. I've been running 30-40 miles a week for 20+ years, with no negative effect on my knees. Majority of people in my running group (some of whom are even older) fall into the same category: long-distance runners, minimal wear-and-tear. Obviously not everybody experiences 'payback' for a life of running; in fact, I'd argue a significant percentage of runners don't experience crippling side-effects over the course of their lifetimes.

justin66 10y ago

> Just wait till you're older and then it's pay back time. Of course, the cardiovascular benefits of running mean you're a lot more likely to live long enough for pay back time.