20 ms·

Run to Stay Young

202 points by papad 12y ago

hf 12y ago
As the article referenced here is rather light, here is the actual paper of the mentioned study (open access): http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0113471 http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjourna..., and a slightly more informative report by the University of Colorado Boulder, http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2014/11/20/running-really-can-keep-you-young-says-cu-boulder-humboldt-state-study http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2014/11/20/running-rea.... Conclusion from the paper: Running mitigates the age-related deterioration of walking economy whereas walking for exercise appears to have minimal effect on the age-related deterioration in walking economy.
- Nicholas_C 12y ago
  This is great if you're older and have the physical ability to run. I suspect that some of the non-runners can't run.
  - melling 12y ago
    I tried jogging over the summer for the first time in years, but my feet started hurting. It would take days to recover. I gave up after 2 months. It feels good but I seem prone to injury.
    - ihsw 12y ago
      Keep doing it, otherwise the recovery period will swing back up high and the health benefits will fall by the wayside. Diet also plays a major role in consistently reducing your recovery time and increasing the quality of life.
    - matwood 12y ago
      What kind of shoes did you have? What kind of surface did you run on? Did you get your stride checked? Did work up to any distance or go all out day 1? Because running looks easy as opposed to say weight lifting, people often do it without thinking. Running is just like any other exercise in that you have to start slow and work up to more. You also have to do some research for proper technique and equipment.
      - melling 12y ago
        New Balance 990. I started with C25k but had to repeat many days. I'm quite out of jogging shape. I run on the sidewalk or road.
        shepardrtc 12y ago
        You probably need a different brand of shoes. For instance, New Balance works great for me, but I can't ever wear Nike or Avia. Both of those brands really hurt my feet, even though I run all the time. Keep trying different brands, or go to one of those fancy shoe places that can fit your feet properly.
        tormeh 12y ago
        You probably know this, but soft surfaces are a lot better than hard ones, and be careful when running downhill.
        jfoutz 12y ago
        If you go to a decent running store, they'll record you running on a treadmill. They should show you what your ankles are doing so you can pick shoes to support your feet. Most people aren't biomechanically sound, the ankles roll in or out a bit, this can be mitigated with shoes and inserts. My ankles roll in a lot, with out a fair bit of support, my knees kill me. Also, muscles recover quick but tendons take forever to heal - you're not running from a lion, so you can take your time and experiment with what works for you in a safe way. (it sounds like you are, so good for you)
        matwood 12y ago
        I would check on the shoes and then have a running store look at your stride. I used to hate running because in general it hurt. I tried a bunch of different shoes, settled on Brooks Ghosts, and running is actually a pleasure. I also focus on my stride and work on foot strike, length of stride, etc... Since you're doing the C25K I'm assuming you are not super athletic to start. If you are overweight, you may want do some other cardio until you get your weight down a bit. If it hurts obviously don't do it and find some professional advice. Re-doing days in a training program is fine, everyone has their own pace. Good luck!
    - bcantrill 12y ago
      Try running barefoot on grass (or, if you live near a beach, sand) instead of concrete -- much better on the joints!
      - kazinator 12y ago
        Sure, until you step on something sharp hiding in that grass, like broken glass.
        nl 12y ago
        If that's stopping you, try something like the Merrell Trail Glove or the New Balance Minimus. You get good sharp protection but pretty much zero padding and very minimal heel drop.
      - moron4hire 12y ago
        Barefoot running is mostly just a trade off of one type of injuries for another. And it's not just "use no/special shoes". It requires learning a different way to run. If you run "normally" you're going to severely hurt yourself.
      - lwh 12y ago
        Avoiding road/sidewalk can make a huge difference for beginners.
    - tomsthumb 12y ago
      Random guess from some clown on the other side of the internet, but if I had to guess, one of the following was bothering you: * too quick of ramp up or not enough recovery (it can take a long time to ease into this stuff) * you were running incorrectly, either directly because of bad technique or you had bad technique because of bad posture/stride. many people land hard on their feet or turn one foot out when they run. * you have actual medical problems with your feet or legs that would cause this if you enjoyed it you should really look at different running techniques and make sure your stride is good so you can get back to it! if your posture is bad your stride will almost definitely be bad; you may need to start there.
    - mbubb 12y ago
      This helped me alot with pain in shins and calfs: http://www.prevention.com/fitness/strength-training/foam-roller-strengthen-muscles-and-relieve-pain http://www.prevention.com/fitness/strength-training/foam-rol...
    - Hasu 12y ago
      Can I ask what kind of shoes you were wearing, and if you tried other shoes? Have you ever tried running barefoot? When I started running, I wore shoes, and my feet hurt all the time. I stopped wearing shoes, and the foot pain stopped, too. I've since found shoes I can wear when it's cold/wet that don't hurt, but running barefoot is still my go-to style. I think normal running shoes are probably fine for most people, but I benefited quite a lot from running without shoes at all.
      - 001sky 12y ago
        Not to nitpick, but a couple of comments: The ounce of truth is that feet (in general) need to be strengthened. YOu can do fun stuf like walking on the beach, on gravel roads, or proper rock climbing, or balance beam work. All of which iwll work to strenghten your feet. What's funny is once your feet are strong, shoes have little to do with it.[1] The inverse is not true - weak feet in barefoot shoes - is likely to create a problem. Barefoot style shoes may be useful for some people with strong feet, but they are a poor substitute for developing strong feet in the first-place. And they can be outright dangerous for people with weak feet and poor balance, or people subjecting themselves to long-distance or endurance situations. Whereas a trail-running shoe used in a hiking application is a better, safer, and more useful piece of gear. Lastly, one nice feature that has come out in the recent years is the ability to get the right (so called) drop, in a variety of styles of shoe. And shoes that are either too angled or too 'flat' will present additional challenges, but expecially people with weak feet. The footbed angle needs to be selected based on application. [1] They can still hurt you, but strong feet in good shoes tend to be fine.
    - leetNightshade 12y ago
      What kind of shoes were you using? People have unique feet, so you may need to be fitted. Find a running store and sit down with an employee to find running shoes that will best suit your feet.
    - hsitz 12y ago
      Almost everyone has problems when they first start running, and these become worse the older you get. The good thing, though, is that most people can work through the initial period if they do it right. I was a runner on cross county and track teams in high school, but basically went thirty years after that without running regularly. I would often start up for a few weeks in the summers, then peter out. As I aged into mid 40's, found that I was getting injuries when starting out, and they didn't go away. I tore my calf muscle at age 45 (trying to imitate Usain Bolt), and that injury stuck with me for several years; I thought I'd probably never be able to run pain-free again. Then a few years ago (2011) I started running and took everything more slowly, both mileage and pace. I actually started out just doing hikes in nearby mountains, since my calf injury made running painful but hiking/walking was fine. I ran a little bit later that year, things went okay but I still caused myself some injuries because I always wanted to try and run faster. The same thing happened in 2012, although I ended up running my first marathon late that year. It was painful and my persisting Achilles/calf injury was always present, at least in a small degree. In early 2013 I started running again and threw all thoughts of fast pace out the window, and paid close attention to pains, backing off and sometimes taking time off until some niggling pain went away. I started running more often, five or six days a week, which paradoxically helped. Yes, you generally need more recovery time as you age, but if you keep your runs on the slow side and don't tax your body as much, running every day can be easier and more injury-free than running just a few times a week. I have talked to others with same experience. I ended up qualifying for Boston Marathon last fall, proving that you don't need to train fast or hard to race fast (in fact best training for marathon is much slower than most people think). And this year I've run the Boston Maraton, a 50 mile mountain trail race, and I'll be logging well over 2,000 miles for the year (i.e., averaging 45 miles per week). I have heard similar stories from many runners I know. "Injury prone" is very often a tag that attaches to any person who tries to start running too many miles or who tries to run them too fast. Since most people try to start running that way -- trying to do too much too soon -- most people end up being "injury prone". Instead, start out slow, walking most of the miles if you want, and ramp up very slowly. I've gone from being injury prone to being injury free, mostly because I know the sorts of things that would cause me injury and I avoid doing them. The good thing is that once you've slowly ramped your body up to a given level, say for me 50 miles/week at pace around 9:00 to 10:00 per mile, my body is rock solid. I'd have to be careful if I wanted to increase mileage or speed, but if I just want to keep running at level my body is acclimated to the odds of injury are very low. And the pleasure when running is very high.
    - nicklaf 12y ago
      According to Wikipedia, 10% of all people get what's called "Plantar Fasciitis" at some point. In my late teens, I began to have very bad bouts of this syndrome, whenever I sprinted. The more I ignored the pain, the longer it would take to heal. In my early 20's, I suddenly took up running--eventually ratcheting up my route to 7 miles--after being somewhat sedentary for a couple years. The result of this was perhaps the worst case of Plantar Fasciitis I'd ever developed. Shortly after, I visited an expensive shoe store downtown, and explained my problem to the salesman. He recommended a pair of high-end Asics, in the price range of $80-$120. I believe the pair had the title "gel evolution" in it somewhere. He also laced them up a special way. Whenever I use them, I maintain this special lacing, and always have to carefully tighten them just enough so that my feet still have enough flexibility to bend my foot without constricting it or cutting of circulation. These shoes provided incredible arch support, being manufactured with a great deal of material surrounding the ankle and the sole, but while also being made of flexible material in the rest of the shoe. (Note that the shoes I'd been wearing when I injured myself were incredibly cheap, and had virtually no arch support). To further enhance the arch support, I also replaced the soles with some fairly thick "Superfeet" soles, which are rather stiff and are curved to rise where your arches are. Since then, for the last 5 years, I've been running on a daily (or at least weekly) basis--the problem has never come back, even though I seem genetically predisposed to the syndrome. Having excellent shoes makes all the difference. Later on, I picked up a pair of Asics from Nordstrom Rack, at a great price (under $50). These were much cheaper (instead of having "Gel Evolution" in the title, they were just called "Oasis"). These have worked just as well for me, although I suspect that my continuing foot health can also partially be attributed to the muscle strengthening of my feet, as well as good form. (When you are still in pain, be very careful not to continue running if you feel like you need to modify your gait in order to avoid the pain ("limping"). This can result in injuring yourself in a new, different way, such as your knees!) By the way, I highly recommend jogging or running, in general. I wouldn't be the person I am today without it, since it is often when I am outside, running, when I come up with the best ideas. I suspect this has something to do with the time-scale of the activity (lasting long enough for sustained thought), the freedom for the mind to roam (since exercising is not mentally taxing), and not the least due to the increased oxygen in your system. If you run often enough, you begin to become addicted, to the point where you feel "high".
    - dustingetz 12y ago
      Try a couch-to-5k program that will ease you into things without getting you hurt: http://www.reddit.com/r/c25k http://www.reddit.com/r/c25k
    - perlpimp 12y ago
      it can be related to diet at least it was for me. increase in protein and fruits and getting rid of starchy foods gave me a leg up on it - not right away after adjusting your diet it can take some time to feel better. Gradual acceleration too can help. Speed walking may be the next step, at least it was for my dad.
  - TulliusCicero 12y ago
    It seems like the distinguishing factor is intensity, so it's likely you could substitute in some other higher-intensity workout that may be easier on the joints, like swimming.
    - spudlyo 12y ago
      An elliptical trainer also works well for getting the heart pumping without hurting the joints.
      - kazinator 12y ago
        But "getting the heart pumping" isn't the same as improving "age-related deterioration in walking economy".
    - soperj 12y ago
      For my money, skating is easily the easiest on joints for high intensity exercise.
      - ams6110 12y ago
        Falling on the ice is pretty rough though. If you're starting out, wear hockey pants and elbow pads. And maybe a helmet.
        soperj 12y ago
        Better than falling on cement, you slide.
      - ams6110 12y ago
        Falling on the ice is pretty rough though. If you're starting out, wear hockey pants and elbow pads. And maybe a helmet.
increment_i 12y ago
After 30 years of running, I can attest to the irreversible damage caused to knees, shins, and other joints and ligaments due to running on paved and other man made surfaces. A good alternative as you get up in years is swimming and/or cycling or recumbent biking.
- chatmasta 12y ago
  I ran 4 years of D1 cross country. Can confirm. The oft-repeated trope is "concrete is 12x harder than soft surface grass." Not sure how true that is or how the physics work, but stay away from roads. Run on the dirt on the side of them.
  - dazc 12y ago
    And also avoid running downhill.
    - elwell 12y ago
      Yes, running uphill is a better workout and it feels better on the knees.
    - redgrange 12y ago
      why? downhills are free.
      - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
        Not on your knees. Downhill running (and hiking) is also more anaerobic (stopping your self from falling) than aerobic (working to move up).
        chatmasta 12y ago
        If you're stopping yourself from falling when running downhill, you're doing it wrong. You should be "leaning into" the hill, which is counterintuitive and feels like you're going to fall, but is way better for your knees and also faster than stopping yourself.
mbubb 12y ago
Interesting... I am approaching 50 and have noticed a slight reduction in mobility. I have recently read articles about certain markers of mortality (or is morbitity the word here?) - like the ability to get up from the ground without using arms... or trying not to sit too much during the day. or trying to walk 10,000 steps (according to that dubious android app). Particularly the 'idea of getting up from the floor without use of arms' made me think of certain simple motions that are hard for me. There is a Korean buddhist practice of 108 bows - I recently tried and got to about 25. (not just Korean - I should have said I learned it in a Korean context) I am disturbed by the idea that there will come a day where I cant do "x" anymore, where x is running, drinking guinness or some other such activity. Recently bought a block of training sessions at a gym and discovered stretching with the aid of hard plastic tubes or rollers that help stretch out areas of the body that are a bit hard to stretch otherwise. Hip flexors, trapezius (sp?), etc. This has greatly improved my mobility and has helped me do things which were hard to do before (shoulder presses, running) without pain. Reading this article it made me think of how walking alone might not stretch out muscles in the same way as running (or swimming, rowing, etc). "But researchers and older people themselves also have noted that walking ability tends to decline with age. Older people whose primary exercise is walking often start walking more slowly and with greater difficulty as the years pass, fatiguing more easily." They don't explicitly talk about flexibilty and running but some form of stretching is somewhat implied. It might be interesting to see those possible correlations. And I thought of the octo- (and maybe nono-) genarian Koreans who would briskly walk by me on the small mountains in Seoul on their way to a temple to throw down a few bows...
- justrudd 12y ago
  If anyone wants a quick mobility routine... http://phraktured.net/molding-mobility.html http://phraktured.net/molding-mobility.html I do a full round of the mobility work (15 reps and not the warmup section) every morning within 15 minutes of getting out of bed. It has done wonders for my mobility, and my attitude in the morning (not a morning person and doing this makes me less grumpy).
  - swah 12y ago
    Another exercise that is in vogue these days is foam rolling. I'm trying to see how it helps, but I'm not sure what kinds of changes I'd notice and after how many sessions.
kolev 12y ago
Didn't know that Sardinians and Okinawans were all runners...
plg 12y ago
isn't running absolutely horrible for one's joints (e.g. knees)? not to mention the bowel issues
- kolev 12y ago
  Cartilage is one of the few tissues that is not known to regenerate.
- k-mcgrady 12y ago
  The joints issue was my first thought too. Could you explain the bowel point though? How does running effect this?
  - kolev 12y ago
    Runner's diarrhea [0]. [0] http://www.mayoclinic.org/runners-diarrhea/expert-answers/faq-20058107 http://www.mayoclinic.org/runners-diarrhea/expert-answers/fa...
    - k-mcgrady 12y ago
      Interesting, thanks.
- pg314 12y ago
  AFAIK there is no evidence that running is bad for the knees. There is not enough research to draw firm conclusions, but a Stanford study (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2556152/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2556152/) didn't find a higher incidence of osteoarthritis in runners (20%) vs non-runners (32%) after 18 years of running. There is selection bias in this study since the runners were self-selected. The book 'Which comes first, cardio or weights' from A. Hutchinson offers one hypothesis in which running might protect the knees: by limiting weight gain with advancing age. Less weight means less stress on the joints.
SCAQTony 12y ago
NOPE - Show me a runner who is 50 and he looks like 70. Show a swimmer who is 70 and he looks like 50. At late middle age running is dangerous.
- kazinator 12y ago
  Ah, the 70 at 50 problem is due to years of roaming around outdoors without using sunscreen, not due to running.
pc2g4d 12y ago
The conclusions drawn in the article don't seem to match the study in question. The participants were not experimentally assigned to be either walkers or runners; rather, they had themselves already selected whether or not to be walkers or runners. This implies that the large proportion of older adults who are neither walkers nor runners are not represented in this study. It also makes it impossible to determine the direction of causality in the correlations discovered. Did people's running cause them to be healthier? Or did people's being healthier cause them to be runners?
- CapitalistCartr 12y ago
  Or neither; people who run regularly tend to practice other healthy habits. Or maybe it's mostly genetics.
  - pc2g4d 12y ago
    Good call---confounders lurk!
- freefrancisco 12y ago
  Even if the study had been conducted properly, this only addresses walking vs running. That running is better than walking doesn't necessarily mean that people should go and start running. How about running vs lifting weights, running vs yoga, or running vs tai chi?
  - kangax 12y ago
    A much more interesting question indeed. There's been numerous (human and animal) studies showing benefits of strength training for elderly. Ergo-log covers [1] those [2] all [3] the time [4]. Then there's evidence [5] suggesting that higher calorie burning is directly associated with reduced death rate. And a specific quote on muscle mass: "A recent theory suggests that developed muscle mass results in considerable emissions of anti-inflammatory and life-extending signal substances. That's why muscular strength is believed to protect against cancer and why strong men are thought to live longer." (links to studies confirming those claims are in the article) The thing about running (if we're talking about traditional jogging) is that it does poor job at burning calories. It's a movement that becomes "familiar" very quick (and so becomes easier, according to Principle of Adaptation) and the one in which it's difficult to increase intensity. You also don't develop muscle mass when jogging, which would contribute to higher metabolic rate and reduced chance of injury. Everything suggests that strength training (whether it's bodyweight, yoga, suspension trainer, or barbells and kettlebells) combined with proper supplementation is the best bang for your buck. [1] http://www.ergo-log.com/over-seventies-benefit-more-from-power-training-than-from-strength-training.html http://www.ergo-log.com/over-seventies-benefit-more-from-pow... [2] http://www.ergo-log.com/combination-strength-training-green-tea-elderly-muscle-mass.html http://www.ergo-log.com/combination-strength-training-green-... [3] http://www.ergo-log.com/over-nineties-still-react-to-strength-training.html http://www.ergo-log.com/over-nineties-still-react-to-strengt... [4] http://www.ergo-log.com/cholesterolmuscles.html http://www.ergo-log.com/cholesterolmuscles.html [5] http://www.ergo-log.com/caloriemortality.html http://www.ergo-log.com/caloriemortality.html
suprgeek 12y ago
We need to be wary of drawing the conclusions drawn here - the big tip-off is this sentence from the paper: "...Runners self-reported running for exercise three or more times per week for at least 30 minutes per bout and for at least six months prior to the study. " A self-reported group of old runners can apparently walk more efficiently than a self-reported group of old walkers...but the runners were fit enough to run and sustain running to begin with!! So older people who were fit enough to sustainably run for 6+ months were fitter than older folks who (were possibly not as fit) but choose to walk? Horrible study...randomly assign fit older people to one or other group, let them run or walk for 6+ months - measure. Reverse the groups again measure.
- lightcatcher 12y ago
  I think the study is assigning health benefits to "being a runner" rather than just "running". It's likely that the selected group of runners who had been running regularly for 6 months had been running regularly for much much longer, perhaps 10+ years. I'm definitely not an expert on the subject, but I don't know how many people are in good enough shape at age 60+ to start running, and I imagine most people running at age 60+ started running no later than their mid 50's. The real thing you want to control for is the health of the runners and the walkers at the time the runners started running.
cdoxsey 12y ago
In 1977 Jim Fixx published the best-selling book "The Complete Book of Running" which popularized running for sport, and purported to demonstrate its health benefits - including increased longevity. 7 years later he died of a heart attack while jogging at the age of 52. His death doesn't mean running is a bad idea - a single anecdote is statistically insignificant - but perhaps it can remind us that nothing we do can guarantee a long and healthy life. All too often we take a mildly correlated statistic, give it a hand-wavy air of "science", and then pronounce it as a set-in-stone moral absolute. How much of the received wisdom about healthy lifestyles that you were taught has been shown to be completely wrong? I don't doubt that in 3 years there will be another New York times article, demonstrating why running is actually terrible for you, and you should never do it no matter what age you are. Growing up in a secular society ancient religions can seem awful strange: why did people worship stone statues and sacrifice to them? Did they really believe all that effort did anything? But perhaps our modern obsession with "healthiness" reflects the same underlying human motivation: incapable of accepting the reality of our own deaths we grasp at anything to try and give ourselves the illusion of control. Is eating an organic strawberry in the hopes of living longer really any different than performing a ritualistic dance in the hopes of bringing rain?
- imanaccount247 12y ago
  >How much of the received wisdom about healthy lifestyles that you were taught has been shown to be completely wrong? Virtually none of it. >I don't doubt that in 3 years there will be another New York times article, demonstrating why running is actually terrible for you, and you should never do it no matter what age you are. I do doubt that. I doubt it very much. >Is eating an organic strawberry in the hopes of living longer really any different than performing a ritualistic dance in the hopes of bringing rain? That seems like really desperately grasping at ways to dismiss things you don't like. Exercise is good, even if you don't want it to be.
  - MrJagil 12y ago
    >> Virtually none of it. What? Milk? Multi-vitamins? Stretching? This stuff is discussed heavily; I do not know enough about these things to weigh in on validity, but if nothing else, these discussions might be very symptomatic.
brisky 12y ago
I am 27 years old and after few months of intensive running I got a spinal disc herniation. It took me about a half a year to recover from it. So my advice is not to rush into running without learning proper techniques and getting guidance from professionals.
dschiptsov 12y ago
Running also has an effect similar to rope skipping - all the inner organs receive a "free massage". It might be that simple.
pandler 12y ago
I'm certainly no scientist nor statistician, but studies like this bother me because of their tiny sample size. They studied 30 people. My understanding was always that you needed more samples than that to reach any kind of statistical significance. Can anyone in the know comment on how realistic or significant it is for a study of this nature to reach any kind of conclusion from a sample size of 30?
curiously 12y ago
lot of the comments sound fatalistic, almost seems like they are invalidating and refuting healthy lifestyles.
dont_be_mean 12y ago
Alan Turing ran to stay calm. He said: "I have such a stressful job that the only way I can get it out of my mind is by running hard."
kolev 12y ago
I think "Stay Young to Run" is a much more truthful.

202 points by papad 12y ago

hf 12y ago

As the article referenced here is rather light, here is the actual paper of the mentioned study (open access): http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0113471 http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjourna..., and a slightly more informative report by the University of Colorado Boulder, http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2014/11/20/running-really-can-keep-you-young-says-cu-boulder-humboldt-state-study http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2014/11/20/running-rea.... Conclusion from the paper: Running mitigates the age-related deterioration of walking economy whereas walking for exercise appears to have minimal effect on the age-related deterioration in walking economy.

Nicholas_C 12y ago
This is great if you're older and have the physical ability to run. I suspect that some of the non-runners can't run.
- melling 12y ago
  I tried jogging over the summer for the first time in years, but my feet started hurting. It would take days to recover. I gave up after 2 months. It feels good but I seem prone to injury.
  - ihsw 12y ago
    Keep doing it, otherwise the recovery period will swing back up high and the health benefits will fall by the wayside. Diet also plays a major role in consistently reducing your recovery time and increasing the quality of life.
  - matwood 12y ago
    What kind of shoes did you have? What kind of surface did you run on? Did you get your stride checked? Did work up to any distance or go all out day 1? Because running looks easy as opposed to say weight lifting, people often do it without thinking. Running is just like any other exercise in that you have to start slow and work up to more. You also have to do some research for proper technique and equipment.
    - melling 12y ago
      New Balance 990. I started with C25k but had to repeat many days. I'm quite out of jogging shape. I run on the sidewalk or road.
      - shepardrtc 12y ago
        You probably need a different brand of shoes. For instance, New Balance works great for me, but I can't ever wear Nike or Avia. Both of those brands really hurt my feet, even though I run all the time. Keep trying different brands, or go to one of those fancy shoe places that can fit your feet properly.
      - tormeh 12y ago
        You probably know this, but soft surfaces are a lot better than hard ones, and be careful when running downhill.
      - jfoutz 12y ago
        If you go to a decent running store, they'll record you running on a treadmill. They should show you what your ankles are doing so you can pick shoes to support your feet. Most people aren't biomechanically sound, the ankles roll in or out a bit, this can be mitigated with shoes and inserts. My ankles roll in a lot, with out a fair bit of support, my knees kill me. Also, muscles recover quick but tendons take forever to heal - you're not running from a lion, so you can take your time and experiment with what works for you in a safe way. (it sounds like you are, so good for you)
      - matwood 12y ago
        I would check on the shoes and then have a running store look at your stride. I used to hate running because in general it hurt. I tried a bunch of different shoes, settled on Brooks Ghosts, and running is actually a pleasure. I also focus on my stride and work on foot strike, length of stride, etc... Since you're doing the C25K I'm assuming you are not super athletic to start. If you are overweight, you may want do some other cardio until you get your weight down a bit. If it hurts obviously don't do it and find some professional advice. Re-doing days in a training program is fine, everyone has their own pace. Good luck!
  - bcantrill 12y ago
    Try running barefoot on grass (or, if you live near a beach, sand) instead of concrete -- much better on the joints!
    - kazinator 12y ago
      Sure, until you step on something sharp hiding in that grass, like broken glass.
      - nl 12y ago
        If that's stopping you, try something like the Merrell Trail Glove or the New Balance Minimus. You get good sharp protection but pretty much zero padding and very minimal heel drop.
    - moron4hire 12y ago
      Barefoot running is mostly just a trade off of one type of injuries for another. And it's not just "use no/special shoes". It requires learning a different way to run. If you run "normally" you're going to severely hurt yourself.
    - lwh 12y ago
      Avoiding road/sidewalk can make a huge difference for beginners.
  - tomsthumb 12y ago
    Random guess from some clown on the other side of the internet, but if I had to guess, one of the following was bothering you: * too quick of ramp up or not enough recovery (it can take a long time to ease into this stuff) * you were running incorrectly, either directly because of bad technique or you had bad technique because of bad posture/stride. many people land hard on their feet or turn one foot out when they run. * you have actual medical problems with your feet or legs that would cause this if you enjoyed it you should really look at different running techniques and make sure your stride is good so you can get back to it! if your posture is bad your stride will almost definitely be bad; you may need to start there.
  - mbubb 12y ago
    This helped me alot with pain in shins and calfs: http://www.prevention.com/fitness/strength-training/foam-roller-strengthen-muscles-and-relieve-pain http://www.prevention.com/fitness/strength-training/foam-rol...
  - Hasu 12y ago
    Can I ask what kind of shoes you were wearing, and if you tried other shoes? Have you ever tried running barefoot? When I started running, I wore shoes, and my feet hurt all the time. I stopped wearing shoes, and the foot pain stopped, too. I've since found shoes I can wear when it's cold/wet that don't hurt, but running barefoot is still my go-to style. I think normal running shoes are probably fine for most people, but I benefited quite a lot from running without shoes at all.
    - 001sky 12y ago
      Not to nitpick, but a couple of comments: The ounce of truth is that feet (in general) need to be strengthened. YOu can do fun stuf like walking on the beach, on gravel roads, or proper rock climbing, or balance beam work. All of which iwll work to strenghten your feet. What's funny is once your feet are strong, shoes have little to do with it.[1] The inverse is not true - weak feet in barefoot shoes - is likely to create a problem. Barefoot style shoes may be useful for some people with strong feet, but they are a poor substitute for developing strong feet in the first-place. And they can be outright dangerous for people with weak feet and poor balance, or people subjecting themselves to long-distance or endurance situations. Whereas a trail-running shoe used in a hiking application is a better, safer, and more useful piece of gear. Lastly, one nice feature that has come out in the recent years is the ability to get the right (so called) drop, in a variety of styles of shoe. And shoes that are either too angled or too 'flat' will present additional challenges, but expecially people with weak feet. The footbed angle needs to be selected based on application. [1] They can still hurt you, but strong feet in good shoes tend to be fine.
  - leetNightshade 12y ago
    What kind of shoes were you using? People have unique feet, so you may need to be fitted. Find a running store and sit down with an employee to find running shoes that will best suit your feet.
  - hsitz 12y ago
    Almost everyone has problems when they first start running, and these become worse the older you get. The good thing, though, is that most people can work through the initial period if they do it right. I was a runner on cross county and track teams in high school, but basically went thirty years after that without running regularly. I would often start up for a few weeks in the summers, then peter out. As I aged into mid 40's, found that I was getting injuries when starting out, and they didn't go away. I tore my calf muscle at age 45 (trying to imitate Usain Bolt), and that injury stuck with me for several years; I thought I'd probably never be able to run pain-free again. Then a few years ago (2011) I started running and took everything more slowly, both mileage and pace. I actually started out just doing hikes in nearby mountains, since my calf injury made running painful but hiking/walking was fine. I ran a little bit later that year, things went okay but I still caused myself some injuries because I always wanted to try and run faster. The same thing happened in 2012, although I ended up running my first marathon late that year. It was painful and my persisting Achilles/calf injury was always present, at least in a small degree. In early 2013 I started running again and threw all thoughts of fast pace out the window, and paid close attention to pains, backing off and sometimes taking time off until some niggling pain went away. I started running more often, five or six days a week, which paradoxically helped. Yes, you generally need more recovery time as you age, but if you keep your runs on the slow side and don't tax your body as much, running every day can be easier and more injury-free than running just a few times a week. I have talked to others with same experience. I ended up qualifying for Boston Marathon last fall, proving that you don't need to train fast or hard to race fast (in fact best training for marathon is much slower than most people think). And this year I've run the Boston Maraton, a 50 mile mountain trail race, and I'll be logging well over 2,000 miles for the year (i.e., averaging 45 miles per week). I have heard similar stories from many runners I know. "Injury prone" is very often a tag that attaches to any person who tries to start running too many miles or who tries to run them too fast. Since most people try to start running that way -- trying to do too much too soon -- most people end up being "injury prone". Instead, start out slow, walking most of the miles if you want, and ramp up very slowly. I've gone from being injury prone to being injury free, mostly because I know the sorts of things that would cause me injury and I avoid doing them. The good thing is that once you've slowly ramped your body up to a given level, say for me 50 miles/week at pace around 9:00 to 10:00 per mile, my body is rock solid. I'd have to be careful if I wanted to increase mileage or speed, but if I just want to keep running at level my body is acclimated to the odds of injury are very low. And the pleasure when running is very high.
  - nicklaf 12y ago
    According to Wikipedia, 10% of all people get what's called "Plantar Fasciitis" at some point. In my late teens, I began to have very bad bouts of this syndrome, whenever I sprinted. The more I ignored the pain, the longer it would take to heal. In my early 20's, I suddenly took up running--eventually ratcheting up my route to 7 miles--after being somewhat sedentary for a couple years. The result of this was perhaps the worst case of Plantar Fasciitis I'd ever developed. Shortly after, I visited an expensive shoe store downtown, and explained my problem to the salesman. He recommended a pair of high-end Asics, in the price range of $80-$120. I believe the pair had the title "gel evolution" in it somewhere. He also laced them up a special way. Whenever I use them, I maintain this special lacing, and always have to carefully tighten them just enough so that my feet still have enough flexibility to bend my foot without constricting it or cutting of circulation. These shoes provided incredible arch support, being manufactured with a great deal of material surrounding the ankle and the sole, but while also being made of flexible material in the rest of the shoe. (Note that the shoes I'd been wearing when I injured myself were incredibly cheap, and had virtually no arch support). To further enhance the arch support, I also replaced the soles with some fairly thick "Superfeet" soles, which are rather stiff and are curved to rise where your arches are. Since then, for the last 5 years, I've been running on a daily (or at least weekly) basis--the problem has never come back, even though I seem genetically predisposed to the syndrome. Having excellent shoes makes all the difference. Later on, I picked up a pair of Asics from Nordstrom Rack, at a great price (under $50). These were much cheaper (instead of having "Gel Evolution" in the title, they were just called "Oasis"). These have worked just as well for me, although I suspect that my continuing foot health can also partially be attributed to the muscle strengthening of my feet, as well as good form. (When you are still in pain, be very careful not to continue running if you feel like you need to modify your gait in order to avoid the pain ("limping"). This can result in injuring yourself in a new, different way, such as your knees!) By the way, I highly recommend jogging or running, in general. I wouldn't be the person I am today without it, since it is often when I am outside, running, when I come up with the best ideas. I suspect this has something to do with the time-scale of the activity (lasting long enough for sustained thought), the freedom for the mind to roam (since exercising is not mentally taxing), and not the least due to the increased oxygen in your system. If you run often enough, you begin to become addicted, to the point where you feel "high".
  - dustingetz 12y ago
    Try a couch-to-5k program that will ease you into things without getting you hurt: http://www.reddit.com/r/c25k http://www.reddit.com/r/c25k
  - perlpimp 12y ago
    it can be related to diet at least it was for me. increase in protein and fruits and getting rid of starchy foods gave me a leg up on it - not right away after adjusting your diet it can take some time to feel better. Gradual acceleration too can help. Speed walking may be the next step, at least it was for my dad.
- TulliusCicero 12y ago
  It seems like the distinguishing factor is intensity, so it's likely you could substitute in some other higher-intensity workout that may be easier on the joints, like swimming.
  - spudlyo 12y ago
    An elliptical trainer also works well for getting the heart pumping without hurting the joints.
    - kazinator 12y ago
      But "getting the heart pumping" isn't the same as improving "age-related deterioration in walking economy".
  - soperj 12y ago
    For my money, skating is easily the easiest on joints for high intensity exercise.
    - ams6110 12y ago
      Falling on the ice is pretty rough though. If you're starting out, wear hockey pants and elbow pads. And maybe a helmet.
      - soperj 12y ago
        Better than falling on cement, you slide.
    - ams6110 12y ago
      Falling on the ice is pretty rough though. If you're starting out, wear hockey pants and elbow pads. And maybe a helmet.

increment_i 12y ago

After 30 years of running, I can attest to the irreversible damage caused to knees, shins, and other joints and ligaments due to running on paved and other man made surfaces. A good alternative as you get up in years is swimming and/or cycling or recumbent biking.

chatmasta 12y ago
I ran 4 years of D1 cross country. Can confirm. The oft-repeated trope is "concrete is 12x harder than soft surface grass." Not sure how true that is or how the physics work, but stay away from roads. Run on the dirt on the side of them.
- dazc 12y ago
  And also avoid running downhill.
  - elwell 12y ago
    Yes, running uphill is a better workout and it feels better on the knees.
  - redgrange 12y ago
    why? downhills are free.
    - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
      Not on your knees. Downhill running (and hiking) is also more anaerobic (stopping your self from falling) than aerobic (working to move up).
      - chatmasta 12y ago
        If you're stopping yourself from falling when running downhill, you're doing it wrong. You should be "leaning into" the hill, which is counterintuitive and feels like you're going to fall, but is way better for your knees and also faster than stopping yourself.

mbubb 12y ago

Interesting... I am approaching 50 and have noticed a slight reduction in mobility. I have recently read articles about certain markers of mortality (or is morbitity the word here?) - like the ability to get up from the ground without using arms... or trying not to sit too much during the day. or trying to walk 10,000 steps (according to that dubious android app). Particularly the 'idea of getting up from the floor without use of arms' made me think of certain simple motions that are hard for me. There is a Korean buddhist practice of 108 bows - I recently tried and got to about 25. (not just Korean - I should have said I learned it in a Korean context) I am disturbed by the idea that there will come a day where I cant do "x" anymore, where x is running, drinking guinness or some other such activity. Recently bought a block of training sessions at a gym and discovered stretching with the aid of hard plastic tubes or rollers that help stretch out areas of the body that are a bit hard to stretch otherwise. Hip flexors, trapezius (sp?), etc. This has greatly improved my mobility and has helped me do things which were hard to do before (shoulder presses, running) without pain. Reading this article it made me think of how walking alone might not stretch out muscles in the same way as running (or swimming, rowing, etc). "But researchers and older people themselves also have noted that walking ability tends to decline with age. Older people whose primary exercise is walking often start walking more slowly and with greater difficulty as the years pass, fatiguing more easily." They don't explicitly talk about flexibilty and running but some form of stretching is somewhat implied. It might be interesting to see those possible correlations. And I thought of the octo- (and maybe nono-) genarian Koreans who would briskly walk by me on the small mountains in Seoul on their way to a temple to throw down a few bows...

justrudd 12y ago
If anyone wants a quick mobility routine... http://phraktured.net/molding-mobility.html http://phraktured.net/molding-mobility.html I do a full round of the mobility work (15 reps and not the warmup section) every morning within 15 minutes of getting out of bed. It has done wonders for my mobility, and my attitude in the morning (not a morning person and doing this makes me less grumpy).
- swah 12y ago
  Another exercise that is in vogue these days is foam rolling. I'm trying to see how it helps, but I'm not sure what kinds of changes I'd notice and after how many sessions.

kolev 12y ago

Didn't know that Sardinians and Okinawans were all runners...

plg 12y ago

isn't running absolutely horrible for one's joints (e.g. knees)? not to mention the bowel issues

kolev 12y ago
Cartilage is one of the few tissues that is not known to regenerate.
k-mcgrady 12y ago
The joints issue was my first thought too. Could you explain the bowel point though? How does running effect this?
- kolev 12y ago
  Runner's diarrhea [0]. [0] http://www.mayoclinic.org/runners-diarrhea/expert-answers/faq-20058107 http://www.mayoclinic.org/runners-diarrhea/expert-answers/fa...
  - k-mcgrady 12y ago
    Interesting, thanks.
pg314 12y ago
AFAIK there is no evidence that running is bad for the knees. There is not enough research to draw firm conclusions, but a Stanford study (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2556152/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2556152/) didn't find a higher incidence of osteoarthritis in runners (20%) vs non-runners (32%) after 18 years of running. There is selection bias in this study since the runners were self-selected. The book 'Which comes first, cardio or weights' from A. Hutchinson offers one hypothesis in which running might protect the knees: by limiting weight gain with advancing age. Less weight means less stress on the joints.

SCAQTony 12y ago

NOPE - Show me a runner who is 50 and he looks like 70. Show a swimmer who is 70 and he looks like 50. At late middle age running is dangerous.

kazinator 12y ago
Ah, the 70 at 50 problem is due to years of roaming around outdoors without using sunscreen, not due to running.

pc2g4d 12y ago

The conclusions drawn in the article don't seem to match the study in question. The participants were not experimentally assigned to be either walkers or runners; rather, they had themselves already selected whether or not to be walkers or runners. This implies that the large proportion of older adults who are neither walkers nor runners are not represented in this study. It also makes it impossible to determine the direction of causality in the correlations discovered. Did people's running cause them to be healthier? Or did people's being healthier cause them to be runners?

CapitalistCartr 12y ago
Or neither; people who run regularly tend to practice other healthy habits. Or maybe it's mostly genetics.
- pc2g4d 12y ago
  Good call---confounders lurk!
freefrancisco 12y ago
Even if the study had been conducted properly, this only addresses walking vs running. That running is better than walking doesn't necessarily mean that people should go and start running. How about running vs lifting weights, running vs yoga, or running vs tai chi?
- kangax 12y ago
  A much more interesting question indeed. There's been numerous (human and animal) studies showing benefits of strength training for elderly. Ergo-log covers [1] those [2] all [3] the time [4]. Then there's evidence [5] suggesting that higher calorie burning is directly associated with reduced death rate. And a specific quote on muscle mass: "A recent theory suggests that developed muscle mass results in considerable emissions of anti-inflammatory and life-extending signal substances. That's why muscular strength is believed to protect against cancer and why strong men are thought to live longer." (links to studies confirming those claims are in the article) The thing about running (if we're talking about traditional jogging) is that it does poor job at burning calories. It's a movement that becomes "familiar" very quick (and so becomes easier, according to Principle of Adaptation) and the one in which it's difficult to increase intensity. You also don't develop muscle mass when jogging, which would contribute to higher metabolic rate and reduced chance of injury. Everything suggests that strength training (whether it's bodyweight, yoga, suspension trainer, or barbells and kettlebells) combined with proper supplementation is the best bang for your buck. [1] http://www.ergo-log.com/over-seventies-benefit-more-from-power-training-than-from-strength-training.html http://www.ergo-log.com/over-seventies-benefit-more-from-pow... [2] http://www.ergo-log.com/combination-strength-training-green-tea-elderly-muscle-mass.html http://www.ergo-log.com/combination-strength-training-green-... [3] http://www.ergo-log.com/over-nineties-still-react-to-strength-training.html http://www.ergo-log.com/over-nineties-still-react-to-strengt... [4] http://www.ergo-log.com/cholesterolmuscles.html http://www.ergo-log.com/cholesterolmuscles.html [5] http://www.ergo-log.com/caloriemortality.html http://www.ergo-log.com/caloriemortality.html

suprgeek 12y ago

We need to be wary of drawing the conclusions drawn here - the big tip-off is this sentence from the paper: "...Runners self-reported running for exercise three or more times per week for at least 30 minutes per bout and for at least six months prior to the study. " A self-reported group of old runners can apparently walk more efficiently than a self-reported group of old walkers...but the runners were fit enough to run and sustain running to begin with!! So older people who were fit enough to sustainably run for 6+ months were fitter than older folks who (were possibly not as fit) but choose to walk? Horrible study...randomly assign fit older people to one or other group, let them run or walk for 6+ months - measure. Reverse the groups again measure.

lightcatcher 12y ago
I think the study is assigning health benefits to "being a runner" rather than just "running". It's likely that the selected group of runners who had been running regularly for 6 months had been running regularly for much much longer, perhaps 10+ years. I'm definitely not an expert on the subject, but I don't know how many people are in good enough shape at age 60+ to start running, and I imagine most people running at age 60+ started running no later than their mid 50's. The real thing you want to control for is the health of the runners and the walkers at the time the runners started running.

cdoxsey 12y ago

In 1977 Jim Fixx published the best-selling book "The Complete Book of Running" which popularized running for sport, and purported to demonstrate its health benefits - including increased longevity. 7 years later he died of a heart attack while jogging at the age of 52. His death doesn't mean running is a bad idea - a single anecdote is statistically insignificant - but perhaps it can remind us that nothing we do can guarantee a long and healthy life. All too often we take a mildly correlated statistic, give it a hand-wavy air of "science", and then pronounce it as a set-in-stone moral absolute. How much of the received wisdom about healthy lifestyles that you were taught has been shown to be completely wrong? I don't doubt that in 3 years there will be another New York times article, demonstrating why running is actually terrible for you, and you should never do it no matter what age you are. Growing up in a secular society ancient religions can seem awful strange: why did people worship stone statues and sacrifice to them? Did they really believe all that effort did anything? But perhaps our modern obsession with "healthiness" reflects the same underlying human motivation: incapable of accepting the reality of our own deaths we grasp at anything to try and give ourselves the illusion of control. Is eating an organic strawberry in the hopes of living longer really any different than performing a ritualistic dance in the hopes of bringing rain?

imanaccount247 12y ago
>How much of the received wisdom about healthy lifestyles that you were taught has been shown to be completely wrong? Virtually none of it. >I don't doubt that in 3 years there will be another New York times article, demonstrating why running is actually terrible for you, and you should never do it no matter what age you are. I do doubt that. I doubt it very much. >Is eating an organic strawberry in the hopes of living longer really any different than performing a ritualistic dance in the hopes of bringing rain? That seems like really desperately grasping at ways to dismiss things you don't like. Exercise is good, even if you don't want it to be.
- MrJagil 12y ago
  >> Virtually none of it. What? Milk? Multi-vitamins? Stretching? This stuff is discussed heavily; I do not know enough about these things to weigh in on validity, but if nothing else, these discussions might be very symptomatic.

brisky 12y ago

I am 27 years old and after few months of intensive running I got a spinal disc herniation. It took me about a half a year to recover from it. So my advice is not to rush into running without learning proper techniques and getting guidance from professionals.

dschiptsov 12y ago

Running also has an effect similar to rope skipping - all the inner organs receive a "free massage". It might be that simple.

pandler 12y ago

I'm certainly no scientist nor statistician, but studies like this bother me because of their tiny sample size. They studied 30 people. My understanding was always that you needed more samples than that to reach any kind of statistical significance. Can anyone in the know comment on how realistic or significant it is for a study of this nature to reach any kind of conclusion from a sample size of 30?

curiously 12y ago

lot of the comments sound fatalistic, almost seems like they are invalidating and refuting healthy lifestyles.

dont_be_mean 12y ago

Alan Turing ran to stay calm. He said: "I have such a stressful job that the only way I can get it out of my mind is by running hard."

kolev 12y ago

I think "Stay Young to Run" is a much more truthful.