PBS’s The Truth About Exercise

Standard

“The chair is a killer.”
– Michael Mosley, PBS, The Truth About Exercise

Attention all exercise geeks and anyone fond of learning about the ins and outs of regaining or maintaining your health: You must check out the new series from PBS called The Truth About Exercise with Michael Mosley.  (Actually, it seems that each episode has it’s own title “… with Michael Mosley.”)  I watched the first episode and it’s tremendously interesting.  The second episode is titled “Eat, Fast and Live Longer.”  I just started it.

(Thanks to my mom for telling me about this show.)

Mosley uses himself as an experimental subject as he delves into some of the following topics:

  • How to reduce your insulin response with 3 minutes of (very) intense exercise per week.
  • How and why exercise can help remove fat from the blood stream.
  • The very deadly perils of sitting too much.
  • Why some people are “non-responders” to some aspects of exercise (and why exercise is still healthy for “non-responders.)

I know very little about Mosley but that he seems to be a fairly common sort of guy who’s not in particularly good shape.  He has the questions about his health that many of us have.  He talks to various exercise physiologists, nutrition scientists and coaches as he searches for answers and examines several exercise myths.  I love it because much of what he discovers is informed by the latest science.  He’s not rehashing the “common knowledge” (which is commonly stale and fairly inaccurate.)  It’s a very entertaining show that moves quickly and isn’t overly science-y.  It has a pretty decent soundtrack as well.  I highly recommend it to anyone reading this right now.  Previews of each episode are below.  Go here to watch the full episodes.

Watch The Truth About Exercise with Michael Mosley – Promotion on PBS. See more from Michael Mosley.

Watch Guts with Michael Mosley – Preview on PBS. See more from Michael Mosley.

Check out Kinetic Revolution

Standard

If you’re a runner, or triathlete or if you’re a therapist or trainer who works with runners and or triathletes, then you should have a look at Kinetic Revolution. It’s an English site run Neil Scholes and James Dunne. Between them they have fairly impressive credentials as both athletes, coaches and rehab specialists.

For a fee, Kinetic Revolution offers coaching on running technique, flexibility, strength and other topics. Online courses on running technique and strength are also available.

I’ve been digging through the blog recently and I’ve found a lot of thoughtful, informative stuff.  Most recently I read through ITB or Not ITB… That is the Question.  As you might guess it’s about IT band syndrome. I like the discussion on why the foam roller probably won’t help you get over IT band troubles.  To that point the article discusses that in fact your IT band pain probably isn’t an IT band problem, but rather is a problem with some of the muscles that attach to or near the IT band.  For more good information, check out the lively comments following the article.

The big picture here is that if you’re a runner/triathlete and/or you’re geekily into reading about this stuff like me, you’ll find a lot of great information at Kinetic Revolution.

Running Awareness: Cadence, Foot Placement, Lean

Standard

I just started the new year with a run in the cold with my dog.  It was a good run and I can report that I’ve tuned into something(s) important. I was aware of several gait-related details that I adjusted and played with, those being cadence, foot placement and the degree to which I lean while running.  Why was any of this on my mind?

Cadence

First, upon reading the excellent Anatomy for Runners I’ve become more aware of my running cadence aka how often my feet hit the ground.  The author Jay Dicharry discusses a popular notion that the ideal cadence is about 170-180 RPM.  I’ve run with a metronome a few times to investigate this idea and compare this range to my normal cadence.  Turns out my cadence was quite a bit slower.  The problem I found when running at  this higher cadence is that my cardiovascular system felt overwhelmed!  Maintaining even the low end of that cadence was very challenging.  Seems that I may have found a simple solution.  Before I get to that, let’s discuss why a quick cadence may be beneficial.

Changing cadence to prevent overstriding

I mentioned in my last post that where your foot lands is very important in running.  You want the foot to land as near to your center of mass as possible, not way out in front of you, a situation also known as overstriding.  Several elite-level running coaches have discussed cadence and foot strike position.  I’ll let their words do my talking.  First, Steve Magness at Science of Running says:

“Then why is everyone in a rage over increasing stride rate? Because as I’ve pointed out before, most recreational runners simply overstride, which artificially creates a very low stride rate. Why? Because the foot lands so far out in front of the Center of Mass that it takes a while for your body to be over it and ready to push off. So, when some running form coach says to increase stride rate to X, what ends up happening is the runner is trying so hard to increase stride rate, he chops his stride a bunch by putting his foot down earlier and landing closer to his center of mass, thus decreasing the overstriding. Nothing particularly wrong with that.

Where we go wrong is in the logic that the stride rate increase is the key. No, it’s not. It’s the elimination of the overstriding. Using the cue to increase stride rate is a way for coaches/runners to reduce the heel striking overstride.”

The key concept here is that it’s not cadence in and of itself that’s so important, but rather by manipulating cadence we can improve the location of where the foot lands.  Pete Larson at Runblogger puts it well when he says:

“In other words, reaching with the leg is bad, and increasing cadence can help us avoid doing that. Let me repeat – overstriding is what we are trying to prevent by manipulating cadence. If you don’t overstride, manipulating cadence might not be wise or necessary.”

Now, you may be asking why is overstriding an issue?  Essentially overstriding is harder on the body.  In contrast, keeping the foot closer to you won’t beat you up so much.  I won’t go into the details but if you’re interested, then please check out Jay Dicharry’s posts on Loading Rate Part 1: What Does it Mean for You and Part 2.  (Part 2 is a very interesting discussion as to why a forefoot, midfoot or heel strike may not matter at all.)

Leaning forward

I’m obviously on the lookout for gait and running mechanics information.  I recently discovered a very good site called Kinetic Revolution. There’s all sorts of very useful science-based information there for runners and triathletes. Among all this wealth of good stuff, I came across the post titled Essentials of Running Mechanics. That post features a video from a South African running coach named Bobby McGee.  (Insert whatever obvious Janis Joplin joke you’d like.) Leaning forward is the first thing McGee discusses.  Through leaning we can go faster or slower: more forward = faster, more upright = slower.

 

Remember earlier I mentioned that this faster cadence was overwhelming my heart and lungs?  At the 1:34 minute of the video McGee discusses this issue. He says to simply get a bit more upright (don’t lean so far forward) to slow down and control the cardiovascular exertion.  I tried it today and it worked perfectly!  I was able to a) maintain proper foot placement under my center of mass by b) speeding up my cadence and c) adjusting my lean so that I was more upright.  The overall result is that I maintained a quick pace and felt good doing it. I felt my glutes working well.  Foot placement felt ideal.  All-and-all I was very pleased with what this small adjustment did for me.

 

The Marathon: Done and Done

Standard

This past Saturday I ran the Denver Rock ‘n’ Roll Marathon–my first marathon. My time was 3:57:15 for an average pace of

Proof that I helped tie up Denver traffic on Saturday.

9:02/mile. (For the record, I beat Paul Ryan’s official marathon time by 4 minutes, 10 seconds. However, in his imagination, he definitely beat me.) This race was a culmination of about 10 years of my overcoming various aches and pains brought on not by running, but by moving–walking, running, standing, lifting, anything else that counts as moving–incorrectly. I’ve overcome these issues and the marathon was a victory lap.

It was definitely a fun experience but it was very tough and fairly uncomfortable. I was very sore and way beyond fatigued by the end of the race.  I’m sore in some unexpected ways. My feet were very beat up it as you might expect. My thighs and hamstrings were plenty sore too which is no surprise.  It’s Tuesday and I’m feeling decent now.

Interestingly, my lateral abdominal muscles are quite sore. I’m fairly certain it’s my external obliques that are sore and this is actually a good thing. It means that I was using them correctly. Part of my pain problems were rooted in incorrect use of my external obliques. Now I know they were put to very good and thorough use yesterday. (For more info on the role of the role of these muscles in running, check out this three-part video series of from the Gait Guys: part 1, part 2, part 3. I’ve been using elements of these videos with some of my clients to very good effect.) I’ll refer back to my run technique in a moment.

Things got tough at mile 18/19. I was about hip deep in the suffering by then. That’s where my pace slowed and I knew hitting my goal time would be very difficult if not impossible. My legs were hurting. The crowds had thinned out a good bit by then and what I knew would be a long lonely stretch lay ahead. That I had about 10 miles to go wasn’t the most joyous thought I’d ever had. I was functioning though and there was no sign of anything like an injury.

Difficulties: nothing major

I’d planned to run with a pace group. There were several pace groups dispersed throughout the event. My goal time was 3:45 and there was a 3:45 pace group. I got to the race very early but I was late getting to my corral. Thus I couldn’t find the 3:45 group. My fault entirely but it wasn’t a disaster, just a bit of a bummer. Got kind of lonely out there, especially at the later miles. Suffering with others is better than suffering alone. Being that I missed my goal time, I can’t help but wonder how my race would’ve gone had I gotten in with the group….

Not much slowed me down but one thing definitely took a little momentum away. I’ve had a little trouble with blisters on my toes mostly on my right foot, only once on my left. Because of this I often tape several of my toes. My mistake was that I taped some of my toes on the left but not all. Not long into the race I felt friction against my left pinky toe. I knew this would probably turn into a sizeable problem well before the race was over. The only solution was to stop, sit down, take off my socks (compression socks which are long and fit tightly thus they’re sort of hard to get back on), remove the tape, get everything back on and resume running. That took a few minutes. I took one bathroom break but other than those stops I kept running.

The final stretch

Brutal is the word I’d use to describe miles 22 through 26.2. There were several short/steep hills on what was a steady false-flat that led back into downtown. (In fact, I’m convinced that during this marathon, the very laws that govern the universe were broken. We started and finished in the same location yet 99/100s of the whole course was uphill. I believe the course was designed by MC Escher.) Four miles to go was A LONG way to go. The idea of stopping to walk just a little was very tantalizing. I knew if I started walking I might not start back running. It was also fairly warm–not hot–but warm enough to add real difficulty to the whole process.

Somewhere around mile 21 I felt a potential hamstring cramp in my right leg. I wasn’t sure if it was an electrolyte issue but I didn’t really think so. I’d taken some salt pills before and during the race and I was consuming fuel containing electrolytes as well. The cramp didn’t really come on until I was crossing Speer Blvd right at about mile 25. I felt that right hamstring start to ball up underneath my right glute. I thought I was done! I thought I was going to have to walk the last mile and I finish well over the four-hour mark. This was about to be a minor disaster. I was fine though. Why?

Earlier I mentioned my glutes, external obliques, and my running technique. I went right back to the running method described in those Gait Guys videos. I focused on lengthening through the hip into the ground and letting the right hip drop away from the right bottom rib as my right foot struck the ground. I did this for a few strides and the cramp simply vanished.

Technique! Technique! Technique! It’s all about proper movement and proper positioning! This is the undisputed key to getting out of pain and performing your best.

What’s next?

I intend to run more marathons.  I’m not sure which one(s) or where.  I want to get faster.  Run Less, Run Faster tells me that since I finished slower than my 5k time predicted I need to work on my endurance.  I definitely want to run with a pace group next time.  (God that was dumb of me to miss the group…)  My shoes (Nike Free 3.0) and nutrition seem solid.

My next race (probably) is the Run the Rocks 5k in October.  Then I’m only doing random, unstructured runs for a while.  I’ll run with my dog then some time this winter I’m going to do one or two track/sprint workouts per week with random longer runs whenever I feel like it.  I’m looking forward to getting into the weight room and working on my clean and press, squat, and deadlift.  For now though I’m very content to not run for a few days.

Just Over A Week ‘Til Race Day

Standard

The marathon is close and I’m feeling it. What does that phrase mean? I’m worn out! A summer of hard training, long runs, fast runs, a brutal trail race and the big 20 mile run Saturday-before-last means the organism that is me is feeling shagged out. My sleep patterns have been off a little lately, I’ve been a bit grumpy, and I’ve had two runs that were tougher and slower than they should’ve been. In other words I’m not in optimal condition.

As they sometimes ask on ESPN, “Is it time to panic?”

I went to a former client and good friend of mine to get his take on my condition. (This guy is a multiple-Ironman competitor and veteran of numerous Olympic distance triathlons, marathons and various very demanding and ugly adventure races.) I told him about all this. His words were, “Congratulations, you’re two weeks out from a marathon. You’ve been training hard. Feeling beat up and tired is completely normal.”

Wonderful! I’m normal! Psychologically, it’s very comforting to have someone who’s gone through this process tell me that all is probably very well. Seems like it’s a good time to discuss exactly what’s going on here and why I might be feeling a bit run over and rundown.

Whether we’re looking at strength training or endurance training, a process known as the General Adaptive (or Adaptation) Syndrome is at work. Rather than try to explain this myself, (I am tired after all) I’ll borrow from Cedric Unholz, a Vancouver-based collegiate strength coach and manual therapist. The following comes from his document, Resistance Training Theory and Adaptation Fundamentals. (Never mind that this is directed at resistance training.  As I said earlier, endurance training processes are essentially the same.)

The Stress-Response Model

The fundamental model underpinning all training and adaptation processes is derived from the ‘General Adaptation Syndrome’ initially outlined by Hans Selye in 1936, and later refined by the same author in 1956. In most training literature this concept is commonly referred to as the ‘supercompensation cycle’.

These models very clearly highlight that training is ultimately about applying appropriate stress to take advantage of the body’s subsequent adaptive responses. Any stimulus/stressor or recovery method, regardless whether acute or chronic in nature, will cause a response that will correspond to the principles of this concept and shape the response curvature. Similarly, a lack or over-application of stimulus will also be accompanied by a corresponding response profile.

In essence, this stress-response model (Figure 2) consists of four phases:

1. ‘Alarm reaction’ following a disruption in homeostasis (e.g. a training stimulus).

2. ‘Resistance’ where the body responds to the stimulus by recovering, repairing itself, and instigating a return towards the initial baseline.

3. ‘Supercompensation’ where the body adapts to the initial stimulus by rebounding above the previous baseline, in order to better cope with the initial disruptive stimulus should it present itself again.

4. ‘Exhaustion’, which could also be termed ‘Detraining’, sees a drop to the initial level of homeostasis (or below) if there is an inappropriate application of following stimulus; whether too much, too soon, or not enough.

Figure 2. The Stress-Response Model based on Hans Selye’s ‘General Adaptation Syndrome’

So in my case, my recent poor runs suggest that I’ve had a little too much stimulation and I was somewhat deep in the alarm phase of this model–somewhere in the A/B range of the curve. The strategy now is to get well into the C part of the curve for the race.

Recovery strategy

The key word here is REST. I need to back off of the running, lifting, cycling, etc. in order to allow for supercompensation. That means lying around a good bit, sleeping in a bit, looking for any opportunity to sit. I’ve also been overeating a bit. I haven’t been too terribly gluttonous but I’ve definitely been taking in more good quality calories.  I’ve also been drinking a bit of delicious tart cherry juice from I got at the local farmer’s market.

Beyond rest and eating, I’ll modify my running plan for the final week before the race. I will likely do a long run on Saturday or Sunday of 6-8 miles and I’ll run it slow and easy. Next week I’ll probably do some speed work early in the week but I’ll cut down the reps. Then the mid-week three mile run at marathon pace sounds about right.

I’ve already cut back my weight workouts and I might do one upper-body focused workout next week but even just working the upper body can tax the whole system, so less is more in this regard.

Finally, if any of this is of interest to you, then definitely have a look at this Running Times article titled How Long Does It Take To Benefit From A Hard Workout? The information here should prove very valuable to anyone trying to strategize their race training.

***UPDATE***

Today I did a 3 mile tempo run and I felt good. I hit my pace without too much discomfort. All seems well.  I believe I’m right where I need to be.

 

Training Update: I’m Running Well.

Standard

My training–particularly my running–is improving very nicely.  I’m getting faster and I’m able to run without pain far more than I’ve been able to in roughly a decade.  I think several factors are at work here:

1)  I’m using my glutes: I’ve mentioned recently (here and here) that I’ve learned a tremendous amount of how to use my glutes to both stabilize my knees and propel me forward.  This has been a huge bit of progress for me.

2)  I’m aware of my arches:  I recently stood on a device called a pedobarograph.  Quite interesting.  It showed me pressure was distributed through my feet as I stood on it.  Turns out my arches were a bit collapsed.  It wasn’t anything terrible but something worth working on.

I’m an advocate of minimal shoe running so I didn’t want to turn to an orthotic insert.  I did a bit of research and found a tremendously helpful article about the three different arches of the feet–not just the one arch most of us think of.  The article described where each arch is on the feet and how to move and perceive the arches.  Unfortunately, the article and the site it came from seem to have vanished from the universe. I plan to do a video demonstrating where these arches are and how to move them.  The video in the next paragraph should be helpful as well.

3)  I’m toeing off:  Along with using my arches, I’m also focusing on using my big toe to help propel me forward.   It’s the last thing I feel on the ground as I drive forward.  I’ve realized that in past years I haven’t been doing a very good job of this. This is a complex thing.  Here’s a video from the Gait Guys that touches on the muscles and the actions that are responsible for good toe and arch mechanics.  (BTW, the Gait Guys put out a lot of detailed info on all things pertaining to gait.  They can also be found at Youtube.  If you’re having problems with your feet, knees, hips, etc. you may find their information very helpful.)

The video is a bit technical but the long and the short of it informs me that the exercise known as the calf raise or heel raise should benefit me.  Specifically the heel raise should help condition the muscles that maintain the arches in my feet (the flexor hallucis brevis, the abductor hallucis, and the tibialis posterior) I’m doing a lot of these daily in the 15-20 rep range.  I’m also jumping rope.

4)  I’m lighter and stronger: I’m under 200 lbs. for the first time in about 10 years.  Less of me always makes running easier.  It’s also a big help in mountainbiking.  Not only am I lighter but my numbers in the gym are pretty decent being that I’m running and biking a lot.  I power cleaned 175 lbs. recently.  My squat is around 225 lbs. for 2 reps (I’d really like to get that number up….  some day).  My deadlift is about 335 lbs. for 2-3 reps.  My pistol squats are improving in terms of range of motion, reps, and technique.  Stronger + lighter = better.

5)  The FIRST plan is working:  I “first” used a Furman Institute of Running and Scientific Training (FIRST) run plan for the Cherry Blossom 10-Miler several years ago.  It was the best race I’ve ever run so I figured I’d use the FIRST half-marathon and marathon plan for my two upcoming races.I like these plans because they have me running only three days per week.  I’m doing a speed workout on the track, middle distance “tempo” run, and a long run.  I’m doing other things on other days of the week, typically lifting and/or cycling or just resting.  Three runs per week is quite a bit less running than is advocated by other plans.  For an explanation of the plan, have a look at Training Science.com.

6)  Beet juice(?):  I’ve mentioned the benefits of beet juice.  Now, I never attribute one outcome to only one factor, but every time I drink beet juice before a run I feel really good.  I go (for me) fast and I’m able to cover (for me) long distances while feeling quite decent.Perhaps this is a nonsensical placebo effect, it’s all in my head and purely psychological.  Guess what: Who cares?  If I think it makes me a better runner then it’s probably making me a better runner.  Hooray for me and my brain.  We shall choose to be happy.

News On Beet Juice, Running & Evolution, Saturated Fat & Cardiovascular Disease

Standard

I’m behind on posting and I’m trying to catch up.  There’s been a lot of interesting information to read in various publications.  If you’re a runner (and probably any other sort of endurance athlete) you definitely need to see some of this.  If you’re listening to government guidelines on saturated fat, then definitely look at the last article.

Beet juice for endurance

A number of articles have appeared lately about beet juice and its benefits for endurance athletes.  Never miss a beet is from Outside Magazine.  The article discusses two studies from Exeter University in England that demonstrated performance benefits for cyclists.  Here are the important details.  (Emphasis added is mine.):

… In 2009, a small study done at England’s Exeter University caught the attention of the fitness world. Researchers discovered that competitive cyclists who drank half a liter (about 16 ounces) of beet juice right before they got on their bikes were able to ride 16 percent longer—a massive gain in a sport where only a few percentage points of improvement can be the difference between first place and fifteenth.

Last June, a larger Exeter study backed up this rather unusual protocol: cyclists who drank half a liter of beet juice for six days were 11 seconds faster over a 2.5-mile course and 45 seconds faster over a 10-mile course. The reason: more oxygen was getting to the athletes’ muscles, thanks to molecules in the juice called nitrates. “The oxygen cost of exercising at a given speed is basically fixed,” says Andrew Jones, a professor of applied physiology at Exeter and lead author of both studies. “Only nitrate ingestion appears to improve efficiency. These effects cannot be achieved by any other known means, including training.”

It works like this: Our bodies convert nitrates into nitric oxide, a gas that causes blood vessels to relax and widen, by a process known as vasodilation. This allows more oxygen-rich blood to flow through the body—and the more oxygen reaches the muscles, the longer they’re able to perform at high intensity. Athletes have tried to trigger vasodilation with various banned substances, including hypertension drugs and erectile-dysfunction medication, for years. It now appears that simply consuming large amounts of vegetables that are high in nitrates, such as spinach, carrots, radishes, and beets—the last of which pack the biggest punch, a whopping 310 grams per 16 ounces of juice—can offer the same performance boost.

The article also discusses beta-alanine supplementation.  I haven’t used beta-alanine but recently I have been playing around with eating and juicing beets.  (I don’t juice a whole beet.  I combine about ¼ beet with other fruits and vegetables.)  I pretty much will never say that one thing causes one other thing, but since I’ve been consuming more beets, my workouts have felt really good.  Also, getting up early has been easier.  Again, I can’t say this is the only factor but I see no reason not to continue gobbling a few beets through the week.

One odd thing about beets is that they color some of your bodily excretions, meaning you may see a red tint in the toilet soon after eating or drinking beet juice.  It was kind of alarming the first time I noticed it.  Turns out it’s normal.  Despite this weird side effect, I’m giving beets a thumbs-up.

Evolution, distance running, and a controversial title for an article

Other articles have discussed the idea that human evolution and distance running are intimately intertwined.  A recent article from Slate Magazine suggests the same thing.  If nothing else, All men can’t jump: Why nearly every sport except long-distance running is fundamentally absurd sounds like fun reading.  From our Achilles tendons, to our teeth, brains, our ability to dissipate heat , gait mechanics, and even the “runner’s high,” the article suggests that we are uniquely and powerfully suited to “persistence hunting,” that is chasing down prey until it’s tired.  I think it’s an interesting theory, though I wonder if some day scientists will ruminate over the connection between our thumbs, evolution, and video games or text messaging.

Overhydration

It’s summer.  It’s hot.  We still run, bike, hike, walk, etc.  How much should we drink?  How often? Do we need to weigh ourselves before and after exercise?  Does dehydration lead directly to heatstroke? Furthermore, have you ever heard of hyponatremia, or what happens to you when you drink too much water.  (FYI, drinking too much can be far more deadly than being dehydrated.)

The issue of hydration is a pendulum that still swings around and there is confusion.  Many of us are growing gills for the amount of water we’re drinking, but this high consumption of water throughout the day seems a fairly recent thing.  Do we really need all this consumption?  How did we manage before plastic bottles?  (Watch an episode of Mad Men and you’ll see the only water anyone drank came from melted ice cubes in their cocktail.  How’d we get out of the 1950s under those circumstances?)

For more information, read the Outside Magazine article Tim Noakes on the serious problem of overhydration in endurance sports. (Why listen to Dr. Noakes?  He’s a leading exercise scientist and he’s just recently written a 439-page book called  Waterlogged: The Serious Problem of Overhydration in Endurance Sports.  He’s a very well informed guy.  All runners should read his superb book Lore of Running.)

The article covers some interesting information including how hunter/gatherers run a lot during a hunt but don’t drink until they’ve caught their prey, the history and marketing of sports drinks, and why a bit of dehydration is nothing to fear.

Here’s some background on why we think we need to drink so much when exercising.  (Emphasis is mine.):

When did we start drinking more water?

Well, the sports drink industry was involved. In 1969 a great American physiologist, David Costill, started new studies. Gatorade was just getting into the market, and he went to them and said, Listen, you produce this product, do you know if it works? Is it of any value? He said, I’ll do the studies and let’s see if it works. His focus was to try and raise money to fund his laboratory. He did the first study where he had people like Amby Burfoot—who writes the foreword for the book and won the 1968 Boston Marathon—not drinking anything. Costill had them run when they drank up to 1.2 liters per hour on the treadmill, and [then run] when they didn’t drink. When they did drink, he showed their body temperatures were much lower and he presumed that was better. But if you ask Amby Burfoot, he said he felt much better when he ran without drinking. Costill assumed then that drinking was good for you, although the study hadn’t really shown that because it wasn’t a performance trial, and all the runners found when they didn’t drink was that there were no problems associated with not drinking. The American College of Sports Medicine asked David Costill to write the first drinking guidelines, which he did in 1975. He said that runners should drink regularly during exercise, which is pretty good advice.

Then, what I discovered, which was really eye-opening, was that a single individual working for the U.S. military decided that water was a tactical weapon. That if the military could be encouraged to drink more during maneuvers, they’d have less heat stroke and less illness and they’d be more productive and could be better soldiers. It was purely his idea. It had no scientific basis at all. Two years later he published a paper supposedly saying that if the US soldiers drank 1.9 liters per hour [64 ounces] when they were exercising in the heat they would perform much better. There was utterly no concrete evidence that that was true. The problem was, his advice was embraced by the U.S. Military. They changed their drinking guidelines to say that you should now drink 1.9 liters per hour. The same people who drew up those guidelines were then invited by the American College of Sports Medicine to get involved with drawing up guidelines for runners.

The essential information first and foremost 1) let thirst be your guide, 2) over drinking is bad, and 3) anything short of severe dehydration won’t kill you.

Evidence on saturated fat and cardiovascular disease

Finally, I’ve mentioned before that perhaps we shouldn’t be as afraid of fat–particularly saturated fat–to the degree that we’ve been told.  We’ve got a little more evidence in that direction.  Saturated fat and cardiovascular disease: the discrepancy between the scientific literature and dietary advice is a recent study from the Netherlands.

Researchers evaluated three reports from leading U.S. and European dietary advisory committees with results of studies on dietary fat and cardiovascular disease as they were presented in the referenced articles.  (These committees are the sort that tell us to eat less fat for fear of contracting such ailments as heart disease.)  The findings indicate that the advice given by the committees doesn’t reflect the evidence.  The concluding statement of the abstract of the study says, “Results and conclusions about saturated fat intake in relation to cardiovascular disease, from leading advisory committees, do not reflect the available scientific literature.”  So again, perhaps we should reconsider our view of nasty old saturated fat.

Running News

Standard

“That is, once the runners were tired, their form got sloppier, theoretically raising their risk for a tibial stress fracture.”
– Runner’s World

Running while fatigued increases stress fracture risk.

I’ve discussed several times (here, here and here) the idea that if we train too hard, we’re courting injury. An article in Runner’s World gives more evidence to support this idea. The article cites recent research from Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. As the test subjects ran, researchers monitored several movement patterns that were indicative of tibial stress fractures.  As the subjects ran and became more fatigued, these movement patterns became exacerbated.

To me, the messages are first pay attention to your running form.  Running is a skill.  That’s why I don’t wear headphones anymore when running. Pay attention to how you run!  Second, finish your run when you still feel good.  Don’t kill yourself (except during a race) when you’re training.  Don’t be afraid to quit early or skip a day if you’re very fatigued.

“Liking to run, it seems, may have helped to make humans what they are.”
-NY Times Phys Ed

Running & evolution

Running for enjoyment is sort of a strange thing.  Non-runners will agree with me.  From an evolutionary perspective, doing something that uses up energy and exposes us to injury really doesn’t make sense.  Yet many of us love it.  Why?  It’s this question that’s discussed in a recent New York Times Phys Ed section.  Recent research in the Journal of Experimental Biology examines the matter.  Turns out humans and dogs show increased circulating endocannabinoids post run.  Walking however does not induce the same reaction.  Nor, in this experiment did running have the same effect on ferrets.  Seems that dogs and humans may have a deeply wired reward system that’s tied to running.

The question is then asked why don’t more of us run?  Dr. David A. Raichlen, a professor of anthropology at the University of Arizona, who led the study answered, “That’s the million dollar question.  It appears from our study that we have the evolutionary drive” to exercise. But modern man has learned to ignore it.

I absolutely believe we were meant to run.  And running with a dog?  There’s nothing like it in life.

I Know How to Walk and Run: Part II

Standard

In the previous post I discussed my difficulty in solving my running-related pain issues.  Analyzing and changing one’s running technique is a challenging thing, but I’m going to attempt it.  I’m mainly going to discuss running here but these concepts apply to walking as well.  (Don’t think that poor walking mechanics don’t matter.  We spend a lot of time walking.  If we’re doing it wrong then we’re really hammering the body into a mangled mess.)

Really important thing #1: Let the foot drop right below you.  Don’t reach out with your heel.

It’s vital to get the foot strike correct when running.  I now realize that for years I was reaching forward with my leg, putting my heel out in front of me, and hitting the ground with my heel. This is bad.  It promotes overuse of the hamstring muscles and de-emphasizes the glutes.

I then spent the past year to year-and-a-half trying a forefoot strike.  I thought this was an effective correction of my heel strike but I was still doing several things wrong.  First, I was still reaching out ahead of me.  As a result I was still using my hamstrings too much and I wasn’t using my glutes enough.  And though I was hitting with my forefoot and avoiding a heel strike, I wasn’t allowing my heel to settle to the ground.

Now I’m doing things a lot better.  First, I drop my foot directly below me.  In fact, it feels like my foot is dropping behind me.  Let me emphasize the word “drop.”  I passively let the leg unfold underneath me and let gravity pull my foot to the ground.  I don’t actively try to do much of anything with my foot.  I often pay attention to how things feel down there but I don’t try to pull my foot off the ground or push off in any particular way.  Steve Magness discusses this process in is superb post How to run with proper biomechanics.  I’ve bolded the key points:

Once the knee has cycled through, the lower leg should drop to the ground so that it hits close to under your center of gravity. When foot contact is made, it should be made where the lower leg is 90 degrees to the ground. This puts it in optimal position for force production. The leg does not extend outwards like is seen in most joggers and there is no reaching for the ground. Reaching out with the lower leg results in over striding and creates a braking action. Another common mistake is people extending the lower leg out slightly and then pulling it back in a paw like action before ground contact. They are trying to get quick with the foot and create a negative acceleration. This is incorrect and does not lead to shorter ground contact times or better positioning for force production. Instead the paw back motion simply engages the hamstrings and other muscles to a greater degree than necessary, thus wasting energy. The leg should simply unfold and drop underneath the runner.

I know I’m running well when it actually feels like the foot is dropping behind me.  (It’s not actually behind me, it’s just dropping quite a bit further back than it used to.)  I now focus on hip extension when I run, or using my glutes to drive my leg back.  With this proper foot placement I can feel my glutes turn on and propel me forward.  It helps to have a slight forward lean through this process.

Really important thing #2: Lengthen through the hip

This concept of what I call “lengthening through the hip” has had a massive impact on my walking and running technique and thus my pain issues as well.  Denver-area physical therapist Rick Olderman helped me solve a strange little bodily riddle I’d had for years, and this hip lengthening process was right at the core of it.

For a long time I noticed that standing on my right leg was a lot different from standing on my left.  When I would stand on my right leg I always sort of tipped or shifted to the right.  It didn’t feel right.  My balance would shift in a sort of exaggerated way.  This was happening every step.  Standing incorrectly on my right leg when walking and running also meant I would land badly on my left leg.  Lengthening up and pressing my weight through my hip into my foot solved this issue.

This concept is a little tough to effectively describe in words but here goes:  As my foot hits the ground below me, I think of lifting my trunk away from hip.  In my mind the hip and the rib cage of the stance leg are separating–moving away from each other, and I’m sort of getting taller in the process.  I don’t think of bounding or hopping though.  I’m trying to make my leg longer below me and behind me as I move forward. A slight lean forward from the ankles helps me do this all correctly.

This movement is sort of a subtle kind of thing to grasp.  Describing this process is sort of like describing chocolate to someone who’s never tasted it.  It’s not like simply flexing your elbow or bending your knee.  It’ll probably take a bit of practice to get a feel for this.  The goal should be to take this strange-feeling novel movement and turn it into a habit. The video below should help explain this.

A Questionable Case for Running Shoes

Standard

The New York Times Health section discusses a study from the University of Colorado in Boulder comparing the metabolic costs of running in shoes vs running barefoot.  The results suggest that shod running is more energy efficient than unshod running.  These results deserve a few questions.  First some background on the study. 

Subjects of the study were 12 barefoot runners–runners who knew how to run barefoot in contrast to novice barefooters.  “It was important to find people who are used to running barefoot,” says Rodger Kram, a professor of integrative physiology, who oversaw the study.

These runners were then asked to run several times in a yoga sock on a treadmill or while wearing the 150 gram Nike Mayfly, a lightweight running shoe.  Then the researchers taped 150 grams’ worth of thin lead strips to the top of runners’ sock feet. By adding an equal amount of weight to the bare foot, they could learn whether barefoot running or shod running was more efficient.  The study reports these findings:

1. For every 100g (3.5oz) (the average weight of a deck of playing cards) added per foot, energy cost increases by approximately 1% whether running barefoot or shod.

2. Running barefoot and in lightweight shoes do not significantly differ in energy cost.

3. When controlling for shoe/foot mass, running in lightweight shoes requires ~3-4% less energy than running barefoot.

So it seems that wearing a shoe is a good idea if you want to conserve energy as you run.  This would be important obviously during a race.  Here are some questions and observations:

1. The positive result of wearing a shoe was seen in 8 of the 12 runners.  That means 1/3 of the subjects saw no advantage from running in shoes.  Extrapolated out to a large population that means a significant number of barefoot runners are at no disadvantage running in bare feet.  I wonder if any of them are more efficient in bare feet?

2. The study was done on a treadmill.  Treadmill running is quite different from real running.  What if the study was done on a road or trail?

3. The study looked at the Nike Mayfly.  What about other shoes?  It’s a light shoe.  Would even lighter shoes be better efficiency?

4. A commentator on the Times article made the following observation: “Flaw: the only way for the comparison to be valid is if the weight distribution of added weights were precisely the same as the weight distribution of the shoes themselves. Anyone who has ever studied the effects of mass distribution on movement would know that.”

So did the way the weight was added to the (mostly) bare feet affect the runners’ efficiency?  What if the weight was distributed differently?

5. The study enlisted experienced barefoot runners as subjects.  Alex Hutchinson of Sweat Science and Runner’s World discusses that issue:

Finally, all the runners were midfoot or forefoot strikers, both barefoot and in shoes. This condition was imposed to prevent confounding effects from comparing rearfoot to forefoot striking efficiency.

These conditions raise an important caveat. One of the proposed advantages of barefoot-minimalist running is that it automatically helps to correct overstriding — an extremely common problem among inexperienced runners. The fact that all these runners were already forefoot strikes suggests that none of them were likely overstriding, which would make them less likely to benefit from barefoot running. It’s possible that a truly ‘random’ group of runners might have been less efficient in the shod condition, because more of them would have been dramatically overstriding.

It’s good that someone has done this study.  The debate isn’t over and it’s always good to have another view.  There’s plenty more studying to be done.

One thing that I keep coming back to is the fact that the fastest runners in the world wear shoes–at least when racing.  So from the performance standpoint there seems to be some benefit to putting something on your feet.  Further, if you’re happy with you performance and enjoyment of running then you should probably stay with what you’re doing whether it’s shod or unshod.