Article titled "Why women should not run" - opinions?
Replies
-
Most of the people who replied didn't even read the full article.
It is an article targetted at those people who ONLY do cardio in attempts to lose weight, as opposed to someone who has resistance training only, or resistance training in combination with running.
Think about it.... most women do not eat a many calories. Couple that with the fact that the majority of the population think running is the answer to weight loss, and the fact they do not eat back those calories... you have people netting like 200 calories a day, demolishing their metabolisms, losing muscle, and ultimately becoming skinny fat.
This is a common occurance among many female fitness compeitors whose garbage coaches has them doing 2-3 cardio sessions a day and eating like less than 1k calories.
He doesn't make any claims that running is useless, but says that women are more susceptible to falling victim to this mindset.
I have to admit, I do not know, nor have I ever known anybody to only net 200 calories per day, not sure where those figures come from.0 -
seen this?
hahahahaha.
not that I believe that. But I think that if you eat more than you burn, obvi you will have more body fat. Regardless of what type of exercise you do.0 -
there was an entire discussion thread on this article yesterday (I can't remember the title or I'd point ya there).
I love running and the spirit of the running community I'm involved with, so I will continue running--I also do strength training and other activities so I think I have a good balance.
Cool rocker chick!!! :glasses:0 -
That pole vaulting girl on top got really fat, by the way.
This is not relevant in any way, but just sayin
0 -
The last time I looked at a picture of Deena Kastor I was struck by how fat she was
Yes, David. She's a chub-bub alright.0 -
Keep in mind who his audience is. Contest-level bodybuilders for the most part. His definition of "fat" is going to be way different than mine.
One final note - if you don't know of any female runners who are still overweight after months and even years of running, you need to open your eyes. I'm not saying it's the standard, but there are definitely some in that situation. For the ones who are, I think it might be worth your time to take a look at what this guy is saying.
I too must object to this statement. I know very many women who have run for years. You don't run for years and stay fat. Sorry.0 -
Compare a sprinters body to a marathon runners body.
One of the dumbest and most intellectually dishonest arguments ever.
^indeed0 -
Nevermind. Wrong thread.0
-
Most of the people who replied didn't even read the full article.
It is an article targetted at those people who ONLY do cardio in attempts to lose weight, as opposed to someone who has resistance training only, or resistance training in combination with running.
Think about it.... most women do not eat a many calories. Couple that with the fact that the majority of the population think running is the answer to weight loss, and the fact they do not eat back those calories... you have people netting like 200 calories a day, demolishing their metabolisms, losing muscle, and ultimately becoming skinny fat.
This is a common occurance among many female fitness compeitors whose garbage coaches has them doing 2-3 cardio sessions a day and eating like less than 1k calories.
He doesn't make any claims that running is useless, but says that women are more susceptible to falling victim to this mindset.
that's what I thought as well when I responded to yesterday's post. Then I read another post that pointed out the comments at the bottom
"You refer to hours of running per day. What about someone who runs 30 min a day a few times a week, or even 30-40 min every day? Some of your language suggests running is out completely for women, but then you describe what most women would consider extreme workout schedules. Is your point more that women shouldn't over-do it with cardio? Can you be more specific about how much running is too much and could cause these kinds of negative results?
DHKiefer Mod Honest Questions • 2 days ago −
From the research, a few times per week at less than 30 minutes should not have as heavy of an impact, but you're riding a fine line here and there are gaps in the research. So I can't answer this fully. If you find you can run 2 times per week at this intensity and it has no effect on you whatsoever and you're happy with how you look, keep doing it. If, however, you're using this activity to achieve a body that you desire or to increase your health, then ditch it. It's not helping your cause."0 -
Umm, why then are all the women in my marathon club lean and muscular? The only fatties are the one who have recently joined. I'm not buying this article at all.0
-
Most of the people who replied didn't even read the full article.
It is an article targetted at those people who ONLY do cardio in attempts to lose weight, as opposed to someone who has resistance training only, or resistance training in combination with running.
Think about it.... most women do not eat a many calories. Couple that with the fact that the majority of the population think running is the answer to weight loss, and the fact they do not eat back those calories... you have people netting like 200 calories a day, demolishing their metabolisms, losing muscle, and ultimately becoming skinny fat.
This is a common occurance among many female fitness compeitors whose garbage coaches has them doing 2-3 cardio sessions a day and eating like less than 1k calories.
He doesn't make any claims that running is useless, but says that women are more susceptible to falling victim to this mindset.
I have to admit, I do not know, nor have I ever known anybody to only net 200 calories per day, not sure where those figures come from.
You eat only 1200 calories a day and then run for 5 miles and don't eat the calories back?0 -
This video will put it into perspective:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcM8HablpZk 0 -
Most of the people who replied didn't even read the full article.
It is an article targetted at those people who ONLY do cardio in attempts to lose weight, as opposed to someone who has resistance training only, or resistance training in combination with running.
Think about it.... most women do not eat a many calories. Couple that with the fact that the majority of the population think running is the answer to weight loss, and the fact they do not eat back those calories... you have people netting like 200 calories a day, demolishing their metabolisms, losing muscle, and ultimately becoming skinny fat.
This is a common occurance among many female fitness compeitors whose garbage coaches has them doing 2-3 cardio sessions a day and eating like less than 1k calories.
He doesn't make any claims that running is useless, but says that women are more susceptible to falling victim to this mindset.
I have to admit, I do not know, nor have I ever known anybody to only net 200 calories per day, not sure where those figures come from.
You eat only 1200 calories a day and then run for 5 miles and don't eat the calories back?
Oh I see.
Who does that then? Just out of curiosity.0 -
If women want to run let them. It's not all about weight. I run because I enjoy it. I do other cardio at a lower hr because I enjoy it too. And lifting...well.you cam guess why I do that too.
Point. If I like the exercise I am going to do it. If not I won't do it.0 -
seriously? Just look around on here, you see it all the time... And this is one of the more educated forums.Most of the people who replied didn't even read the full article.
It is an article targetted at those people who ONLY do cardio in attempts to lose weight, as opposed to someone who has resistance training only, or resistance training in combination with running.
Think about it.... most women do not eat a many calories. Couple that with the fact that the majority of the population think running is the answer to weight loss, and the fact they do not eat back those calories... you have people netting like 200 calories a day, demolishing their metabolisms, losing muscle, and ultimately becoming skinny fat.
This is a common occurance among many female fitness compeitors whose garbage coaches has them doing 2-3 cardio sessions a day and eating like less than 1k calories.
He doesn't make any claims that running is useless, but says that women are more susceptible to falling victim to this mindset.
I have to admit, I do not know, nor have I ever known anybody to only net 200 calories per day, not sure where those figures come from.
You eat only 1200 calories a day and then run for 5 miles and don't eat the calories back?
Oh I see.
Who does that then? Just out of curiosity.
Look at any gym, you'll find dozens of women doing only cardio and eating next to nothing. it's practically epidemic..0 -
Seriously? Every other day this article gets posted.0
-
seriously? Just look around on here, you see it all the time... And this is one of the more educated forums.Most of the people who replied didn't even read the full article.
It is an article targetted at those people who ONLY do cardio in attempts to lose weight, as opposed to someone who has resistance training only, or resistance training in combination with running.
Think about it.... most women do not eat a many calories. Couple that with the fact that the majority of the population think running is the answer to weight loss, and the fact they do not eat back those calories... you have people netting like 200 calories a day, demolishing their metabolisms, losing muscle, and ultimately becoming skinny fat.
This is a common occurance among many female fitness compeitors whose garbage coaches has them doing 2-3 cardio sessions a day and eating like less than 1k calories.
He doesn't make any claims that running is useless, but says that women are more susceptible to falling victim to this mindset.
I have to admit, I do not know, nor have I ever known anybody to only net 200 calories per day, not sure where those figures come from.
You eat only 1200 calories a day and then run for 5 miles and don't eat the calories back?
Oh I see.
Who does that then? Just out of curiosity.
Look at any gym, you'll find dozens of women doing only cardio and eating next to nothing. it's practically epidemic..
Really, epidemic eh. Dang they should all be skinny little runts really then.
Seriously I love how people are able to defy physics (in theory anyway).
We shall agree to disagree.0 -
seen this?
hahahahaha.
not that I believe that. But I think that if you eat more than you burn, obvi you will have more body fat. Regardless of what type of exercise you do.
This ^
Regarding the two pictures above, I know which one I would rather look like.....
I'll give you all a clue....
IT DAMN WELL AIN'T THE BOTTOM ONE LMAO0 -
I think the article would be very well said if the title was "why fat people need to get off the treadmill" because I agree that it's too widely used and doesn't always help.0
-
Women shouldn't run. It makes it harder for me to catch them.0
-
It's a fairly subtle issue, so knee-jerk reactions of the sort you see in this thread are not going to do it justice.
I have known some long-distance runners with a significant amount of body fat. I have also known people who went from obese to a normal BMI through long-distance running. There are obviously quite a lot of people on MFP who never bother with cardio and look and feel great. Endurance steady-state cardio is not the only, and possibly not even the best way to lose fat, and it is not going to knock your thyroid out of whack in every case. But for some people who *only* do steady-state cardio and do not get the fat loss results they are hoping for, it may not be a bad idea to switch to HIIT or weight lifting.
THIS.
The article was not saying women should not run. The article was talking about the tendency many women (in particular) have to beat themselves up with steady state cardio sessions that end up not delivering the body composition they are working so hard to achieve.
Read the article again and think critically about what he's saying.
Rachel Cosgrove, fitness professional, author, athlete, etc. wrote an article about how her body changed for the worse when she started running distances to prepare for an Ironman:
http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/most_recent/the_final_nail_in_the_cardio_coffin
I think if you love to run, you should do it. But if you aren't getting the results you want as far as your body composition, the answer isn't MOAR CARDIO.0 -
.0
-
It's not that aerobic exercise is bad, it's just inefficient. However, it does become 'bad' when you only have X hours to workout weekly, and you spend all those hours running. There really is no cardiovascular need for aerobic exercise either.0
-
seriously? Just look around on here, you see it all the time... And this is one of the more educated forums.Most of the people who replied didn't even read the full article.
It is an article targetted at those people who ONLY do cardio in attempts to lose weight, as opposed to someone who has resistance training only, or resistance training in combination with running.
Think about it.... most women do not eat a many calories. Couple that with the fact that the majority of the population think running is the answer to weight loss, and the fact they do not eat back those calories... you have people netting like 200 calories a day, demolishing their metabolisms, losing muscle, and ultimately becoming skinny fat.
This is a common occurance among many female fitness compeitors whose garbage coaches has them doing 2-3 cardio sessions a day and eating like less than 1k calories.
He doesn't make any claims that running is useless, but says that women are more susceptible to falling victim to this mindset.
I have to admit, I do not know, nor have I ever known anybody to only net 200 calories per day, not sure where those figures come from.
You eat only 1200 calories a day and then run for 5 miles and don't eat the calories back?
Oh I see.
Who does that then? Just out of curiosity.
Look at any gym, you'll find dozens of women doing only cardio and eating next to nothing. it's practically epidemic..
Really, epidemic eh. Dang they should all be skinny little runts really then.
Seriously I love how people are able to defy physics (in theory anyway).
We shall agree to disagree.
No... thats just it. It won't result in fat loss, so they won't be skinny. Driving yourself into a net of 300 calories a day will NOT result in being skinny, just a destruction of your metabolism.0 -
seriously? Just look around on here, you see it all the time... And this is one of the more educated forums.Most of the people who replied didn't even read the full article.
It is an article targetted at those people who ONLY do cardio in attempts to lose weight, as opposed to someone who has resistance training only, or resistance training in combination with running.
Think about it.... most women do not eat a many calories. Couple that with the fact that the majority of the population think running is the answer to weight loss, and the fact they do not eat back those calories... you have people netting like 200 calories a day, demolishing their metabolisms, losing muscle, and ultimately becoming skinny fat.
This is a common occurance among many female fitness compeitors whose garbage coaches has them doing 2-3 cardio sessions a day and eating like less than 1k calories.
He doesn't make any claims that running is useless, but says that women are more susceptible to falling victim to this mindset.
I have to admit, I do not know, nor have I ever known anybody to only net 200 calories per day, not sure where those figures come from.
You eat only 1200 calories a day and then run for 5 miles and don't eat the calories back?
Oh I see.
Who does that then? Just out of curiosity.
Look at any gym, you'll find dozens of women doing only cardio and eating next to nothing. it's practically epidemic..
Really, epidemic eh. Dang they should all be skinny little runts really then.
Seriously I love how people are able to defy physics (in theory anyway).
We shall agree to disagree.
No... thats just it. It won't result in fat loss, so they won't be skinny. Driving yourself into a net of 300 calories a day will NOT result in being skinny, just a destruction of your metabolism.
Personal experience here - it'll get you there (skinny) in some cases but good luck staying.0 -
seriously? Just look around on here, you see it all the time... And this is one of the more educated forums.Most of the people who replied didn't even read the full article.
It is an article targetted at those people who ONLY do cardio in attempts to lose weight, as opposed to someone who has resistance training only, or resistance training in combination with running.
Think about it.... most women do not eat a many calories. Couple that with the fact that the majority of the population think running is the answer to weight loss, and the fact they do not eat back those calories... you have people netting like 200 calories a day, demolishing their metabolisms, losing muscle, and ultimately becoming skinny fat.
This is a common occurance among many female fitness compeitors whose garbage coaches has them doing 2-3 cardio sessions a day and eating like less than 1k calories.
He doesn't make any claims that running is useless, but says that women are more susceptible to falling victim to this mindset.
I have to admit, I do not know, nor have I ever known anybody to only net 200 calories per day, not sure where those figures come from.
You eat only 1200 calories a day and then run for 5 miles and don't eat the calories back?
Oh I see.
Who does that then? Just out of curiosity.
Look at any gym, you'll find dozens of women doing only cardio and eating next to nothing. it's practically epidemic..
Really, epidemic eh. Dang they should all be skinny little runts really then.
Seriously I love how people are able to defy physics (in theory anyway).
We shall agree to disagree.
No... thats just it. It won't result in fat loss, so they won't be skinny. Driving yourself into a net of 300 calories a day will NOT result in being skinny, just a destruction of your metabolism.
Personal experience here - it'll get you there (skinny) in some cases but good luck staying.
well right... because of the metabolism. You'll then spend months rehabbing it. Watch the most recent Layne Norton video on Youtube about metabolic capacity.
I don't doubt cardio as a tool by any means.. but when you hardly eat and add copious amounts of cardio, you're doing yourself more harm then good. I know countless females who opt only for running for their exercise, eat minmal calories and are skinny fat.0 -
While I generally dislike the guy's snotty tone and spurious use of related research, if we narrow down his premise to one, specific circumstance, he is correct: steady-state cardio ONLY, in the long run, changing nothing else, will not lead to long-term, consistent weight loss.
I have been a distance runner for the past 20 years and my weight has very comfortably hovered in the 'perfectly fine' range--above or below 130 by a few pounds, depending on the season, at 5' 6". I gain a few (i.e. 6 or 7) pounds over the holidays and winter break, when I'm off-season for running training and am just puttering around skiing, then get back in the groove in February and shave them off again for half marathons and marathons in the spring, summer, and fall. I shave the pounds off using the best-known methods--refine my diet to higher protein, lower carbs, all while tracking calories; build up mileage slowly (which leads to greater endurance); and work on muscle strength and speed through the use of hills, intervals, and other speed work in combination with weight training (lately, that's been kettle bells). I follow training plans from Matt Fitzgerald ("Racing Weight") to achieve that goal and have for the past several years.
As with any other exercise, if you do it STEADY STATE for the long term, your body will become more efficient at it and you will eventually not burn calories the way you did in the beginning. If you're not also tracking what you eat, it is very easy to over-compensate. For example, I now only burn about 600 calories per hour of moderate pace (for me) running; whereas, a new runner of my same stature might burn up to 1,000. If I want the calorie burn to shave off my winter fat, I have to change things up the hard way: intervals, hills, HIIT. I can, and do, continue to do at least one, long, steady-state run each week. But, my goal is not the calorie burn, it is to increase my endurance for greater distance, which is an entirely different goal.
I won't even go into the guy's hypothyroid babble--that is unsupported by peer-reviewed research. Oh, and that what his hypothetical friend is eating does not enter the picture, either.0 -
seriously? Just look around on here, you see it all the time... And this is one of the more educated forums.Most of the people who replied didn't even read the full article.
It is an article targetted at those people who ONLY do cardio in attempts to lose weight, as opposed to someone who has resistance training only, or resistance training in combination with running.
Think about it.... most women do not eat a many calories. Couple that with the fact that the majority of the population think running is the answer to weight loss, and the fact they do not eat back those calories... you have people netting like 200 calories a day, demolishing their metabolisms, losing muscle, and ultimately becoming skinny fat.
This is a common occurance among many female fitness compeitors whose garbage coaches has them doing 2-3 cardio sessions a day and eating like less than 1k calories.
He doesn't make any claims that running is useless, but says that women are more susceptible to falling victim to this mindset.
I have to admit, I do not know, nor have I ever known anybody to only net 200 calories per day, not sure where those figures come from.
You eat only 1200 calories a day and then run for 5 miles and don't eat the calories back?
Oh I see.
Who does that then? Just out of curiosity.
Look at any gym, you'll find dozens of women doing only cardio and eating next to nothing. it's practically epidemic..
Really, epidemic eh. Dang they should all be skinny little runts really then.
Seriously I love how people are able to defy physics (in theory anyway).
We shall agree to disagree.
No... thats just it. It won't result in fat loss, so they won't be skinny. Driving yourself into a net of 300 calories a day will NOT result in being skinny, just a destruction of your metabolism.
It will not result in NO weight loss either, however, that weightloss will be extremely bad for one's health as they will be getting no nutrients.
Out of interest, what exactly is the runner using for energy - if they have excess fat it will be that.
Excess fat is stored energy, that is why it burns off.
I am not going to argue, there are too many mamby-pamby new-tech arguments going on in the last few years on here and it does my head in.
Calories in -v- calories out - HOWEVER you desire to burn it, make sure the calorie intake is less that the calories used up.0 -
Out of interest, what exactly is the runner using for energy - if they have excess fat it will be that.
The body is capable of consuming pretty much any and all body mass for energy. This includes muscle, bone, organ, connective tissue, etc.0 -
Out of interest, what exactly is the runner using for energy - if they have excess fat it will be that.
The body is capable of consuming pretty much any and all body mass for energy. This includes muscle, bone, organ, connective tissue, etc.
I always wondered why some runners find they are missing a kidney after a long run. Sometimes a spleen. For me, it usually was just a knuckle or two. But I started doing HIIT instead and it all grew back.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions