Why Women Should Not Run (as their only means to lose)
Replies
-
bunnehs!!!!!!!!!0 -
0 -
Can't we all just agree that as much as we need a well balanced diet we also need a well balanced fitness routine and stop talking about it? I know plenty of people who have lost over 100lbs doing just cardio - so it does work for some. If it works for you go for it. If not try something new. And really - I don't think much people on here need to be told that.0
-
also, tired of men telling me what i should be doing.
Yeah, I'm with you on this. Gettin' real tired of yo ****, male "experts" on women's fitness.
WTF? My veterinarian isn't even a dog. I'm going to start looking for one that is. Good thinking.
LOL discrediting someone's expertise based on their gender...
...under the impression that this somehow empowers women.
(Pro tip: It doesn't...and if you think it through to its logical conclusion, you'll see the hypocrisy in the position.)0 -
also, tired of men telling me what i should be doing.
Yeah, I'm with you on this. Gettin' real tired of yo ****, male "experts" on women's fitness.
WTF? My veterinarian isn't even a dog. I'm going to start looking for one that is. Good thinking.
i recommend Dr. Spot.
0 -
Can't we all just agree that as much as we need a well balanced diet we also need a well balanced fitness routine and stop talking about it? I know plenty of people who have lost over 100lbs doing just cardio - so it does work for some. If it works for you go for it. If not try something new. And really - I don't think much people on here need to be told that.
For every article like this trying to tell everyone the importance of weight lifting, I see a post about not wanting to lift because of the fear of becoming too bulky0 -
I run because I like running. It helps with the weight loss, but that's not my only reason for running. I still want to lose 30-35 pounds, so yes I will still do as much cardio as I want. I also include some type of strength training. It may not necessarily be lifting heavy barbells or dumbbells in the gym, but I always have some challenging resistance training in there, because I like a well balanced workout routine. My utmost concern is that my routine is enjoyable. The gym bores the s#*t out of me.
The article beats a dead horse, in my opinion.
So you agree with the article. Good to read about your great results and to recognize the benefits of a varied fitness program :flowerforyou:
Depends. If the article is giving reasons FOR WHICH women should not be running, then yes I agree that the reasons the author lists are not good reasons to run frequently.
However, I think some people here are interpreting the article as "women should not run, and this is why."
Honestly, I always find myself irritated in these discussions. I want to jump up and down and scream at people only doing cardio without strength training. I have too many male friends that do this and several can't do 10 pushups and look like crap. They're awesome runners though and I love running. On the other hand, as I said, I love running and I like the way it affects my energy levels and resting heart rate. My advice is to do both and keep both reasonably short.
Unless, of course, their chosen goal is to compete (or better themselves) at longer distances (which is totally fine, at least with me)...
...and then they should run longer (and accept the diminishing impact on their overall health).0 -
0 -
I"m just here for the bunnies....0
-
I run because I like running. It helps with the weight loss, but that's not my only reason for running. I still want to lose 30-35 pounds, so yes I will still do as much cardio as I want. I also include some type of strength training. It may not necessarily be lifting heavy barbells or dumbbells in the gym, but I always have some challenging resistance training in there, because I like a well balanced workout routine. My utmost concern is that my routine is enjoyable. The gym bores the s#*t out of me.
The article beats a dead horse, in my opinion.
So you agree with the article. Good to read about your great results and to recognize the benefits of a varied fitness program :flowerforyou:
Depends. If the article is giving reasons FOR WHICH women should not be running, then yes I agree that the reasons the author lists are not good reasons to run frequently.
However, I think some people here are interpreting the article as "women should not run, and this is why."
Honestly, I always find myself irritated in these discussions. I want to jump up and down and scream at people only doing cardio without strength training. I have too many male friends that do this and several can't do 10 pushups and look like crap. They're awesome runners though and I love running. On the other hand, as I said, I love running and I like the way it affects my energy levels and resting heart rate. My advice is to do both and keep both reasonably short.
Unless, of course, their chosen goal is to compete (or better themselves) at longer distances (which is totally fine, at least with me)...
...and then they should run longer (and accept the diminishing impact on their overall health).
The article defines the goal as weight loss.0 -
Is there a point with the funny pictures?
They are cardio bunnies. LOL! :laugh:0 -
0 -
Oh goody, OP. Why just have one thread about this when you can have two going at the same time? At least you have changed the tile of THIS thread so it in no way corresponds to the hyperbole of the article.
But the article is still fundamentally flawed by it's poor understanding of the science. Too large of a calorie deficit is responsible for changes in hormones, not too much cardio. How you get to the large deficit is irrelevant - be it running, lifting or simply not eating enough.
Should we educate people (men and women) on appropriate calorie intake and why too much steady state cardio may be detrimental to their goals? Yes. Should we keep spamming the same over the top anti-cardio BS? No!0 -
0 -
I"m just here for the bunnies....
OMG.... I almost spit out my water!!
Hilarious....0 -
Hmmmm. I guess the fact that my last 10 lbs basically MELTED off when I started running was just my imagination? It most definitely worked for me.
Now I run for the stress relief (runners high) and for the heart-healthy benefits. Last week I read an article telling about how the hearts of lifelong distance runners who were in their 70s and 80s compared very favorably to those of healthy people in their 40s. That's reason enough for me to keep running.
I will say that once I finished losing and started reading more about fitness I added strength training to my regimen. This is to help me maintain muscle ( and weight loss) for the rest of my life. So I don't deny the benefits of lifting. And I will no longer run for the primary reason of burning calories to maintain my weight.
I do have to disagree with the OP's original premise that running will not help a person lose weight, though.0 -
Oh goody, OP. Why just have one thread about this when you can have two going at the same time? At least you have changed the tile of THIS thread so it in no way corresponds to the hyperbole of the article.
But the article is still fundamentally flawed by it's poor understanding of the science. Too large of a calorie deficit is responsible for changes in hormones, not too much cardio. How you get to the large deficit is irrelevant - be it running, lifting or simply not eating enough.
Should we educate people (men and women) on appropriate calorie intake and why too much steady state cardio may be detrimental to their goals? Yes. Should we keep spamming the same over the top anti-cardio BS? No!
One reason for the change in thread title is to clarify the point of the article. Obviously it didn't work completely.
Is there a reason you choose to repeat the same point then? The article isn't anti cardio. Its trying to explain why someone might not be losing weight anymore despite the amount of cardio achieved.
Article's point. Too much cardio might not be the most effective way to lose weight. Might be detrimental to this goal.
If you want to discuss the dietary reasons for the same problem, then by all means post an article in the food / nutrition section0 -
In for more bunny gifs. I keep spamming my husband with them.0
-
0 -
0 -
0 -
a bunny...
...doing cardio.
0 -
Oh goody, OP. Why just have one thread about this when you can have two going at the same time? At least you have changed the tile of THIS thread so it in no way corresponds to the hyperbole of the article.
But the article is still fundamentally flawed by it's poor understanding of the science. Too large of a calorie deficit is responsible for changes in hormones, not too much cardio. How you get to the large deficit is irrelevant - be it running, lifting or simply not eating enough.
Should we educate people (men and women) on appropriate calorie intake and why too much steady state cardio may be detrimental to their goals? Yes. Should we keep spamming the same over the top anti-cardio BS? No!
QFT.
OP, isn't this your third thread regarding this topic?0 -
*Wondering why a man would waste his time worrying about how a WOMAN should lose weight...*:noway:0
-
0 -
This is just like with new lifters. There is always an initial benefit to new activity, but as the body adjusts, the benefit decreases, and as in the case of the type of training described in the article, can become counter-productive.
In the long term, high-impact calorie burns changes the body's stored energy utilization, using stored fats for energy vs stored protein (muscle) as energy. This is highly documented. The author of the article emphasizes this well-known fact. Intense, high-impact cardio training at a deficit over the long-term is going to affect body composition negatively. That is the author's point.0 -
bump.0
-
I do both and am looking now to cut some cardio out and add more strength training in. Honestly, the biggest difference on my body was when I added pushups in to my routine in March.0
-
Is there a point with the funny pictures?
Because this thread is useless and a complete waste of time without them!?
Hurray for bunnies!0 -
Oh goody, OP. Why just have one thread about this when you can have two going at the same time? At least you have changed the tile of THIS thread so it in no way corresponds to the hyperbole of the article.
But the article is still fundamentally flawed by it's poor understanding of the science. Too large of a calorie deficit is responsible for changes in hormones, not too much cardio. How you get to the large deficit is irrelevant - be it running, lifting or simply not eating enough.
Should we educate people (men and women) on appropriate calorie intake and why too much steady state cardio may be detrimental to their goals? Yes. Should we keep spamming the same over the top anti-cardio BS? No!
QFT.
OP, isn't this your third thread regarding this topic?
no0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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