RUNNING IS NOT EFFICIENT

So if running doesn't make you look 'fit' or 'good' + running long distance isn't even good for your health(vs. HIIT or swimming), what's the point or running for the sake of running?

Vanity or ignorance or trolling for a spat. Whatever.

I don't think its about looks at all. I'll put my level of fitness up against most else my age. My BMI & body fat percentage is very low. I have a resting pulse under 40. My cholesterol and blood pressure are excellent. I can run marathons. I can hike mountains.

It's an aggressive topic subject, I know, but I felt like I would get a lot of attention with that subject title.

That's the usual reason for trolling.....

I see a lot of long distance runners or people that are capable of running long distance.

Very few people look 'fit'. If they wear a t-shirt or without a shirt and walk around every day, nobody would be able to tell that person is able to run 10k, 15, half marathon or marathon.

Who cares, there's more to fitness than superficial appearances.......

Also, running longer and longer is not beneficial for the health either.

Can you cite a source?

So if running doesn't make you look 'fit' or 'good' + running long distance isn't even good for your health(vs. HIIT or swimming), what's the point or running for the sake of running?

What's the point of this post?

This is because I see a lot of 'fat' runners who run marathons and think they're healthy.

and you've checked their blood pressure, serum lipids etc? I know lots of skinny people who are unhealthy.....your point?

Genetics? no. If 600 pounders can lose 400 pounds and become fit through diet and exercise, I doubt you can blame your genetics

Thank you for this gem...........

Perhaps one of the most useless threads in the history of MFP, thanks OP!

I'm throwing the Troll flag

+1

And not even one with some game.

But, got my laugh in for the day. :laugh:

I run becuase I enjoy it, its a great stress reliever and I find it a very efficient way of staying fit! I dont think I look unfit or unhealthy. Running isnt for everyone but dont knock it for those who try, no matter what their shape or size.

If you are little more than a troll, then you might get what you want for a while.

But, when you get old enough (and you aren't right now), you might have a different view and a different way of approaching this.

And I'll point out a couple of things.

No definition of "efficient" and no definition of "fit" and more importantly are YOU the definition of fitness? If not, then what are you going to do and by when to be that objective measurement of fitness.

If those people that you are complaining about (and it is a complaint designed to make you "right and them "wrong") and they went out today and ran your *kitten* into the ground at a half-marathon distance or full marathon distance who do you think would be more "fit?"

you cant get fit and healthy playing darts either, but people still do that.

and yes, you can get fit and healthy from running. maybe once you start doing marathons you are beyond that point, but walking and running is the cheapest and most accessible form of exercise to everyone.

It's an aggressive topic subject, I know, but I felt like I would get a lot of attention with that subject title.

I see a lot of long distance runners or people that are capable of running long distance.

Very few people look 'fit'. If they wear a t-shirt or without a shirt and walk around every day, nobody would be able to tell that person is able to run 10k, 15, half marathon or marathon.

Yeah, so? If anyone puts in the work, they can accomplish the goal. People of all shapes and sizes can run - it's an all-inclusive sport, and one heck of a milestone in someone's life. Some people are casuals, others are a little obsessed. I don't see why it should keep you up at night.

Also, running longer and longer is not beneficial for the health either.

Prove it.

So if running doesn't make you look 'fit' or 'good' + running long distance isn't even good for your health(vs. HIIT or swimming), what's the point or running for the sake of running?

This is because I see a lot of 'fat' runners who run marathons and think they're healthy.

I also know lots of "fat" runners who are more aerobically fit than me. And way to go on the omniscience. I wish I had the power to know if people thought they were fit.

Genetics? no. If 600 pounders can lose 400 pounds and become fit through diet and exercise, I doubt you can blame your genetics

I am not allowed to say that you're an idiot who is full of utter crap, but I will say that this post is.

The better I get at running the better chance I have of out running you when the zombies attack.

I'm a fat runner. I weigh in at over 200lbs. I also cycle 30 miles on a good day. Why am I a fat runner? Because I'm trying to lose weight... Healthy? Despite my weight, I'd say I'm healthy, not because I reckon I am, but the doctors say I am. I don't have diabetes or other obesity related conditions to worry about, so I can carry on being a fat runner, and you can carry on being miserable about other people instead of keeping your opinions to yourself.

How else will you prepare your body to escape the coming zombie hoard?

The slow get eaten, the fast run away and live....which do you want to be? AND... zombies don't tire out so you have to be able to run fast for long distances!

It's an aggressive topic subject, I know, but I felt like I would get a lot of attention with that subject title.

I see a lot of long distance runners or people that are capable of running long distance.

Very few people look 'fit'. If they wear a t-shirt or without a shirt and walk around every day, nobody would be able to tell that person is able to run 10k, 15, half marathon or marathon.

Also, running longer and longer is not beneficial for the health either.

So if running doesn't make you look 'fit' or 'good' + running long distance isn't even good for your health(vs. HIIT or swimming), what's the point or running for the sake of running?

This is because I see a lot of 'fat' runners who run marathons and think they're healthy.

Genetics? no. If 600 pounders can lose 400 pounds and become fit through diet and exercise, I doubt you can blame your genetics

When the zombies come, you'll see how useful running endurance can be.

CARDIO IS GOOD FOR YOUR HEART...

WHY ARE WE YELLING

I was gifted with being a good runner, naturally speaking. I have run a marathon, 1/2 marathons, and various 10K/5K races at different times...in fact, I'm running a 5K this weekend just for the heck of it...

That being said, I HATE running just for the sake of running. I get no personal satisfaction from "pounding pavement" or enough of a buzz at end of an endurance race to make it something I do regularly. I have done it at different times for different motivations; mostly the social aspect and because I'm already fit enough to be able to run longer distances without putting too much effort into training (marathon distance excluded). I'm not bragging here, I'm just stating the way my conditioning relates to running.

Now, if I'm playing basketball, soccer, or some other field sport I'll run until my legs give out. Something about chasing a ball and playing on a team motivates me, whereas running in and of itself does not.

Also, for the sake of exercise/cardio conditioning, I find HIIT to be far more "efficient" - relative to the OP's comment - on calorie burning. I would rather put in 30 minutes of intense HIIT than an hour+ of slow cardio.

Before I get flamed, "To each their own". I have many friends who I would consider serious runners, who travel for marathons and even one who does ultra-marathons. We still have much in common in regards to our outlook on fitness, I just choose a different path to achieve a similar means.