Slow runners come out ahead!

GiddyupTim
GiddyupTim Posts: 2,819 Member
edited November 12 in Social Groups
I am curious what people here think about the report cited here:

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/04/slow-runners-come-out-ahead/?_r=0

Many of the runners I know are talking about it and are of mixed opinion. But almost all, I am fairly certain, are going to ignore it and continue to run how they have always run. The way they enjoy running.
This study is kind of relevant to a discussion my wife and I have been having. Many of our parents and uncles and aunts, and even friends, have passed away, and it seems that, as often as not, those who go early are those who exercised the most.
For example, my wife's mother recently died at age 79 years. She ran. She watched her diet. She never smoked and drank moderately. My wife feels she should have gotten to live longer, as 79 years for an American female is just average.
Certainly, we know of other relatives and acquaintances who drank and smoked a lot -- still smoke -- who are living longer than 79 years.
I am of the mind that staying in shape does not necessarily mean a longer life. But it almost always does mean a rapid and good end. My mother-in-law, for example, was playing scrabble online the morning of the day she died. She had a stroke. Never woke up. Did not feel a thing.
I could give other examples, but I have made my point.

Replies

  • Carrieendar
    Carrieendar Posts: 493 Member
    Slow is relative. I plan to run my marathon at 6:52 per mileand my half at 6:34 but I train at 7:40-8 min/ mile for 90% of running. This study doesn't seem to account for any of that?

  • lporter229
    lporter229 Posts: 4,907 Member
    The notion of running to prolong one's life seems a little silly to me. Obviously, none of us knows when his or her time is up and how it's going to come. I run because it gives me a better quality of life, both physically and mentally, right now. I do it because I can, which may not always be the case. So yes, I guess I fall into that group of those who will ignore it and run how they have always run.
  • vcphil
    vcphil Posts: 79 Member
    I think the health benefits of running outweigh the negative sides. If I had not alstarted running, I know for a fact I would be obese and still a smoker. I would have high blood pressure (when I was 19 my BP was usually 135/90).. I probably have to take meds at this point if I continued down my old "lifestyle" path.

    My goal isn't to live as long as I possible can.. My goal is to enjoy every day of my life. Running has brought me so much happiness. Running fast- winning races- it's a feeling like nothing else. It has given me a chance to feel alive and love living. It has given me health. If it kills me at 70, whatever. We are all going to die if something.
  • lporter229
    lporter229 Posts: 4,907 Member
    tufel wrote: »
    I am of the mind that staying in shape does not necessarily mean a longer life. But it almost always does mean a rapid and good end. My mother-in-law, for example, was playing scrabble online the morning of the day she died. She had a stroke. Never woke up. Did not feel a thing.
    I could give other examples, but I have made my point.

    I wonder if that may have as much to do with the mindset of active people as anything. Sort of a subconcious " If I can't live and be active and healthy then I don't need to live at all" kind of thing.

    My father was the opposite. While not obese, he was a smoker and sedentary and was extremely unhealthy for most of his life. Although he died at a relatively young age of 73, he far surpassed the expectations of most of his doctors, hanging on for years on dialysis and in a wheel chair and in need of constant care. I feel like he had developed a mindset that you just fight through the pain and misery because that is the quality of life he accepted early on in his life. I respect and admire his resilience, but I have no desire to live my life like that.
  • hiker_chick
    hiker_chick Posts: 16 Member
    So many studies are flawed in their data collection and bias. Who is to say those people didn't start running because they had a predisposition to bad health and were looking to improve their health by running? How old were the participants? Did they take equal numbers from different age group randomly for each of the runner categories? I'm guessing not.

    Op, reading the articles now. Yea, very flawed study. 2 deaths out of 40 in the highest group? What did they die from? What is the average rate of death of 40 people in a ten year period naturally? Shouldn't you eliminate any deaths that were not health-related (i.e. car accident, etc)?

    I took stats classes in high school and college, and they basically taught me never to trust statistics.

    I think I fall into "going to keep doing what I am doing" boat.
This discussion has been closed.