Health is more than body size. Don't use the scale to measure health.
Options
Replies
-
TheOwlhouseDesigns wrote: »But sometimes it is wiser/better to keep opinions to your self
Some people might have better outcomes than I did if they stayed away from running, and that would make me happy even if I annoyed some people.
IKR? Nothing makes me happier than convincing people to never try to achieve their goals and to live in fear of what might happen. Any day that I can convince somebody to just settle for mediocrity is a good day. Glad we agree on that
:laugh:0 -
UltimateRBF wrote: »williamwj2014 wrote: »
Thanks for that, o fount of wisdom.williamwj2014 wrote: »I don't regret anything I said..if it offended you then you have bigger problems. You take the article and image how you want to take it but to sit here and act like it encourages overweight people to exercise is far fetched lol..why doesn't it encourage them to make healthier choices to lose weight..
lazy to go back and quote but, no, I'm not bothered by overweight people, I don't give a *kitten* if they're overweight. I have family members who are overweight and whine about how unhappy they are with their weight but you know what? Showing them this picture and article isn't going to help them get up off the couch and exercise, that's for sure lol. They either want to change or they don't... I'm not going to sit here and act like being overweight is okay though. This idea that it encourages overweight people to exercise is ridiculous and is exactly what I mean by acceptance because exercise alone is not a "healthy" lifestyle.
Also to @fatgirlclub Good for you that your taking action. But like anywhere on the internet, people will have their own views and you will disagree. If you feel put down then, damn, build some tougher skin and go after your goals? It shouldn't make no difference what I or anyone else says..
People were offended because it was offensive. It's not about getting a thicker skin, it's about you being ignorant.
offensive in what way? Because I pointed out how being fat is unhealthy as did a lot of other people? Lol
For people that are overweight and unhappy- Quit playing the victim, nobody got you overweight but yourself. It's your own doing. Don't expect society to view you in the positive light and cater to your feelings. I'm sorry your sensitive when others have their own opinions. The best thing for you to do is to change those bad habits and work towards forming good, lifelong lasting habits...but i will not accept being fat as okay, EVER.
0 -
TheOwlhouseDesigns wrote: »But sometimes it is wiser/better to keep opinions to your self
Some people might have better outcomes than I did if they stayed away from running, and that would make me happy even if I annoyed some people.
IKR? Nothing makes me happier than convincing people to never try to achieve their goals and to live in fear of what might happen. Any day that I can convince somebody to just settle for mediocrity is a good day. Glad we agree on that
Running gets touted all over the place as being the "best cardio to lose weight" (highest calorie burn, free, slims legs down - have a google on the quoted phrase to see what comes up). The hype makes it sound really good to people who otherwise would be just as happy swimming or cycling or dancing. If people's goals mostly involve losing some weight and being more active, there are approximately 50 things I can think of that could accomplish that without ligament damage being a reasonably high probability (not just possibility). If people really want to be runners, they're obviously just going to do it. They'll do what they want anyway.
I don't think anyone can accuse me of running around the forums touting the awesomeness of running. It's fairly well known that I'd rather get shot in the face than run a single mile. I don't think that ability to run X distance is the end all be all of fitness. I don't think running is THE way to lose weight.
And yet, nobody can accuse me of running around the forums discouraging people from running, either. If someone wants to run, go run. I'll give them what little I have to offer when it comes to running advice. I HATE running, but I'm willing to encourage people to run if that's what they want to do. So you trying to flag everyone away from it is patently ridiculous.
Injury rates? Whatever. I guess you've never played a single sport in your life. Because do you know what the injury rate for sports are? Any sport? It's 100%. Because if your do anything hard enough and long enough eventually you'll get some form of injury from it. Hell, secretaries develop overuse injuries. Are you going to neg everyone that wants to participate in a sport, too? You must be a blast at parties.
The other thing that's killing me here is how you keep saying that you don't want others to suffer the same injuries you have. That's.....wow. Just wow. I've read hundreds of your posts here in F&E since you arrived on MFP. I've answered a few of your questions. And the thing that stands out.....not to put too fine a point on it.....but you're injury prone. I'm not saying that as an insult. Heck, It's a running joke with my friends right now how often I get hurt doing stuff so I understand getting hurt so I'm not making fun of that at all.
But from your posts, you've gotten seriously injured from essentially every strenous endeavor you've engaged in. Hey, that happens, and I'm truly sorry it's been that way for you. But that makes you an outlier. To assume that *everyone else* is highly likely to suffer the same fate that you have if they try a particular activity is PREPOSTEROUS. just like if I sent people to the free weight section and expected them all to lift the same amounts as me and progress at the same rate as me. I don't do that. I give them advice *as it pertains to them*, not me, and then wish them the best of luck. It would be nice if you'd consider doing the same.
0 -
.0
-
williamwj2014 wrote: »
Why is kd Lang shirtless and yelling at me0 -
Alluminati wrote: »williamwj2014 wrote: »
Why is kd Lang shirtless and yelling at me
Wut.....even is that supposed to be?0 -
Alluminati wrote: »williamwj2014 wrote: »
Why is kd Lang shirtless and yelling at me
Wut.....even is that supposed to be?
Not sure but she seems mad.0 -
People were offended because it was offensive. It's not about getting a thicker skin, it's about you being ignorant.
offensive in what way? Because I pointed out how being fat is unhealthy as did a lot of other people? Lol
For people that are overweight and unhappy- Quit playing the victim, nobody got you overweight but yourself. It's your own doing. Don't expect society to view you in the positive light and cater to your feelings. I'm sorry your sensitive when others have their own opinions. The best thing for you to do is to change those bad habits and work towards forming good, lifelong lasting habits...but i will not accept being fat as okay, EVER.
I don't see anyone "playing the victim" here. My point was that people are here to get help, to lose weight, tone up, bulk up or whatever the case may be. MFP is a place that they should feel like they/we can go to for help not to get put down for being overweight. The #1 reason women fail at working out is because the fear of being judged!0 -
SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage wrote: »http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Health+more+than+body+size+Dont+scale+measure+health+experts/11257544/story.html
Pasted from the article in case you don't want to click:
Erica Schenk has been a runner for 10 years, but a single snapshot of the curvy athlete may represent her most significant strides yet.
The plus-size model is captured mid-sprint as she covers the August issue of Women's Running. The latest edition is focused on body positivity and highlighting that runners' bodies don't all fit one specific mould.
Both the model and the magazine have made international headlines and earned widespread praise, with editor-in-chief Jessica Sebor calling the reaction "completely unanticipated."
Coupled with the kudos, she said they've also received emotional responses from women with larger bodies who said they hadn't felt accepted as runners, but can now "see themselves" on the cover because Schenk was showcased.
"We're such an image-driven culture," Sebor said from San Diego, Calif. "We assume we know everything about someone by looking at their picture and that's just not true.
"Health is about what you do — not about what you look like."
What's more, the "obsession" about body weight and composition has little to do with actual health, said Dr. Arya Sharma, chair in obesity research and management at the University of Alberta.
"We live in a society where people who happen to carry a few extra pounds are looked down upon and face a lot of bias and discrimination — especially as you come to higher BMIs — and that makes their lives miserable. It's not that they actually have health problems."
While many are quick to use weight as a key measure of fitness, Sharma said there are many misconceptions about what the numbers actually indicate.
"Stepping on a scale is not a measure of health. It can be a measure of risk for health problems," said Sharma.
"We do know some health problems become more common in people as they gain weight. But we've also learned that perfect health is also possible across a wide range of BMIs or body weights."
Determining whether excess weight will be a factor also can be related to genetic predisposition, such as diabetes or other weight-related health problems, he noted.
Sharma also notes on his website that abdominal fat is different than the fat accumulating on the hips or buttocks. Abdominal fat can be a major risk factor for diabetes, high blood pressure and abnormal cholesterol levels, and can lead to heart disease and stroke.
"We also know that health behaviours are much more important than the weight on the scale," said Sharma, founder and scientific director of the Canadian Obesity Network.
"What will determine your health ultimately is going to be your fitness level, the amount of sleep that you get, how you feel about yourself, the quality of your diet.
"You could be doing all of those things right with no impact on your body weight and still be a lot healthier than you are now."
Michelle Pitman is vice-president international for the Association of Size Diversity and Health. The professional organization is committed to the Health At Every Size principles, which support acceptance of people regardless of size or shape.
"Health is more than just body size," said Pitman, wellness coach with Define Me Wellness.
Pitman said if she's seeing a new client who wants to lose weight to be healthier, she seeks to help them reframe what health means to them.
"Think about weight in terms of an outcome as opposed to a behaviour. Things like: 'I want to have improved energy,' 'I want to have a better sex life,' 'I want to complete this 10K race for a sense of personal accomplishment' — and taking weight out of the equation."
Thoughts?
Sounds like something a Fat Person (who is not inclined to put down the fork) would say.
And her salient point rings true with your post.
"We're such an image-driven culture," Sebor said from San Diego, Calif. "We assume we know everything about someone by looking at their picture and that's just not true.
How would you like it, if you were seen as a number only, or only seen for being white, black, indian, <insert ethnicity, religion, or creed here> ?
How would you like it, if someone was on the forum stating that all men are < insert logical fallacy here> ?
How would you like it, if you were judged by how others act and look, instead of being judged by who you are and what you do?
Martin Luther King once said, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/martinluth115056.html#3pV0Iy5tpELYMxKW.99
People that are overweight are individuals dissolving of respect. And they should be judged no differently than anyone else. And people that are overweight can be more fit than others with a smaller frame etc.
And just because a person is overweight, that doesn't necessarily mean that he or she didn't know how to put down the fork.
The point of the picture and article seems to be getting lost on those who seem to conveniently forget that they are imperfect beings, even if their body is toned to some arbitrary level of acceptance by the hip and with it crowd.
Ignorance and logical fallacy leads to blindness.0 -
williamwj2014 wrote: »Trying to justify being fat and saying that its not about the number on the scale..okay. When it comes to running, that number on the scale matters, a lot. It might be mean to say but the girl in the picture in that article is not healthy as much as she'd like to believe she is. She's overweight. Let's be realistic, please. 10 years of running..wtf? Did it ever occur to her that being lighter would be easier on her joints..I'm so tired of society trying to have acceptance about everything..society is too sensitive. She's not healthy. She's not fit. She's overweight for crying out loud. The article screams "HEY, YOU CAN RUN AND EAT DONUTS TOO!" Running is a good way to lose weight but this article is bull sh8t in the sense it screams acceptance...
The article doesn't scream that at all. The scream you hear, is your own projected voice being placed over what the article is actually saying.
From the article: "We're such an image-driven culture," Sebor said from San Diego, Calif. "We assume we know everything about someone by looking at their picture and that's just not true.
"Health is about what you do — not about what you look like."
And your post is another example of the truth from the article.0 -
Alluminati wrote: »williamwj2014 wrote: »
Why is kd Lang shirtless and yelling at me
*snort*0 -
TheOwlhouseDesigns wrote: »But sometimes it is wiser/better to keep opinions to your self
Some people might have better outcomes than I did if they stayed away from running, and that would make me happy even if I annoyed some people.
IKR? Nothing makes me happier than convincing people to never try to achieve their goals and to live in fear of what might happen. Any day that I can convince somebody to just settle for mediocrity is a good day. Glad we agree on that
Running gets touted all over the place as being the "best cardio to lose weight" (highest calorie burn, free, slims legs down - have a google on the quoted phrase to see what comes up). The hype makes it sound really good to people who otherwise would be just as happy swimming or cycling or dancing. If people's goals mostly involve losing some weight and being more active, there are approximately 50 things I can think of that could accomplish that without ligament damage being a reasonably high probability (not just possibility). If people really want to be runners, they're obviously just going to do it. They'll do what they want anyway.
I don't think anyone can accuse me of running around the forums touting the awesomeness of running. It's fairly well known that I'd rather get shot in the face than run a single mile. I don't think that ability to run X distance is the end all be all of fitness. I don't think running is THE way to lose weight.
And yet, nobody can accuse me of running around the forums discouraging people from running, either. If someone wants to run, go run. I'll give them what little I have to offer when it comes to running advice. I HATE running, but I'm willing to encourage people to run if that's what they want to do. So you trying to flag everyone away from it is patently ridiculous.
Injury rates? Whatever. I guess you've never played a single sport in your life. Because do you know what the injury rate for sports are? Any sport? It's 100%. Because if your do anything hard enough and long enough eventually you'll get some form of injury from it. Hell, secretaries develop overuse injuries. Are you going to neg everyone that wants to participate in a sport, too? You must be a blast at parties.
The other thing that's killing me here is how you keep saying that you don't want others to suffer the same injuries you have. That's.....wow. Just wow. I've read hundreds of your posts here in F&E since you arrived on MFP. I've answered a few of your questions. And the thing that stands out.....not to put too fine a point on it.....but you're injury prone. I'm not saying that as an insult. Heck, It's a running joke with my friends right now how often I get hurt doing stuff so I understand getting hurt so I'm not making fun of that at all.
But from your posts, you've gotten seriously injured from essentially every strenous endeavor you've engaged in. Hey, that happens, and I'm truly sorry it's been that way for you. But that makes you an outlier. To assume that *everyone else* is highly likely to suffer the same fate that you have if they try a particular activity is PREPOSTEROUS. just like if I sent people to the free weight section and expected them all to lift the same amounts as me and progress at the same rate as me. I don't do that. I give them advice *as it pertains to them*, not me, and then wish them the best of luck. It would be nice if you'd consider doing the same.
I'm flattered that you read my posts that attentively.
Nice straw man, though - I *don't* assume "everyone" will deal with the kinds of problems I've had. I think there's probably a bell curve re genetic fit for most sports (in terms of anthropometry, collagen type and distribution, etc etc), and that the ones in the bottom third for running, in this case, are just going to be less lucky in terms of vulnerability to injury, regardless of training variables.
You can laugh at the injury rates if you want. They might be irrelevant to hardcore athletes, most of whom yeah, probably do get injured eventually. (And also have the training years, coaching, knowledge, and *access to good rehab care* to return to their sport in a reasonable timeframe.)
However, I'm willing to bet that most people on here *aren't* athletes, and are more interested in losing weight, or getting reasonably fit, or looking hot on the beach, than pursuing athletic excellence. I'd bet most would rather be athletically "mediocre" and buff, or be able to stay active over the long haul, than be injured and heroic in the short term. The injury rates might matter to some of them.
My advice was directed to those who might reasonably determine their risk of injury, based on past experience, or current weight. I said a few times that it comes down to *appetite for risk*. That's another way people differ, and it would be great if you could have an understanding of that. You obviously think of caution as something negative, ok. I have an equally unfavorable view of encouraging people to do things that might harm them unnecessarily.
I have actually very much appreciated your input on my past questions.
(And I am fun at parties until people get on the subject of running.)0 -
rainbowbow wrote: »Just throwing this out there: I have a friend who smokes, but is muscular, fit, can do loads of hard cardio and doesn't have any health issues. Is in much better condition and health than many lean people who exercise that I know.
Do you think someone like this smoking a cigarette while running should be looked at as it's not that big a deal?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I think the important thing to think about is... it's an unhealthy habit that WILL ultimately lead to many negative health repercussions. It may not be causing a problem, YET, but, ultimately will. We know smoking tobacco causes cancer of the lunges, throat, and mouth. We know that it can shave years off your life and even second-hand smoke can cause health problems.
I look at obesity the same way.
Can someone (at a young age) who can run, and has no bad health effects YET be healthy and be obese? Sure. (even though this is NOT the case for the majority of people who are overweight. Many do not follow a "healthy" lifestyle) But the question isn't, can they be healthy right now? It's can that lifestyle be maintained long term without serious health issues in the future?
Many people who are overweight are even struggling with health issues without knowing it yet (like blood-sugar problems, pre-diabetes, even full blown diabetes, joint damage, hormone imbalance, and high blood pressure).
I understand what you're saying, and my instinct is to feel the same way. However, other than joint damage, which everyone eventually gets and is all but guaranteed with significant overweight, the research is apparently moving in the direction of suggesting that health IS actually at least POSSIBLE at many sizes (if not every size).
I don't usually appeal to authority, but I know Dr Sharma's name, he used to hold the Canada Research Chair of obesity studies (this is a huge deal; indicator of research excellence in Canada) - he's up on the latest stuff, if nothing else. (And I mean, some of the studies I've actually seen have supported the idea.) Of course there is much to suggest the opposite - certainly body composition / bf % is linked with ill health, even in normal weight people. (That's a concern for me - I'm normal weight but have high bf%, and my cholesterol number is borderline for the first time in my life, wasn't even like that when I was overweight. Obviously it's possible to be "thin" and unhealthy. Anyway, I'm working on that.) But I think it's still unclear what the outcomes are for overweight people who pursue health through diet and fitness, not sure there's a lot of research on that group specifically. Although looking at overweight people as a whole, some research is indeed saying it might not be all doom and gloom.
For me, I think I have probably always linked the look of an overweight body and of body fat with the idea of ill-health. It's very hard for me to separate them. And I wonder how much of the concern about health is covering up less PC responses to fat (on an aesthetic level) and people who carry fat, and how much health concern actually feeds into fat-phobia, whether directed towards one's self/body parts or at another person. I'm trying to be more mindful of and to question actual biases I think I probably hold.
But looking at the model on this cover - her posture is great, her chin is up, she's looking forward - she doesn't look ill to me, and I think I can see her as looking healthy, certainly it's a positive image. If that supports people pursuing fitness and health, that's a great thing, imo. If fighting biases that contribute to shame experienced by overweight people - shame that stops them from pursuing health - can help people move towards health, that's a great thing.
Some people may never make it to a normal BMI, but they can certainly live better. Making the perfect the enemy of the good is the wrong approach, imo.
I just love this response. You said it better than I ever could.0 -
Everybody is getting a bit too political here. So look at this pic and tell me how healthy an obese person is. BTW, the girl on the magazine cover is 18. So of course, she doesn't look or is ill...yet. Not to mention photo editing for magazines. They make anybody look their best or worst, depending on what they want to represent.
Here is the link to the pic of an obese person's heart:
http://imgur.com/gallery/CfOybP30 -
To shouty bloke - stress is a major source of bad health. Maybe he should chill out and protect his heart.
Look at the bigger picture - fat person running/ swimming whatever. This is a GOOD thing and people should be encouraged for doing so, instead of negativity about how unhealthy they are.
Positivity is cumulative and good for health (both physical and mental). Something the interweb has the power to do and the people using it also. Think about that for two minutes.
In my gym we have muscley types, fat people, old people, disabled, youngsters etc. I look around and think "Yep this is great". Everyone is *trying*to improve their health and reach goals. I would rather see a fat *kitten* running and wobbling all over the place than none at all. It's inclusive and a step in the right direction for themselves and who am I to judge on their health?
#thisgirlcan0 -
cheshirecatastrophe wrote: »
I'm the biggest cheerleader out there for anyone exercising to the extent their current and future health allows, but I really wish WR had picked an actual overweight runner.
Yes, me too.
The content of the article was good I thought. The actual photo was in jarring contrast to that. The photo was clearly highly posed. She is pretty and made up to the nines. If a message of inclusive body positivity is being promoted then show someone actually running as they normally do (which is my case is a gurning sweaty mess) otherwise it becomes just another version of those ridiculous "women with her head back laughing whilst eating healthy food" (yeah, who actually does that?)
0 -
I think it is so dangerous to promote the idea that you can be "healthy" and overweight to young people. It discourages them against even trying to moderate how much they eat and eat healthy.0
-
TheOwlhouseDesigns wrote: »But sometimes it is wiser/better to keep opinions to your self
Some people might have better outcomes than I did if they stayed away from running, and that would make me happy even if I annoyed some people.
IKR? Nothing makes me happier than convincing people to never try to achieve their goals and to live in fear of what might happen. Any day that I can convince somebody to just settle for mediocrity is a good day. Glad we agree on that
Running gets touted all over the place as being the "best cardio to lose weight" (highest calorie burn, free, slims legs down - have a google on the quoted phrase to see what comes up). The hype makes it sound really good to people who otherwise would be just as happy swimming or cycling or dancing. If people's goals mostly involve losing some weight and being more active, there are approximately 50 things I can think of that could accomplish that without ligament damage being a reasonably high probability (not just possibility). If people really want to be runners, they're obviously just going to do it. They'll do what they want anyway.
I don't think anyone can accuse me of running around the forums touting the awesomeness of running. It's fairly well known that I'd rather get shot in the face than run a single mile. I don't think that ability to run X distance is the end all be all of fitness. I don't think running is THE way to lose weight.
And yet, nobody can accuse me of running around the forums discouraging people from running, either. If someone wants to run, go run. I'll give them what little I have to offer when it comes to running advice. I HATE running, but I'm willing to encourage people to run if that's what they want to do. So you trying to flag everyone away from it is patently ridiculous.
Injury rates? Whatever. I guess you've never played a single sport in your life. Because do you know what the injury rate for sports are? Any sport? It's 100%. Because if your do anything hard enough and long enough eventually you'll get some form of injury from it. Hell, secretaries develop overuse injuries. Are you going to neg everyone that wants to participate in a sport, too? You must be a blast at parties.
The other thing that's killing me here is how you keep saying that you don't want others to suffer the same injuries you have. That's.....wow. Just wow. I've read hundreds of your posts here in F&E since you arrived on MFP. I've answered a few of your questions. And the thing that stands out.....not to put too fine a point on it.....but you're injury prone. I'm not saying that as an insult. Heck, It's a running joke with my friends right now how often I get hurt doing stuff so I understand getting hurt so I'm not making fun of that at all.
But from your posts, you've gotten seriously injured from essentially every strenous endeavor you've engaged in. Hey, that happens, and I'm truly sorry it's been that way for you. But that makes you an outlier. To assume that *everyone else* is highly likely to suffer the same fate that you have if they try a particular activity is PREPOSTEROUS. just like if I sent people to the free weight section and expected them all to lift the same amounts as me and progress at the same rate as me. I don't do that. I give them advice *as it pertains to them*, not me, and then wish them the best of luck. It would be nice if you'd consider doing the same.
I'm flattered that you read my posts that attentively.
Nice straw man, though - I *don't* assume "everyone" will deal with the kinds of problems I've had. I think there's probably a bell curve re genetic fit for most sports (in terms of anthropometry, collagen type and distribution, etc etc), and that the ones in the bottom third for running, in this case, are just going to be less lucky in terms of vulnerability to injury, regardless of training variables.
You can laugh at the injury rates if you want. They might be irrelevant to hardcore athletes, most of whom yeah, probably do get injured eventually. (And also have the training years, coaching, knowledge, and *access to good rehab care* to return to their sport in a reasonable timeframe.)
However, I'm willing to bet that most people on here *aren't* athletes, and are more interested in losing weight, or getting reasonably fit, or looking hot on the beach, than pursuing athletic excellence. I'd bet most would rather be athletically "mediocre" and buff, or be able to stay active over the long haul, than be injured and heroic in the short term. The injury rates might matter to some of them.
My advice was directed to those who might reasonably determine their risk of injury, based on past experience, or current weight. I said a few times that it comes down to *appetite for risk*. That's another way people differ, and it would be great if you could have an understanding of that. You obviously think of caution as something negative, ok. I have an equally unfavorable view of encouraging people to do things that might harm them unnecessarily.
I have actually very much appreciated your input on my past questions.
(And I am fun at parties until people get on the subject of running.)
"Never try anything because, based on my extensive personal experience, it's not if you get hurt, it's when. ESPECIALLY running, it's the devil."
- Tomatoey
There. Just make this your signature line. It sums up everything you've said in this thread with 99.9% less superfluous verbage.0 -
TheOwlhouseDesigns wrote: »But sometimes it is wiser/better to keep opinions to your self
Some people might have better outcomes than I did if they stayed away from running, and that would make me happy even if I annoyed some people.
IKR? Nothing makes me happier than convincing people to never try to achieve their goals and to live in fear of what might happen. Any day that I can convince somebody to just settle for mediocrity is a good day. Glad we agree on that
Running gets touted all over the place as being the "best cardio to lose weight" (highest calorie burn, free, slims legs down - have a google on the quoted phrase to see what comes up). The hype makes it sound really good to people who otherwise would be just as happy swimming or cycling or dancing. If people's goals mostly involve losing some weight and being more active, there are approximately 50 things I can think of that could accomplish that without ligament damage being a reasonably high probability (not just possibility). If people really want to be runners, they're obviously just going to do it. They'll do what they want anyway.
I don't think anyone can accuse me of running around the forums touting the awesomeness of running. It's fairly well known that I'd rather get shot in the face than run a single mile. I don't think that ability to run X distance is the end all be all of fitness. I don't think running is THE way to lose weight.
And yet, nobody can accuse me of running around the forums discouraging people from running, either. If someone wants to run, go run. I'll give them what little I have to offer when it comes to running advice. I HATE running, but I'm willing to encourage people to run if that's what they want to do. So you trying to flag everyone away from it is patently ridiculous.
Injury rates? Whatever. I guess you've never played a single sport in your life. Because do you know what the injury rate for sports are? Any sport? It's 100%. Because if your do anything hard enough and long enough eventually you'll get some form of injury from it. Hell, secretaries develop overuse injuries. Are you going to neg everyone that wants to participate in a sport, too? You must be a blast at parties.
The other thing that's killing me here is how you keep saying that you don't want others to suffer the same injuries you have. That's.....wow. Just wow. I've read hundreds of your posts here in F&E since you arrived on MFP. I've answered a few of your questions. And the thing that stands out.....not to put too fine a point on it.....but you're injury prone. I'm not saying that as an insult. Heck, It's a running joke with my friends right now how often I get hurt doing stuff so I understand getting hurt so I'm not making fun of that at all.
But from your posts, you've gotten seriously injured from essentially every strenous endeavor you've engaged in. Hey, that happens, and I'm truly sorry it's been that way for you. But that makes you an outlier. To assume that *everyone else* is highly likely to suffer the same fate that you have if they try a particular activity is PREPOSTEROUS. just like if I sent people to the free weight section and expected them all to lift the same amounts as me and progress at the same rate as me. I don't do that. I give them advice *as it pertains to them*, not me, and then wish them the best of luck. It would be nice if you'd consider doing the same.
I'm flattered that you read my posts that attentively.
Nice straw man, though - I *don't* assume "everyone" will deal with the kinds of problems I've had. I think there's probably a bell curve re genetic fit for most sports (in terms of anthropometry, collagen type and distribution, etc etc), and that the ones in the bottom third for running, in this case, are just going to be less lucky in terms of vulnerability to injury, regardless of training variables.
You can laugh at the injury rates if you want. They might be irrelevant to hardcore athletes, most of whom yeah, probably do get injured eventually. (And also have the training years, coaching, knowledge, and *access to good rehab care* to return to their sport in a reasonable timeframe.)
However, I'm willing to bet that most people on here *aren't* athletes, and are more interested in losing weight, or getting reasonably fit, or looking hot on the beach, than pursuing athletic excellence. I'd bet most would rather be athletically "mediocre" and buff, or be able to stay active over the long haul, than be injured and heroic in the short term. The injury rates might matter to some of them.
My advice was directed to those who might reasonably determine their risk of injury, based on past experience, or current weight. I said a few times that it comes down to *appetite for risk*. That's another way people differ, and it would be great if you could have an understanding of that. You obviously think of caution as something negative, ok. I have an equally unfavorable view of encouraging people to do things that might harm them unnecessarily.
I have actually very much appreciated your input on my past questions.
(And I am fun at parties until people get on the subject of running.)
"Never try anything because, based on my extensive personal experience, it's not if you get hurt, it's when. ESPECIALLY running, it's the devil."
- Tomatoey
There. Just make this your signature line. It sums up everything you've said in this thread with 99.9% less superfluous verbage.
I realize it's hard to keep track when there are a lot of words. Here's the more concise version again
What does that even mean?
How do you know you're good at running before you decide to try running?
I feel like almost no one has not had the opportunity to run (unlike say SCUBA diving or pole dancing) but admit this may not be true for everyone.
The following is my opinion (albeit one shared by at least two of my past physiotherapists):
Some people are built to run. Great biomechanics for running. They're like gazelles, beautiful to watch. They know they can run because when they do it, it's easy and feels good (vs bad).
Some people are ok at running. Medium biomechanics for running, maybe not perfect but they can make it work without hurting themselves.
Some people SUCK at running and will almost certainly hurt themselves if they do it long enough bc their mechanics for it are terrible.
The issue is when people THINK they're in group 2 but are actually in group 3. That can be long term bad news bears (it happened to me).
Many people who are ACTUALLY in group 2 will probably be fine, but there's no real way to know until you've already hurt yourself, possibly permanently
0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXDEe_bg9lM
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 925 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions