Why do most doctors (including "sports medicine" ones) hate running and think 30mpw is the max amount you should eve

Median half marathon finishing times are at 9:30 pace for men. You'd figure 11-12 min miles for true easy pace. That's 5.5 hours of running per week - DIDN'T YOU READ THAT LAST STUDY THAT SAYS IF YOU RUN OVER 2.5 HOURS PER WEEK, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO LIVE AS LONG????

You might check your facts about knees. Does running really cause arthritis or osteoarthritis?

http://bit.ly/J8aIK7

Obviously, running less will heal us. But not running may not. 6 month ago I had multiple torn abs muscles and was running 100 miles (I started running 2 years ago) and stopped for 4 month with no improvement. Went to a PT who told me to start running gradually again ASAP, with some exercices. Did everything and started healing. Later was diagnosed with double inguinal hernia. Still everything else got healed and now I can run without much pain. Will have to do surgery later though.

I beleive we can all run pretty high mileage, but some just need years of adaptation.

rich99 wrote:

You might check your facts about knees. Does running really cause arthritis or osteoarthritis?

http://bit.ly/J8aIK7

.

If you were referring to me, then we're in agreement -- I re-read my post and see how it's unclear.

I meant to say that the average American is overweight /and sedentary/, yet ironically thinks running is "bad for the knees," when (as other studies show) it is /obesity/ and lack of activity which is clearly bad for knees.

In the case of some patients that experience knee pain after running, that still means (by way of the average population) overweight people who just started running, in which case I would still argue the principle cause is the excess weight.

No, a couple other posters have stated that running was bad for knees. And I agree too with your statement. I guess obese/overweight have more of a problem with running technique that greatly stresses the knees. Bodybuilders have very strong knees and high bone density, yet "overweight", but have motor skill to run properly or mad dedication to learn. They too need to start slow though.

rich99 wrote:

You might check your facts about knees. Does running really cause arthritis or osteoarthritis?

http://bit.ly/J8aIK7

Test sample 54 - that's not a real study, that's a joke.

"Most" dcotors don't hate running, most doctors don't care about running. There is, as early posters have said, no real focus on sports medicine in medical school, and why should there be? Are running injuries a major public health issue that a society should spend money trying to fix? It is going to be hard for a non sports medicine physician get too excited about minor running injuries when the next person has a blood pressure of 190/120 and a blood sugar of 400. The priority is going to be health, not running performance. The average physician has minimal training in running injuries and less in how much training is needed to be a competetive running, nor should they. I'm not sure that I have ever seen a serious runner as a patient (although in my specialty that would be unlikely).

I don't know many sports medicine doctors with most of my contact coming as a patient. I do get the impression that they tend to be more interested in sports like football, basketball, volleyball, ect and the type of injuries that occur in these sports.

Interesting. Well then, where is a competitive distance runner to go when he/she has problems? PTs and Chiropractors?

There probably are sports medicine doctors that are interested in running, just not the majority. I think whether other fields are appropriate probably depends on the injury (not much a chiropractor or physical therapist can do for Haglund's deformity).

What's the purpose of getting a sports medicine fellowship if it means you tell NCAA distance runners straight to their face to no longer run 60mpw?

I’ve seen this a lot

Doctors and the medical profession truly work miracles when it comes to trauma (car wreck, being shot, etc) and disease (malaria, polio and all the other diseases that used to kill the masses). But they really don’t know squat when it comes to a subject like running’s impact on your knees or lifestyle diseases (chronic heart disease) and their relationship to Healthy food and exercise.

ronner wrote:

I remember reading on here in the last few years about a study that came out of Stanford that concluded that runners who train through their development stages(before they are full grown) are actually at a very low risk of knee problems when they are older. It's the folks who start distance running when they are already full grown that have the long term knee problems. I'm too lazy to try and look it up, so maybe someone else can. But he just of it was that while your developing, if you are running miles, your body develops in a way that helps you sustain that for the rest of your life. If you don't run while you are developing, you body is

Experiment of one, here, but....I've been running 20-40/week for over 40 years, and never a knee problem, or any other joint. Plenty of soleus, calf, and hamstring injuries. While I'm a low-mileage guy, the accumulated miles are pretty substantial by now, and no hint of knee problems. So, again, experiment of one, but it's fairly hard to imagine that it's currently supportable for doctors to warn runners about still-fairly-modest mileage (30+).

Oh, and I'm not assuming that I know what most doctors do or do not recommend. However, it easy for me to be receptive to the OP's theme, as I know that even a low-mileage guy like me seems to often be seen as pretty hardcore in relation to the pretty sedentary standards of the average American doctor and/or citizen. At the serious risk of humblebragging, it's kind of funny how exceptional (and/or strange) Americans can make you feel if you're simply reasonably thin and fit in your 50's.....

Except the doctor is fat and out shape and loses credibility by not knowing how to solve problems we runners solve all the time.

Really though there is some truth in what you say, but maybe more nuance than only freaks of nature can keep going. In fact there are plenty of runners who sustain a "serious" runner life who are far from genetic lottery winners. You just have to be smart and more determined to solve your problems than the average Kaiser Fatso.

Why misuse the word "hate"?

Doctors know that people rely more on wishful thinking than good sense, and overdo everything, including their training. Doctors have to deal with the entire mix of people, so their recommendations are slanted towards what the common mix of people might stupidly do.

Also, high volume entails more high intensity. The more high intensity, the more likely someone will not warm up properly, and over-pressurize their heart and arteries, increasing chances for inflammation and thick walled ventricles that don't move enough blood. If everyone trained wisely, the statistics wouldn't show that high volume results in higher circulatory system damage.

RyecorDone wrote:

Doctors know that people rely more on wishful thinking than good sense, and overdo everything, including their training. Doctors have to deal with the entire mix of people, so their recommendations are slanted towards what the common mix of people might stupidly do.

Also, high volume entails more high intensity. The more high intensity, the more likely someone will not warm up properly, and over-pressurize their heart and arteries, increasing chances for inflammation and thick walled ventricles that don't move enough blood. If everyone trained wisely, the statistics wouldn't show that high volume results in higher circulatory system damage.

But their recommendation is based not on the belief of circulatory damage but more future joint damage and possible need for hip replacements, knee replacements etc

Unqualifiednoob wrote:

In fact there are plenty of runners who sustain a "serious" runner life who are far from genetic lottery winners. You just have to be smart and more determined to solve your problems than the average Kaiser Fatso.

Would agree with this. Was told (10 years ago) that in just 20 years would require bilateral hip replacements if I continue. I just hit all time high training volume 100mpw 10 years later. But it will be another 10 years before I’ll get to see if the doctor was right that I’ll need hip replacements

I'm just going with the more recent stuff that focuses on the recommendation of less than 40 minutes, 3 times per week. And the reasons given were about the heart. Sure, doctors rationalize the recommendations, which they never had time to study, on the fly, so you get the usual knee injury folklore. My doctor told me not to start running at age 50 because I had early stage knee joint "degeneration" from too much ladder work in construction. I ignored him and started running. A year later he noticed that my knee joints were smooth, quiet and strong, and told me "keep doing what you're doing!"