People get hurt more at lower mileage?

You actually sounded like you knew what you were talking about until the last sentence. NEXT!

?

jaguar1 wrote:

The lab I did my thesis at did one of the major NIH funded jumping studies. Yes, high impact has a positive impact on bone, but it's not as safe, sustainable, and important for bone strength/maintenance than the "low magnitude/high frequency" vibrational force of simply weight bearing and lower-intensity exercise.

For a guy so learned I find it funny that you eliminate an entire middle of the spectrum and only reference LSD and high impact. Although, jumping itself is similar. Running is a lunge, or squat jump, one leg at a time. Depth jumps would be the opposite end of the spectrum. That middle spectrum you are not talking about is where some of us are alluding to.

The guy was just being a tool. The word you were looking for was "attributed."

virgin mobile wrote:For a guy so learned I find it funny that you eliminate an entire middle of the spectrum and only reference LSD and high impact. Although, jumping itself is similar. Running is a lunge, or squat jump, one leg at a time. Depth jumps would be the opposite end of the spectrum. That middle spectrum you are not talking about is where some of us are alluding to.

For a guy so critical, perhaps you shouldn't assume you are talking to a guy.

jaguar1 wrote:

?

If you are online here please see my e-mail.

tangy wrote:

For a guy so critical, perhaps you shouldn't assume you are talking to a guy.

That logic doesn't even follow.

While you're here jaguar1 I have a few questions. Say that someone works at a job that requires them to be on their feet for 6-8 hours a day for a total of 25-30 hours a week. Would that negatively effect running performance? What injuries or problems might arise from this, if any at all? And is it less stressful on the body to have a job like the one described above, or a desk job where you are sitting for 6+ hours a day? Thanks!

virgin mobile wrote:

tangy wrote:

For a guy so critical, perhaps you shouldn't assume you are talking to a guy.

That logic doesn't even follow.

Read and think.

tangy wrote:

The guy was just being a tool. The word you were looking for was "attributed."

Guilty. Carry on.

Some great posts above.

Perhaps some of the same systems such as those involved in Olympic weightlifting are at play in running. Multiple sessions and multiple release of hormones into the body. Also increased frequency in performing a specific skill is likely enhancing neurological efficiency as well.

In the link above Coach Broz talks about the body's connective tissues being avascular and how it doesn't recover as quickly as the muscles. Therefore perhaps just as similarly to O-lifting, running every day and even multiple times per day means that your muscle tissue is broken down just enough to keep from pulling on the connective tissues to hard.

I can attest as well that I got far less tweaks when I went to running every day of the week, and the few times I've had tweaks has come after a day or two off when theoretically I feel fresher. But it would appear that this could be a some at lease small detriment.

virgin mobile wrote:

For a guy so learned I find it funny that you eliminate an entire middle of the spectrum and only reference LSD and high impact. Although, jumping itself is similar. Running is a lunge, or squat jump, one leg at a time. Depth jumps would be the opposite end of the spectrum. That middle spectrum you are not talking about is where some of us are alluding to.

My thesis proposal review of the research is far too comprehensive to post here. Greater intensity places greater stress (and strain) of muscle-on-bone. When applied too frequently, you catch what happens. Every type of training has a purpose-- a higher intensity induces change. A hard-easy method works because it allows for supercompensation. It's often underestimated the anabolic impact of low intensity running, esp. when done more frequently. The OP wanted to know why he feels better running higher mileage, and it's because he's moving more frequently, getting more blood flowing to the working muscles, and the body likes this because we're built to endure.

As crazy as it sounds, when I went on to my MOS school after boot camp years back there was very little time to train. I basically was getting in both an interval workout, and a long run with a fast Tempo finish once per week. About twice per week we had these dumb class battalion marches. They were shin-splint shuffles if a person didn't run have some running strength behind them as they were so slow. So needless to say I was running very low-mileage. However, the marches to and from the classroom were a total of 4 miles each day in formation, and then another 2 miles for those of us who went back to study (I sure did as there was nothing else to do). But this was 6 miles per day of walking 6-7 days per week. I am now convinced that this did have some carryover to my timed run performance while on such a low amount of actual running.

joalturn wrote:

While you're here jaguar1 I have a few questions. Say that someone works at a job that requires them to be on their feet for 6-8 hours a day for a total of 25-30 hours a week. Would that negatively effect running performance? What injuries or problems might arise from this, if any at all? And is it less stressful on the body to have a job like the one described above, or a desk job where you are sitting for 6+ hours a day? Thanks!

I formerly worked in a lab, standing on my feet most of the time. I think standing is far better than sitting all the time. If you can strike a balance, that's great. Since you stand a lot, this uses a lot of energy, so make sure you're fueling (and hydrating) adequately. Compression garments wouldn't be a bad idea. I found I couldn't do my hard workouts before work because I'd be too tired, but if you have no other option, then the compression garments during work (after a hard workout) would likely be very helpful. In grad school, I spent a lot of time looking under a microscope, which used an amazing amount of mental energy (brain = glucose). If your job is mentally tiring, definitely... the whole fueling/hydration aspect is important, and also how you 'view' running (~for meditation/stress relief).

Anyway you could send me the full thesis?

Interesting post.

After pretty frequent injuries, I started running everyday, landing mid-food and building mileage slowly. I can easily handle 60's now (which used to be abreaking point)and I'm coming up on 600 days of running everyday with no injuries.

Is there any data suggesting midfoot landing helps build bone mass better than heel strike?

I think running everyday keeps the blood flowing better than a rest day. Just do a slow recovery day mixed in.

My company is encouraging us to get work stations that allow you to stand and us the computer. Now I think that might be a good idea.

virgin mobile wrote:

tangy wrote:

For a guy so critical, perhaps you shouldn't assume you are talking to a guy.

That logic doesn't even follow.

Your homework assignment is to find out who Jaguar1 is. Using the search function properly will yield the answer.

Very good thread. Thanks for all the information Jaguar!

This thread is great. Anecdotally I've been saying for years that the best way to treat non-acute injuries, niggles, etc, is MORE easy running to increase blood flow. I tell friends, coworkers, etc, that are new to running that their doctors would never tell them to increase their running if something is sore, but it always works for me. I went into Boston last year with a sore tendon in my foot. After 26.2 miles the pain was entirely gone. I didn't run at an easy pace but it wasn't exactly a 200m sprint either. Two weeks ago I got a rather inflamed posterior tibial tendon and proceeded to run a week of 100 miles all at recovery pace and using 2-a-days. Problem solved. This shit works. I'd love a copy of the thesis too.