I have seen plenty of obese but extremely strong people power lifting but I have yet to see an obese but extremely dedicated distance runner.
I have seen plenty of obese but extremely strong people power lifting but I have yet to see an obese but extremely dedicated distance runner.
No Way wrote:
I have seen plenty of obese but extremely strong people power lifting but I have yet to see an obese but extremely dedicated distance runner.
Another straw man. Congratulations!
Do you define fitness as "not being obese"? (I guess Calista Flockhart passes...)
It is a damn good first step.The weightlifters can lift all they want... I'll keep to my yoga and daily running. I'm in my mid 50s and basically weigh the same as I did in college. And funny thing, I'm the one not out of breath when I'm walking up stairs at work... They can preach about weight lifting all they want... most of them look like fat apes.
Monte wrote:
No Way wrote:I have seen plenty of obese but extremely strong people power lifting but I have yet to see an obese but extremely dedicated distance runner.
Another straw man. Congratulations!
Do you define fitness as "not being obese"? (I guess Calista Flockhart passes...)
getreal wrote:
It is a damn good first step.
The weightlifters can lift all they want... I'll keep to my yoga and daily running. I'm in my mid 50s and basically weigh the same as I did in college. And funny thing, I'm the one not out of breath when I'm walking up stairs at work...
They can preach about weight lifting all they want... most of them look like fat apes.
Monte wrote:Another straw man. Congratulations!
Do you define fitness as "not being obese"? (I guess Calista Flockhart passes...)
Fat apes! POD!
What is really at work here is personal trainers trying to justify getting paid $50, $60, $70 an hour to "train" someone in a gym. This is just about economics and not science. Gym memberships go for about $40-100 a month. Add in a personal trainer once or twice a week and you are spending several hundred a month just to lift weights. With running, trainning groups cost less than gym membership and many are free. And even personalized coaching for running costs about as much per month as a single session with a personal trainer. So, the personal trainers have to make up a bunch of stuff about how weight lifting is so much better for you than running in order to justify having people spend hundreds of dollars to have someone stand next to them and say "one more time."
Here you go, if you want to simplify it into who will live the longest. Endurance athletes win, although both groups are better than average.
Increased life expectancy of world class male athletes.
APPLIED SCIENCES
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. 25(2):237-244, February 1993.
SARNA, SEPPO; SAHI, TIMO; KOSKENVUO, MARKKU; KAPRIO, JAAKKO
Avg for Endurance athletes- 75.6yrs
Avg for power athletes- 71.5yrs
Reference group- 69.9yrs
Another one:
"We found that former aerobic sports athletes (endurance and mixed sports) in particular have high total and active life expectancy and low risk for ischemic heart disease and diabetes in later years. "
"former endurance athletes had the lowest ORs for diabetes (OR 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.07 to 0.81) and ischemic heart disease (OR 0.33; 0.18 to 0.61)"
More:
"The lower RR among athletes from endurance sports and other sports involving aerobic activity was largely explained by lower rates of hospital care for heart disease, respiratory disease, and neoplasms, but not for musculoskeletal disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Former elite athletes, particularly those in aerobic sports, use less hospital care. Other beneficial health habits are known to be associated with a physically active lifestyle."
Hospital care in later life among former world-class Finnish athletes.
MORE:
Natural selection to sports, later physical activity habits, and coronary heart disease.
"CONCLUSIONS: Both a previous aptitude for endurance athletic events and continuity of vigorous physical activity seem to be associated with protection against coronary heart disease, but an aptitude for power speed events does not give protection against coronary heart disease."
Runningart knows a lot about being a certified personal trainer. That's it.
The problem I see with this debate is lots of confusion over what is meant by "fitness." The average distance runner sees fitness as being able to get from point A to point B as fast as possible with as little effort as possible. The average weightlifter sees fitness as being able to lift as much weight as possible with as little effort as possible.
[quote]chitownrunner wrote:
My friend, the yoga master Andrey Lappa, used to run barefoot though rough terrain in the night to develop his sensory perception to such a high point he could slip and slide through the woods as comfortably as a wild beast.
Dreaming ?
would he DFL in a girls HS XC over the same terrain
If done correctly, isn't weightlifting aerobic exercise? Besides, running rules. When was the last time you ran into a a weightlifter at the gym and thought to yourself "that guy is awesome"?
"Skinny people with no muscle mass: the results of low testosterone and high daily cortisol production."
This is a result of not eating enough.
I agree that being skinny does not necessarily mean that you are fit but being obese in my mind means you are not fit. Some very elite weight lifters are obese which is inconsistent with the hypothesis that weightlifting is the best way to stay healthy.If you are obese then you are not fit.
Monte wrote:
No Way wrote:I have seen plenty of obese but extremely strong people power lifting but I have yet to see an obese but extremely dedicated distance runner.
Another straw man. Congratulations!
Do you define fitness as "not being obese"? (I guess Calista Flockhart passes...)
No way wrote:
Some very elite weight lifters are obese which is inconsistent with the hypothesis that weightlifting is the best way to stay healthy.
If you are obese then you are not fit.
Alan Webb lifts weights. Is he fit or healthy?
Perhaps the best way to stay healthy uses a combination of methods to produce a wide spectrum of fitness. "Getreal" suggests above that solid core strength and increased flexibility are important aspects of fitness. I agree, but think there are additional aspects to consider.
I find it telling that a majority of runningArt arguments are purely anecdotal.
i.e,
"I've never seen a runner to do splits" or such similar b.s.
I've never met a weight lifter who wasn't a complete douche, that doesn't mean they all are.
qq wrote:
If done correctly, isn't weightlifting aerobic exercise? Besides, running rules. When was the last time you ran into a a weightlifter at the gym and thought to yourself "that guy is awesome"?
Bingo. If you take a cross-sectional area of a trained bodybuilder you will find many more capillaries than you actually thought you would have. Of course he's not an aerobic beast because he's a 250lb beast but his aerobic development is still better than the average person.
http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/81/5/2004The problems is the terms: aerobic (which is a made up term coined by Dr. Kenneth Cooper) and cardio (which is short for cardiovascular activity). Cardiovascular activity is simply one which raises heart rate for a period of time. If you are a bodybuilder and training right you will be under tension for 35-70 seconds per set, rest for 60-90s and repeat. Effort, equal rest, effort, repeat...sound familar? Compare this with a power or strength athlete, who's only concern is moving the weight as fast as he can. A strength or power athlete will likely not have much cardiovascular conditioning due to the nature of their training (heavier weights, longer, much longer rests).
I actually mispoke earlier. Powerlifters are typically pretty fat in the open division. In the weight classes they will be pretty lean. Moreso with the Olympic lifters because speed of movement (which is slowed by too much fat) is a concern.
Also, don't confuse "health & fitness" with "competitive running". That seems to be the apples vs oranges debate going on here. There is a way to train and eat to develop a competitive distance runner. There is a different way to train and eat to develop a lean athletic body which is desired by most people who do not run 100 miles a week.
The problem with the studies on the mortality rate of runners vs lifters is that there are countless other reasons why someonw will have a higher or lower mortality rate. Also, quality of life is important as well. Why would someone even take up such a study if they weren't already biased in one way or another? I have a feeling the retention rate for "former distance runners" is much higher than "strength athletes". Physical activity, no matter what kind it is, prolongs life. Also, what about the genetic predispositions toward distance running vs weight lifting. Those who weight lift tend to start out bigger and come from obese families with a history of heart disease. Again I'm just making generalizations...but the 120lb freshman from a family of skinny people is probably not going out for the football team vs the obese kid from the obese family. To get a better comparison you'd have to compare former distance runners to something like lightweight bodybuilders. There would be a better comparison here.
Alan
Runningart2004 wrote:
The problem with the studies on the mortality rate of runners vs lifters is that there are countless other reasons why someonw will have a higher or lower mortality rate.
The problem with studies on the mortality rate of runners vs lifters is that this one didn't turn out the way you wanted.
Also, quality of life is important as well.
I posted a link earlier in this thread that concluded runners have a higher quality of life than non-exercisers. (To be fair, this may well be true for lifters as well, I don't know of a comparative study.)
Why would someone even take up such a study if they weren't already biased in one way or another?
I don't know? Perhaps they wanted some freaking factual basis for their biases.
Runningart2004 wrote:
One more thing...
Skinny people with no muscle mass: the results of low testosterone and high daily cortisol production. The issue isn't with the immediate production caused by the activity. Yes of course high intensity exercise will produce more cortisol. The problem is the ELEVATED cortisol HOURS after the activity due to the repetitive nature. If I did 1000 lunges I'd expect my cortisol to be high for HOURS too.
I always see more lean (ie: low body fat) and muscular (ie: the men actually have traps) lifting weights and the fat people on the treadmill.
I've seen people and read research that showed people not losing a pound with cardio but having complete body transformations with weight training.
Weight training can increase muscular strength, muscular endurance, flexibility and improve body composition. Running reduces strength and flexibility and improvements in actual muscular endurance (not cardiorespiratory) are typically not on par with weight lifters. Put 50% of your 1 rep max on the bar and see how much you can lift. Do the same with a trained weight lifter....muscle memory and coordinated fiber recruitment will be much better in the lifter. The weight lifter will typically have a lower body fat %...especially if he's a trained bodybuilder and if he's training for a show it's no contest. So a runner will of course have better cardiorespiratory endurance and maybe and even muscular enduranc but the other fitness attributes will be better by a weight lifter.
Alan
You seem preoccupied with body image.
Gym-rat culture getting to you, Alan?
Remember, it's not what you can do, it's what you look like you can do!
John Smallberries wrote:
What is really at work here is personal trainers trying to justify getting paid $50, $60, $70 an hour to "train" someone in a gym. This is just about economics and not science. Gym memberships go for about $40-100 a month. Add in a personal trainer once or twice a week and you are spending several hundred a month just to lift weights. With running, trainning groups cost less than gym membership and many are free. And even personalized coaching for running costs about as much per month as a single session with a personal trainer. So, the personal trainers have to make up a bunch of stuff about how weight lifting is so much better for you than running in order to justify having people spend hundreds of dollars to have someone stand next to them and say "one more time."
Ladies and Gentlemen,
we have a winner.
The big problem with this article is his initial observation. He is comparing some fat chicks waddling on a treadmill for 20 minutes to someone who is lifting weights.
The comparable observation would be if we saw someone along a trail we were running lifting some logs, and we wrote a diatribe about runners being more fit than lifters because we observed a couple of losers playing with twigs.
The cherry picking of studies as shown through the subsequent posts can prove just about anything. The fact that this guy starts his diatribe with a foolish initial observation pretty much ends any credibility of any of the data that follows.
He and his Grand Master yoga master friend can go run off into the woods and lift each other for all I care...
Alan is to fitness (and yesterday horse racing too!) as Flagpole is to economics. i.e. a know it all blowhard
otter wrote:
By the way, I also can't stand the people on the treadmills with I-pods watching television. There are not many of those types on this board. !
You may be surprised about that.
Think about this the next time you are "in the thick of competition fighting for the win". That guy that beats your a55 probably did a great tempo run on a treadmill watching tv and listening to his ipod while you were sliding your way around an ice covered street trying to not get hit by a car because you are a tough "weather" runner. Congratulations. You are no better than "weightlifter guy".