NY Times Article on Cool-Down a BUNCH OF BS

I read the article in yesterdays paper as well, and while I don't necessarily agree with all of the conclusions either, I would hardly call Dr.Paul Thompson a "quack" as you did. From my peripheral recollection, the guy was a very solid marathoner who

I read the article in yesterdays paper as well, and while I don't necessarily agree with all of the conclusions either, I would hardly call Dr.Paul Thompson a "quack" as you did. From my peripheral recollection, the guy was a very solid marathoner (an Oly marathon qualifier if I recall) with solid academic qualifications as a cardiologist as well.

Thompson's Kolata's go to guy. His advice appears in virtually every one of her pieces.

Gina Kolata strikes again!

If you feel better then go ahead and do it. The article just says that it's not necessary and probably doesn't help much if at all.

I can understand cooling down for 5 minutes, but most people go 15 or 20 which is a run in itself.

Jack Daniels says it does not matter what you do after a workout. Within 24 hours the lactic acid in your muscles is gone whether you jog afterward or not.

Personally, I have jumped in the car right after a hard workout in order to get to work on time (yes, I shower between) and never noticed any problem. I have always seen the cool down more as a way to maintain mileage on workout days.

From a coaching standpoint I use it for one very big reason. Its more workload, and therefore can translate to the adaptation to workload. I may tell the runners that it is a "cool-down", but that is more a "jedi mind trick" than anything.

Run more-get faster.

Race an all out 800 and don't cool down. Tell me how you feel the next day. (I'll agree that a 15-20 minute cool down is more of a way to maintain mileage than anything else). You also have to remember this article was written for the average person; most people never push themselves very hard.

The article mentions that there is no science behind it, and that may well be true. I think it's another case of scientific knowledge of running lagging behind what runners already know.

Thanks for the interesting responses.

I think someone said what I was thinking; the warm-down is more for workload than anything else. Keeping that mileage up. Hopefully, any respectable 5K or 10K runner isn't going to just do 4 miles (1 mile up, 3.1 race) and call it a day.

When marathon training, I would jump into 5Ks and use them as tempos with 3 up and 3 down. A pretty good way to get a 9 mile workout with a great speed workout in the middle.

Someone else said that "Normal People don't push themselves very hard" and I agree with that point.

That leads to another problem I have with the article, if the warm-down is a work-load increaser, then anyone who actually takes this article to heart has just been discouraged to workout less.

No wonder we are the fattest country in the world, our mainstream media keeps looking for reasons not to get/stay in shape.

I love this site but really question why they put such a horrible article on the front page.

There's nothing wrong with the article- why do you object when someone points out that there is no evidence to support a practice? Those that think it is important can certainly apply for funding from various sources and do the definitive trial, if they are interested.

As far as various statements from people that claim it is the most important part of the run, it's vital to recovery, they feel terrible if they don't do it, take those for what they are- anecdotes. Ultimately, science is moved forward when we question widespread beliefs, and test things. In a world of 6 billion, anecdotes supporting almost anything can be found. I prefer to rely on some sort of systematically collected data.

The big trouble with this in exercise, is that blinding athletes to an intervention is impossible. You could theoretically take an elite group, and have them alternate months of cooldown vs no cooldown- but if they do better with the cooldown, is it just because they are at ease because they are doing what has been drilled into them as best practice, or does the cooldown help in a way beyond just making them feel like they are doing the correct thing?

Anyways, too much typing, but I think we could all do better to question conventional wisdom, and not get mad when people point out that "hey, you know what, there really isn't much data behind this practice."

Well if we're doing to cooldown to maintain volume, why not just do a longer warmup? Say, 30-40 minutes. Maybe running another 3 miles on damaged muscles isn't a good thing.

I've always wanted to try this since I hate shuffling around for 20 minutes after a workout, but don't really have the option since I'm on a team.

DD,

Good points and I respect your view based on data.

However, this writer seems like a RunnersWorld Penquin type.

If Salazar, Daniels, Vigil, or Mahon stop having their runners do warm-down, then I will listen.

These are the experts who do it for a living (Very successfully as well!!)

Please read below:

Run, Recover, Repeat: Recovery is serious business in Mammoth, where the 30 to 60 minutes after a run are considered an integral part of the workout. The goal is to get the body back to its pre-run state as soon as possible through nutrition and light exercises such as drills and stretching. The latter are especially important if, like the Mammoth runners, you drive to run. For info on optimal post-run nutrition, see "Power Up" on p. 24 of our October Issue.

Source:

http://www.runningtimes.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=17635&PageNum=5

notthatmushccc wrote:

Jack Daniels says it does not matter what you do after a workout. Within 24 hours the lactic acid in your muscles is gone whether you jog afterward or not.

wrong.

I think the article brings up some important points. I've seen coaches at meets telling their athletes that they need to hurry up and cool down before the lactic acid sets in. That's nonsense. Lactic acid doesn't cause muscle soreness, muscle breakdown causes muscle soreness, and shuffling through a cooldown isn't going to fix that, it's only going to cause more muscle breakdown. Which isn't to say that a cooldown doesn't have value, for the reasons previously mentioned. There is a strong training effect in doing some running (however slow) while the body is depleted.

"Hopefully, any respectable 5K or 10K runner isn't going to just do 4 miles (1 mile up, 3.1 race) and call it a day. "

Why? Race day is race day. It's not "I need to jog for an extra 20 minutes day."

Ever since Gina Kolata wrote in one of her articles that Sara Hall runs close to a 4 minute mile she has zero credibility with me.

PERSONAL EXPERIENCE > SCIENCE/DR'S/WHATEVER ELSE.

I do cooldowns because I feel better the next day compared to when I don't. I also like the extra mileage.

I don't care if there's no science behind it.