running bad for health

But I don't just run to get some health benefits, I run to get faster race times (to a point).

This is where we can stop reading. O'Keefe is a fraud who's been pushing junk science for years. The link already posted refutes the idea that running is bad for your health.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Association of high amounts of physical activity with mortality risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis - PubMed

PROSPERO CRD42017055727.

Link:pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31406017/

I don't need to read a study. Middle distance athletes who never move up to 5000m plus and continue to run (6 to 30) miles per week live the longest.

O’Keefe a fraud? Care to provide any proof to back up your bold claims?

In my opinion this is an example of how those who are hypersensitive to a condition, may point the way to potential future troubles for those of us who are less so.
Just like too much sugar is bad for any of us, it is especially so for diabetics. The same principles may apply in this case also, with too much cardio being bad for any of us, but especially so for those recovering from a heart attack.

A better take on this study than the replies so far is the article ‘Extreme Exercise and the Heart’ from the Newyorker. Google it, as I can’t post links as a new user.

It's possible. Being drug-free, and training for a decent marathon time in 2017 at age 43, I was able to increase mileage. After the marathon, when I got my best time although not what i wanted...I was urinating blood clots for almost 2 weeks, suggesting trauma on the body. It went away but if that can happen, anything can. Anything with the bloodstream can affect the heart or other organs whenever and however.

I would recommend that people interested in this topic of exercise induced cardiac damage listen to the following talks. One video, is by Dr James O'Keefe and the other is a response to O'Keefe's findings by Dr Aaron Baggish who dives deeper into the data by looking at the health and history profiles of the participants in one of the studies that O'Keefe used to come to his conclusions.

Just to clarify, the majority of the research pertaining to cardiovascular maladaptation in runners/endurance athletes and mortality in the past 10 years has found that while runners tend to present with many maladaptations of the heart as a direct result of running, such as atrial fibrillation, enlarged right ventricle, increased plaque, scarring on the heart, etc., there is little to no evidence to suggest that those maladaptations result in increased mortality risk. Without going into the weeds on what qualifies as high levels of exercise in terms of MET/week, its fairly safe to say that based on our current knowledge, running is not unhealthy for those who do not have preexisting cardiovascular problems.

The arthritis/osteoporosis issue hasn't been that well studied. The majority of the research suggests that there is a u-shaped curve -- a little running is better for bone and joint health than none, but a lot is worse than a little. That being said... the risks are pretty low for those without preexisting conditions, a history of knee injuries, genetic predisposition, etc.

I think the bigger and more interesting question is that off the effects of running in moderate to poor air quality. There has been some really interesting research recently that has shown that exercising in even moderately poor air quality can completely negate any benefits of the exercise.

I'm 63, I've been running 50+/- per week for 50 years. I'm very healthy. Get blood work and a follow up every year.

My family history is diabetes, heart issues, the works. I have none of that. My last visit my doctor said that realistically, I'm as healthy as a healthy 45 year old and as fit as a healthy man much younger.

I've read studies about how running may be unhealthy- well, not for me.

I always wonder who they're studying. I have friends who took up running in their 40's + and jumped into marathons, get injured, very often they lose weight then go back to unhealthy eating and drinking because they think they can because they "run".

Just keep the mileage moderate (I think even up to 80 is fine) and eat healthy (along with the fun food).

So now that I'm nearly 60 and with more than 50 marathons and 500 shorter road races all given at full effort I have been pondering this question.

It seems like just getting on the treadmill with the incline set at 5 is a tough workout.

Damned if you do damned if you don't.

What age did you start participating in marathons and other races? How many years have you been running? You mentioned that running on the treadmill feels more physically taxing. Have you noticed a general decline in your running performance and milage as you aged?

Thanks for pointing out the Air Quality issue. I never considered that because I typically ran along canal trails with no traffic. But since COVID my local area in Florida has experienced a population boom and I have also been running more often along roads. The traffic down here has become more elevated and I'm beginning to notice the automobile exhaust.

The US government manages an Air Quality Index and most areas of the US are designated as "safe" including my area which has readings in the 20s. But this index doesn't really provide reassurance because even if your area has a low AQI reading that does not matter of you happen to be running along a busy road. You'll still breath in that disgusting exhaust before it disperses into the atmosphere.

Stop giving out health advise that you do not know is correct or not. You are just repeating what you want to be true because it is what you do. You would do everyone a big favor by just zipping it.

You say that research into the links between running and arthritis and other orthopaedic issues is scarce…

Well let’s ( for argument’s sake) say that there is a correlation…( a recent thread I saw in this forum about hip resurfacing from a long time enthusiastic, and good, runner, is an example that there might be)

This then presents a dichotomy / paradox for runners looking to improve their performance. Enough running to improve times…but too much that might result in short term, or even worse, long term and lasting injuries.

The problem that any runner faces is that, unless you are so finely tuned into the signals that your body is giving you ( and many aren’t…or don’t listen in their quest for PB’s) then you don’t know whether you’ve crossed the line…until it is too late.

To me, the further you go down the line of performance, the less healthy it becomes. Past a certain point, and I think it’s a fairly low one, the relationship between fitness and health takes on an inverse relationship of increasing proportions.

Picked up running after quitting smoking at 30, been running for 29 year's with only a couple months off here and there over the year's due to injuries. Yes, I've definitely slowed down over the years just like everyone does. I'm okay with my time's for the effort I put in. Milage is half of what it was 10 years ago.

It just seems some days are alot more stressing on the body. I run by how I'm feeling, some days hard and some day's easy.

Since you have prior history of smoking make sure you're getting regular checkups for your heart and lungs.

It's great that you're still running!

NY Daily News is very much an actual newspaper. The NY Post may be the one you were thinking of. And no it's more a tabloid, a piece of crap.

HIIT workouts. Run two or three miles every few days if you want, but this endless distance stuff isn't doing you any favors.