What is the minimum length of time a run should be if you want to improve capillary growth?
What is the minimum length of time a run should be if you want to improve capillary growth?
bartholomew_maxwell wrote:
What is the minimum length of time a run should be if you want to improve capillary growth?
The question makes no sense. Capillaries (in muscles and in lungs) are always there, any activity (not necessarily running) has a potential to sprout some capillaries and they seem to be easy enough to lose with inactivity. There's a limit to a number of capillaries per muscle fiber that can be achieved with a certain training load (around 5-6 max from an untrained value of 1-3) and then it can be supported with the same training load or perhaps a bit lighter load. When I say load, I mean intensity * time, so short high intensity work and long low intensity work will both achieve that high capillarization you seek if you do enough of it. Studies done on horses show that it takes about 16 weeks, but as usual the biggest changes will be in the first few weeks.
I have heard 35 minutes
Lydiard said runs as short as 20 minutes have some value. If all you have is 20 minutes, its worth it to go for a run over sitting on your butt. However if that is the case, you should learn some time management skills or get your priorities in check.
cim racer wrote:
However if that is the case, you should learn some time management skills or get your priorities in check.
You've never worked in Silicon Valley and had to pull routine 16 hour shifts have you? No amount of time management can help you avoid crunch time. It's all hands on deck to iron out the remaining kinks, do QA testing, etc, before releasing next software version.
As I recall capillary growth will be diminished if your heart rate is above about 135.
So you want easy long runs.
Angiogenesis increases proportionally to muscle fiber growth. So anything that builds fiber size automatically builds more capillaries. So, mere EZ running does nothing for capillarization. There has to be muscle growth stimulus. So, incorporate some hills or strides, I guess. Couldn't find any information to directly answer your question.
bartholomew_maxwell wrote:
cim racer wrote:
However if that is the case, you should learn some time management skills or get your priorities in check.
You've never worked in Silicon Valley and had to pull routine 16 hour shifts have you? No amount of time management can help you avoid crunch time. It's all hands on deck to iron out the remaining kinks, do QA testing, etc, before releasing next software version.
How about you take all of the time you spend posting on Letsrun and use it to actually run instead?
bartholomew_maxwell wrote:
cim racer wrote:
However if that is the case, you should learn some time management skills or get your priorities in check.
You've never worked in Silicon Valley and had to pull routine 16 hour shifts have you? No amount of time management can help you avoid crunch time. It's all hands on deck to iron out the remaining kinks, do QA testing, etc, before releasing next software version.
Welcome to the prestigious 2020 slavery.
Funny, I work for a software company (not in Silicon Valley, but still software) and these all hands on deck days never happen. An over-stretched day is when someone works 10hrs, which doesn't happen very often. The time management in question here needs to come from the top with proper PM work to adequately plan out a project's timeline instead of being pressed up against deadlines unnecessarily.
I feel sorry for people who work in these conditions and complain about it. If that was my norm in life, I would be seeking other employment that values a better work/life balance as my value for me personal time far outweighs the time doing my job so I can do things that I truly enjoy, like run... and banter with people on LetsRun ;)
Maybe you'd be working for a Fortune 50 company as a software developer like me if you pulled 14 or 16 hour days instead of 10 hr days. It's obvious you're not part of Silicon Valley given that you think 10 hrs is a lot...How many of those 10 hrs are you actually working? Maybe 5 effective hours. 1 hour for lunch. And the other 4 are not spent in serious actual development. My 14 hour days are about 9 hours of nose to the grind coding and reviewing other deverloper's' code. . If you want to work for the best, you need to step up your work ethic.
doogiski wrote:
Funny, I work for a software company (not in Silicon Valley, but still software) and these all hands on deck days never happen. An over-stretched day is when someone works 10hrs, which doesn't happen very often. The time management in question here needs to come from the top with proper PM work to adequately plan out a project's timeline instead of being pressed up against deadlines unnecessarily.
I feel sorry for people who work in these conditions and complain about it. If that was my norm in life, I would be seeking other employment that values a better work/life balance as my value for me personal time far outweighs the time doing my job so I can do things that I truly enjoy, like run... and banter with people on LetsRun ;)
It's not just time. It is time and regularity over a period of time with anything aerobic. Running is the king of exercise. Well, actually cross country skiing maybe the king but it's no where as popular. Walking will build aerobic fitness, over time.
For running I would say running every other day and running 5 miles under 50 minutes and doing this for 3 months will build superhighways of capillaries. Then maintain your roads!
Cross country skiing is just not very accessible for most....
I used to play this video game that had a cross country skiing level. I forgot what the name of the game was but at the time I was a kid and was wondering why they were skiing on a flat surface...Now I know the official name of the event lol.
I like how you are conflating “the best” and working the most hours. Unfortunate for you.
doogiski wrote:
I like how you are conflating “the best” and working the most hours. Unfortunate for you.
The best developers are passionate about coding and we'll work any amount of hours. That's the difference between those who do it for a paycheck and those who are truly passionate about their craft.
Wozniack wrote the software for the first Mac floppy drive in something like 2 weeks, maybe less,...and he didn't do it by only working 8 hours a day.
You must be a troll, claiming you work those hours yet you created this thread 6 hours ago and have been active on it ever since. Nice try though, at least do a better job making a more believable story. The lack of effort on this attempt is embarrassing.
doogiski wrote:
You must be a troll, claiming you work those hours yet you created this thread 6 hours ago and have been active on it ever since. Nice try though, at least do a better job making a more believable story. The lack of effort on this attempt is embarrassing.
Umm, I also said that is for crunch time hours. Plus things are slow right now because of coronavirus so projects are in a hold status. No one is really working long hours right now.
"If you want to work for the best, you need to step up your work ethic. "
That's a myth. A big myth. Some people can work many times what someone else does on the same task and still not get anywhere near the results.
fghrxths wrote:
"If you want to work for the best, you need to step up your work ethic. "
That's a myth. A big myth. Some people can work many times what someone else does on the same task and still not get anywhere near the results.
WRONG WRONG WRONG....
That's a myth as well. The myth of the quicker-than-thou genius. In most cases, the "genius" simply had longer formative years and worked in the domain longer than the person who takes longer to answer the question. Consider a first year Computer Science major without any programming background vs a kid who grew up tinkering with html and visual basic in elementary school.
That kid who started at the age of 8 has 10 years more total effort placed into their craft. So of course they're going to be faster on the programming assignments. It doesn't change the fact that in total they've had 10 more years of preparation for the problem than the struggling newbie who never saw code before college...