Couch-to-5K: Anyone with me?

[running_coach]

@Mojo_Pin

I’m curious, and since this is the dope and all… cite? Here’s one interesting article about the benefits of short intense interval training as opposed to long drawn out affairs.

edit:
I hate to contradict the resident runner guru’s advice, but there’s some evidence that the shoes themselves may be your problem. I used to run cross country, and the rate of injuries, even (especially) among the top runners, who had 150$/pair shoes, is amazing. I myself had really bad shin splints the entire time I ran. When I started running barefoot (if I ran at all), my problems disappeared. Check out this article for a little more detail.

I’ll deal with each article separately.

Fit in Six

In the rat experiment, there was no test to see if the short interval group actually gained fitness. The conclusion is based on molecular changes which suggest a result, not provide it.

In the test with college students, they do test with a time trial but the duration of that trial is not stated. It could be a 5 minute effort which will respond to training interval style yet if the trial were an hour the results may have been much different.

The 6-9 min of high intensity training doesn’t include warm up or cool down. When I used to do interval work my warm up/cooldown could total as much as 4-4.5 miles. Do that 3 times a week and you have a runner doing distance work plus some high intensity intervals.

The article states that only cyclists and swimmers were tested.
Shoes are Bad

The first conclusion, that unshod feet were healthier is unsupported(HA!) by anything stated in the first page. What is a healthier foot? Nothing is said about in what way were the feet healthier.

Playing tennis is a short move and stop sport. Most running injuries are overuse injuries. The two are not comparable. (More on this later.)

The article equates expensive shoes with increased injury rates. More likely is that more experienced runners(thus running higher mileage) are buying the higher cost shoes. the higher mileage and most likely higher effort training is probably more likely the cause of the higher injury rate.

According to another study, people in expensive cushioned running shoes were twice as likely to suffer an injury—31.9 injuries per 1,000 kilometers, as compared with 14.3—than were people who went running in hard-soled shoes.

It could be argued that those running in hard sole shoes stopped as soon as discomfort was felt and didn’t go far enough to be injured.

And that only a few state health departments forbid people from going barefoot in restaurants (also true), never mind all those signs that say no shirt, no shoes, no service, which are the handiwork of fascistic barefoot-haters.

I think the bias in this article is showing through.
When you run, you land with 2-3 times your bodyweight each step, walking is significantly less.
Man did not evolve to run fast over long distances, walking and running slow with breaks is more the way primitive man and modern tribes like the Massai handle ambulation. Also we did not evolve to run on concrete and asphalt but on soft ground.

Running fast on artificial surfaces is not what we are built to handle so we need what seems to be unnatural solutions to handle the forces.

Walking and running are so different that they cannot be compared.