Long Distance Running Kills.

Vincent Maudieu, 30, collapsed just metres from the finish line at about 10.15am after running the half-marathon at the City to Surf yesterday.

Paramedics at the event attended to the French man for 15 minutes before transporting him to Royal Perth Hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

Reference
http://www.perthnow.com.au/city-to-surf-marathon-marred-by-death/story-fn8ou527-1226124023102

And

FOUR runners have suffered serious burns after a bushfire swept into the race route and trapped them in a gorge during an ultramarathon event in WA's Kimberley region. Two women, aged 36 and 24, are in a critical condition at Darwin Hospital, having suffered burns over 60 to 80 per cent of their bodies.

Two men, aged in their 40s and 50s, have suffered burns over 10 to 20 per cent of their bodies and are in a serious condition following the incident about 5pm (WST) yesterday. They will be flown from Kununurra to Perth today.

 The race has been called off.

Ms Hill said the four people had been competing in the Kimberley Ultramarathon when a bushfire trapped them in a gorge at El Questro Station near Kununurra.

The Ultramarathon, part of the Racing the Planet Series, was being staged over 100km of outback between Kununurra, the Gibb River Road and El Questro Wilderness Park, from September 2 to 4.

Sport Minister Terry Waldron said last month that the race, which would attract 100 competitors from 30 countries, would be a "fantastic opportunity" to showcase the region to the world.

On the event's Facebook page today, organisers said the race had been cancelled with all competitors removed from the course due to bushfires in the area.

Reference

http://www.news.com.au/top-stories/marathon-runners-trapped-in-bushfire-horror/story-e6frfkp9-1226128705128#ixzz1WrQmjDEN

Research Into The Negative Effects Of Aerobic Training, And The Superiority Of Interval Training.

Please excuse the tedium of simply putting up a blog with research articles in it, but as per my blog yesterday on my philosophy, and my blog the other week on running, I thought it best to make sure my references were in order.  Eric Cressey put out a blog today on why your (my) fitness blog/s might not be getting the hits and have the readership, from this I extrapolated "why people might not listen to me". It could be due to my content; if I want you to listen to what I have to say, I have to make sure my content is appropriate, well sourced, and pleasing to read. I admit, I may not have done this correctly thus far. Some of these references are from other blogs I've done on this subject, I've since removed them, sourced them accurately here, and put them all together, that I might convince even the most ardent skeptic, that I at least have evidence for my position.

It's worth putting in a caveat here, when I use the term "aerobic work" I'm referring to continuous, long distance walking and/or running. Though aerobic interval training is useful, it is still inferior to anaerobic interval training (from now on referred to as: HIIT) and as Cosgrove suggests (below) should only be done if you have time after doing metabolic resistance training and HIIT. I would be willing to concede that there is evidence that aerobic work has resulted in fat loss, but that is nullified by the fact that it takes longer training sessions to gain an effect, something that should already discount it as a fat loss tool (think of a 15 minute HIIT session versus a 45min running one). Due to the continuous and repetitive nature of aerobic exercise it is more likely to cause injury than short duration, high intensity work (though not necessarily). HIIT raises metabolism and does not reduce muscle mass (whereas aerobic work can) and finally HIIT is simply better at increasing overall fitness and fat loss (it is even suggested in studies below that it is great for increasing aerobic fitness). The only times I would suggest aerobic work is in the cases of: beginners, injured individuals (in the sense of: stroke victims, individuals prior joint/muscle injury) etc. For healthy individuals with a base level of fitness, HIIT is more effective in almost every way.  I've covered much of this in another blog, but I wanted to put it altogether and perhaps explain more eloquently my position.

I think this blog establishes my argument, it establishes my evidential basis for this tentatively held acceptance of the inferiority of aerobic training and the superiority of HIIT. Anyone who wants to disagree and wants to convince me of their position has a heavy burden of proof to meet, they have to demonstrate to me a valid argument that overcomes its 4 main faults and HIIT's success in them:
1.- Extended time of training sessions.
2. -Propensity for increased likelihood of injury.
3. -Decreases in muscle mass.
4. -Ineffectiveness as a fat loss tool.

Articles from Strength coaches (containing studies)

Alpert K., Getting Maximum Results Part I - Alternatives to Aerobics-Six Reasons Why Aerobic Work is Counterproductive. Retrieved 21/04/2011. http://www.charlespoliquin.com/ArticlesMultimedia/Articles/Article/25/Getting_Maximum_Results_Part_I_-_Alternatives_to_A.aspx

Alpert K., Getting Maximum Results Part II - Alternatives to Aerobics- Alternative Exercise Strategies to Help You Break Through a Plateau. Retrieved 21/04/2011. http://www.charlespoliquin.com/ArticlesMultimedia/Articles/Article/24/Getting_Maximum_Results_Part_II_-_Alternatives_to_.aspx

Boyle M., (2008). Death to Long Slow Distance. http://www.bodybyboyle.com/articles?show=16.

Boyle M., (2008). Interval Training. Retrieved 21/04/2011. http://www.enhancedfp.com/training/interval-training-mike-boyle

Cosgrove A,. (2010). Hierarchy Of Fat Loss. http://alwyncosgrove.com/2010/01/hierarchy-of-fat-loss/

Cosgrove A,. (2011). New Studies on the Afterburn Effect. Retrieved 21/04/2011   http://alwyncosgrove.com/2011/03/new-studies-on-the-afterburn-effect/

Cosgrove A,. (2010). Training techniques to maximise fatloss. Retrieved 21/04/2011. http://alwyncosgrove.com/2010/06/training-techniques-to-maximize-fat-loss/

Studies

Aerobic work is ineffective
Knechtle B., Knechtle P., (1994). [Run across Switzerland--effect on body fat and muscle mass]. Praxis. 96(8):281-6.
 
Scharhag-Rosenberger F., Meyer T., Walitzek S., Kindermann W., (2010). Effects of one year aerobic endurance training on resting metabolic rate and exercise fat oxidation in previously untrained men and women. Metabolic endurance training adaptations. International Journal of Sports Medicine. 31(7):498-504.

Van Aggel-Leijssen D.P., Saris W.H., Hul G.B., Van Baak M.A., (2001). Long-term effects of low-intensity exercise training on fat metabolism in weight-reduced obese men. Metabolism. 51(8):1003-10.

Van Aggel-Leijssen D.P, Saris W.H, Hul G.B, Van Baak M.A., (2001). Short-term effects of weight loss with or without low-intensity exercise training on fat metabolism in obese men. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.73(3):523-31.

Van Aggel-Leijssen D.P., Saris W.H., Wagenmakers A.J., Hul G.B., van Baak MA. The effect of low-intensity exercise training on fat metabolism of obese women. Obesity Research. 9(2):86-96.

Aerobic work/endurance running causes injuries
Genin J., Mann R,. Theisen D., (2011). Determining the running-related injury risk factors in long distance runners. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 45(4):349.

Jacobsson J., Timpka T., Ekberg J., KowalskiNilsson S., Renström P., (2011). The swedish athletics study: annual incidence of musculoskeletal injuries in elite athletics athletes. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 45(4):353-4.

Junior L.C., Carvalho A.C., Costa L.O., Lopes A.D., (2011). The prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries in runners: a systematic review. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 45(4):351-2.
Lopes A.D., Saragiotto B.T., Yamato T.P., Adami F., Costa L.O., (2011).Musculoskeletal pain in recreational runners prior to race participation: a cross-sectional survey in 1049 runners. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 45(4):361.

Tenforde A.S., Sayres L.C., McCurdy M.L., Collado H., Sainani K.L., Fredericson M., (2011). Overuse injuries in high school runners: lifetime prevalence and prevention strategies. PM& R. (2):125-31; quiz 131.

Anaerobic work is more efficient for fat loss and fitness
Ahearn K. J., Leighton B.H., , McManus J.J., Scott C.B., (2011). Aerobic, Anaerobic, and Excess Post exercise Oxygen Consumption Energy Expenditure of Muscular Endurance and Strength: 1-Set of Bench Press to Muscular Fatigue. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. 25(4):903-8.

Daussin F.N., Zoll J., Dufour S.P., Ponsot E., Lonsdorfer-Wolf E., Doutreleau S., Mettauer B., Piquard F., Geny B., Richard R., (2008). Effect of interval versus continuous training on cardiorespiratory and mitochondrial functions: relationship to aerobic performance improvements in sedentary subjects. American Journal of Physiology Regulatory Integrative Comparative Physiology.295(1):R264-72. Epub 2008 Apr 16.

Gaiga M.C., Docherty D., (1995). The effect of an aerobic interval training program on intermittent anaerobic performance. Canadian Journal of Applied Physiology. 20(4):452-64.

Hoffor A.S., Harrison A.C., Kirk P.A., (1990). Anaerobic threshold alterations caused by interval training in 11-year-olds. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness. 30(1):53-6.
Kanaley J.A., Weatherup-Dentes M.M., Alvarado C.R., Whitehead G., (2001). Substrate oxidation during acute exercise and with exercise training in lean and obese women. European Journal of Applied Physiology. 85(1-2):68-73.

Ratel S, Lazaar N, Dore E, Baquet G, Williams CA, Berthoin S, Van Praagh E, Bedu M, Duche P. (2004). High-intensity intermittent activities at school: controversies and facts.  Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness. 44(3):272-80.

Sartor F., De Morree H.M., Matschke V., Marcora S.M., Milousis A., Thom J.M., Kubis H.P., (2010). High-intensity exercise and carbohydrate-reduced energy-restricted diet in obese individuals. European Journal of Applied Physiology. 110(5):893-903.

Smith T.P., Coombes J.S., Geraghty D.P., (2003). Optimising high-intensity treadmill training using the running speed at maximal O(2) uptake and the time for which this can be maintained. European Journal of Applied Physiology. 89(3-4):337-43. Epub 2003 Mar 25.

Van Aggel-Leijssen D.P., Saris W.H., Wagenmakers A.J., Hul G.B., Van Baak M.A., (2001).Influence of training status on maximal accumulated oxygen deficit during all-out cycle exercise. Obesity Research. 9(2):86-96.

Want to Stay Fat? Keep Running! Pt. 2

I refined the article I did for Wangle to make an information sheet for the gym, thought I'd repost it here, as I'm much happier with this article, than the original. 

Forget what you think you know when it comes to fat loss! Distance running, distance walking, steady state exercise, whatever you want to call it, is a thing of the past. As a personal trainer, I understand that you love to run; it gets you free from the constraints of your daily life, it relaxes you. I get it. But this is one of my biggest headaches.

What’s the problem you ask? Simply put, when you run one kilometre, you’ll subject your joints to roughly 1500 jumping steps at a minimum of 2-4x your body weight (do the math, it’s pretty scary). This is an extraordinary amount of pressure on them. What is the result of this? Specific knee and lower back problems, in fact most of the runners I have seen complain of the same issues: plantar fasciitis lower back pain and patello-femoral problems. Women in particular, can be more affected due to the structure of their hip in relation to their knee (although not, necessarily).

Still, you may be thinking that it’s perhaps the best and only tool you have for fat loss?

Let’s analyse how good it is.

It reduces your metabolism (which makes it harder to burn fat), it increases adrenal stress (which makes you fatter), it increases oxidative stress (which accelerates the aging process), it lowers the testosterone/cortisol ratio (making you fatter) and after 8 weeks, the effects plateau. As you can see, it is not only not the best tool for fat loss, it is actually counter-productive in many cases to the goals you want to achieve.

Let me ask you a question: Who has less body fat and looks better, generally; a sprinter or a marathon runner? 

I think it’s clear who looks better, and it’s not difficult to understand why. We’ve all been sold on the idea, based on science from 20 years ago, that in order to burn fat you have to do long distance running. Sprinters do almost zero continuous, distance running, yet they have less body-fat, more muscle mass and have a generally more pleasing appearance. How is this possible? The reason is in the nature of their training!

Apart from their weight training sessions, they utilise a method called High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT).

What is it, you ask?

It is bouts of maximal effort, followed by bouts of recovery at a steady pace. It can be done on cardio equipment (X-trainers, bikes etc) or it can be done with equipment/bodyweight (burpees, sled pushes, bag flips etc) or simple sprinting. Due to the intense nature of HIIT, you only need to do it for a fraction of the time you would, distance running.

Instead of finding time to do an hour-long run, you can sneak off at lunch, do 15 minutes of intervals and burn a higher amount of calories (and fat!).

How?

One of the main mechanisms we are aware of at the moment is a raise in what is called EPOC (Excess Post exercise Oxygen Consumption). Current research by exercise physiologist’s states that EPOC is not the only factor causing the raise in metabolism from HIIT, many of the specific mechanisms by which fat loss occurs over a 24-48hr period after performing it are not fully understood, but the results are, and that’s the take home message.

What are some other benefits? Due to the shorter training periods, it reduces the likelihood of (overuse) injury, it increases metabolism making you burn calories for significant periods of time after training, it promotes or maintains muscle mass, and is the best method for utilising fat as a fuel source, post workout. All of which distance running fails to do.

To summarise: distance running requires longer training sessions, which puts stress on your joints, increasing the likelihood of injury, it can actually make you fatter, and can make you age faster.

HIIT on the other hand, has shorter training sessions, which make it convenient and reduces the likelihood of injury, it raises metabolism, and promotes/maintains muscle mass (which is needed to burn fat)

In the end why would you want to use a fat loss method that is demonstrably inferior, causes more injuries, takes more time to do, and makes you look older? It doesn’t seem very rational to me.

Want to stay fat? Keep running.

Hey guys, here is an article I wrote for the online magazine known as "Wangle".

Want to stay fat? Keep running

Posted on October 31st, 2010 at 6:00 am

By Rob Bezant

Forget what you think you know when it comes to fat loss, because I’m here to tell you, you don’t know anything! Distance running, distance walking (even worse), steady state exercise, whatever you want to call it…

As a personal trainer this is one of my biggest headaches.
I understand that you love to run; it gets you free from the constraints of daily life, makes you feel free.  I get it.

But the problem is when you run one kilometre, burning somewhere between 60 to 100 calories or so, based on your weight, you’ll subject your joints to 1500 jumping steps at 2-4x your body weight.

In the case of women, the specific structure of your hip, particularly in relation to you knee, running causes you to have specific knee and lower back problems. In fact most of the runners I have seen complain of the same issues: plantar fasciitis, lower back pain and patello-femoral problems.

How good is it for fat loss you ask? Terrible! Like almost no benefit for you terrible.

It reduces your metabolism (which makes it harder to burn fat), it increases adrenal stress (which makes you fatter), it increases oxidative stress (which accelerates the aging process), it lowers the testosterone/cortisol ratio (making you fatter) and after 8 weeks, the effects plateau.

When debating with people I put this image to them: Who has less body fat, a sprinter or a marathoner? The answer I receive is almost always ‘a marathoner.’  The correct answer, however, is a sprinter!

It’s not difficult to understand why. We’ve all been sold on the idea that in order to burn fat you have to do long, slow running. Sprinters do almost zero continuous running, yet they have less body-fat. How is this possible? The reason is in the nature of their training.

Apart from their weight training sessions which are done with heavy weights and low repetitions, sprinters get into shape (fitness and body fat percentage wise) by utilising a method called Interval Training.

Because of the intense nature of interval training, you only need to do it for a quarter of the time you would normally do what we call ‘steady state training,’ like distance running. Instead of finding time to do an hour-long run, you can sneak off at lunch, do 15 minutes of intervals and burn a higher amount of calories.

How?
One of the main mechanisms we are aware of at the moment is a raise in what is called EPOC (Excess Post exercise Oxygen Consumption). Current research by exercise physiologists states that EPOC is not the only factor causing the raising of the metabolism from interval training.  The mechanics by which fat loss occurs over a 24-48hr period after exercising is not fully understood, but the point is, the result is well documented.

The information regarding high intensity interval training comes from the results accumulated by the world’s leading strength and conditioning coaches.

There is more and more evidence coming out that supports the notion that interval training is a superior tool for fat loss. It reduces the likelihood of injury due to shorter training periods, it increases metabolism making you burn calories for significant periods of time, it doesn’t reduce muscle mass and is the best method for utilising fat as a fuel source.

So why aren’t people the world over doing interval training over steady state?

Pure and simple – it’s hard! The nature of interval training is an all out brutal effort, and for some reason people seem married to running.

When you point out all the obvious benefits of interval training over running, they will still fight you tooth and nail. It’s time to pick: Do you like running? Or do you like looking hot?

You need to get it into your head that exercise is meant to be difficult, uncomfortable. If you’re not asking yourself ‘Why am I doing this?’ then you’re not training hard enough!

The Neverending Debate- Distance Running Versus HIIT.

I think I need to state at the outset, when I discuss distance running/steady state/aerobic work I'm talking in terms of what is most effective for fat loss. I'm also not making an absolute statement about the nature of reality, I'm taking a polar position expressed essentially by hyperbole to attempt to change the paradigm. As Michael Boyle states:

"Luckily, Canadian researcher and sport scientist Martin Gibala has come to the rescue. Gibala, an Associate Professor of Kinesiology at McMaster University in Canada published a study in the September issue of the Journal of Physiology comparing interval training and steady state training or long slow distance. The study, although conducted over only a two week period (emphasis added), looked at a twenty minute interval program versus steady state work ranging from ninety to one hundred and twenty minutes. The interval work consisted of thirty second sprints followed by four minutes of slow pedaling. This would amount to two to two and half minutes of high intensity work during a twenty minute session as compared to 90-120 minutes in the “heartrate zone” for the distance group. Gee, which would I want if both were equal?

The conclusion was that both methods showed roughly the same improvement in the chosen marker of oxygen utilization. Yes, the same. Do the math. Each group worked out three times a week.  The interval group exercised for a total elapsed time of one hour per week with six to seven and a half minutes of intense exercise contained in that hour. The steady state group exercised for between four and a half and six hours a week yet the aerobic benefits were the same (emphasis added)?" (Boyles 2008)

Distance running has it's merits, and it's places, but should not be used as the primary tool in a fat loss program (I say that with the caveat: for uninjured individuals with a base level of fitness). If you train for a marathon, or some other sport that requires aerobic endurance then obviously you need to do distance running (as well as HIIT as it increases VO2max better). I'm not saying you can't do distance running I'm just saying that you shouldn't (for fat loss), and that stance is based on evidence: from strength and conditioning coaches, studies and anecdote. When I talk of running I'm talking in terms of distance, when I talk of say, sprinting? I'm talking about speed. By its definition you can't sprint long enough to get into distance training so I support sprints. I might, however,  get my clients to do sprints on soft surfaces or cardio equipment but I don't mind them doing them on the ground, it's the distance and the low intensity, steady state nature of distance running that I don't like.

I've been a fairly big proponent of HIIT for a while now, through demonstration and evidence I put credence in Alwyn Cosgrove's "Hierarchy of fat loss" as being pretty accurate in it's listing of methods that result in some of the best fat loss protocols we have discovered thus far. There is enough evidence to support this as valid for the time being, but even if you don't agree, look at it logically:  Running is ineffective for fat loss, causes injuries and has long training sessions.  HIIT causes relatively no injuries, has short/convinient training sessions and superior fat loss results, you really do have to ask what argument are proponents of running for fat loss really trying to make? We should pick a method backed by evidence as inferior? We should promote a method of fat loss that causes injury? Or that we should back a fat loss strategy that requires large quantities of training time per session that cuts into other dail activies? Any one of these arguments on their own would be reason enough to avoid distance running. As Michael Boyle again states:

"Here is the problem as Diane Lee so eloquently put it. Running is a poor choice for most people. I often talk about the group of people I like to call the “speed limpers”. They are the men and women you often drive by on the road that are running with a visible limp. Usually they have a knee sleeve of some kind on. When you ask them about their problem they will almost always reply “ it loosens up after a while and then I ice and take some Advil after”. What a lousy idea. Guess what, good exercise should make you tired but, shouldn’t hurt your joints (emphasis added). The discomfort should be limited to the muscles and should go away almost immediately after you are done. In my opinion running is only good for doctors and physical therapists. We have an entire cottage industry built up to take care of the injuries caused by running.

The reality is that most people are not made to run. More importantly, they are particularly not made to run long distances (emphasis added). Until the Cooper led aerobics craze of the seventies many of us didn’t know what a plantar fascia, iliotibial band or patella-femoral joint was. Most of us in the industry do now. We know because these are just a few of the litany of sites of injury afflicting runners.

More bad news. Running is even worse for women. Women runners seem to to sustain more running related injuries than men." (Boyle 2010)

For some reason people get married to the idea of running, they think if they don't do it, they'll get fat, when just the opposite is true. I'm not sure why I have to keep hammering home this point and why all for it, why wouldn't I be? I think it's the fitness industries classic reluctance to change. The sad thing is I've been arguing with people for years about it now, with clients, trainers, fitness enthusiasts alike. Hell,  even at university it was endurance training as the only option, VO2max test this, astrand rhyming test that.

Here are some general principles to consider with running and fat lass.

Alwyn Cosgroves hierarchy of fat loss:
1. Metabolic resistance training.
2. High intensity anaerobic interval training.
3. High intensity aerobic interval training.
4. High intensity steady state.
5. Low intensity steady state.

Charles Poliquins 6 reasons NOT to do aerobic training:
1.  Continuous aerobic work plateaus after 8 weeks of training so anything more is counterproductive.

2.  Aerobic training worsens power locally and systemically – in other words, it can make you slower.

3.  Aerobic training increases oxidative stress which can accelerate aging.
4.  Aerobic training increases adrenal stress which can make you fatter and produce other undesirable health consequences.
5.  Aerobic training increases body fat in stressed individuals by contributing additional stress.

6.  Aerobic training worsens testosterone/cortisol ratio which impedes your ability to add fat burning lean muscle.

As Keith Alpert finishes up:

"The Power of Interval Training
The way for individuals to raise the intensity of their training is to do "Interval Training." Interval Training alternates bouts of high-intensity exercise with that of low to moderate-intensity exercise. Recent studies have shown that Interval Training is more effective for fat loss while improving both Aerobic and Anaerobic fitness (emphasis added).
Tabata et al. (1) compared a 70% of VO2 max moderate intensity group (MIG) vs. a high intensity interval group (HIIT). The MIG group did increase their VO2 max by about 10% without a concurrent improvement in anaerobic capacity. The HIIT group improved their VO2 max by 14% and their anaerobic capacity by 28%. The HIIT group actually improved both anaerobic and aerobic capacity at the same time!
Tremblay et al. (2) compared a sprint ergometer group versus an aerobic group. Despite burning 50% less calories, the sprint group lost three times more fat than the aerobic group (emphasis added)." (Alpert)

Conclusion
I hope I've met your burden of proof regarding this situation, this blog is making a cumulative case against running, when you put all the information in this post, with the rest of the blog, I hope my point is clear. If it's not, let me restate: distance running for fat loss is inferior to other methods! But I'm appreciative of correction.


I refer you to this post for a list of references that support my positions in this blog.


References
Alpert K., Getting Maximum Results Part II - Alternatives to Aerobics. Alternative Exercise Strategies to Help You Break Through a Plateau. http://www.charlespoliquin.com/ArticlesMultimedia/Articles/Article/24/Getting_Maximum_Results_Part_II_-_Alternatives_to_.aspx

Boyle M., (2008). Death to Long Slow Distance. http://www.bodybyboyle.com/articles?show=16.


Boyle M., (2010). You Can’t Run to Get Fit, You Need to Be Fit to Run. http://mboyle1959.wordpress.com/2010/01/29/you-cant-run-to-get-fit-you-need-to-be-fit-to-run/