High Speed Backpacking – why

"As for hunting, hunting is not "chasing" around animals. You would not take 2 steps at a gazelle before its long out of range for any spear."

The video link I posted above shows men doing exactly what you just said they can't do.

As for marathons being harmful…I'm at the point that I can run a slow one (~5 hours) at will. I could run one right now if asked, followed by another later in the week. The more I do it, the more often I can, without ill effect so far. I have close friends that have been logging 75-150+ miles per week for a decade, injury free.

The concept of running distance being harmful is not something I've ever experienced amongst conditioned people. In fact, their overall health is substantially better for it.

nm

Guys…
That's the same video I linked above….

"I have close friends that have been logging 75-150+ miles per week for a decade, injury free."

I don't have strong opinions about this, but a few questions:

How old are they?
On trails or tarmac?
Will their knee joints be worn out prematurely?

Those old hunters didn't have the life expectancy we enjoy today. My dad has just been for his pre-op exam for a second hip replacement (other side). he's 82 and never was a runner.

I think I'm just going to walk it. Those fruits and veg will never outpace me.

http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/krigbaum/proseminar/Bramble_Leib_2004_nature.pdf

For those interested in a serious read, this is the first article that I read that really lays out the evolutionary case for humans as distance runners. Pretty fascinating observations here.

That video shows hunters walking and tracking the animal with some intermittent sprinting. I do not see the kind of sustained running you see in modern sport at all.
And I m skeptical of the narrators claims that this was a wide spread hunting technique. Seems more about Romanticism.

Im only stating an opinion here based on my own observations and gut feelings. But there is evidence to back it up though I will be the first to tell you its not "proven"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19332846?itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum&ordinalpos=1

I do know you do not need to run long distances to be healthy and you definitely don't need to run at all to hunt.

Uh oh.
Science publication quotation war!

Have a good one: experience tells me this is going nowhere fast.

I think my previous response got lost on the last page:

Craig said:
"I have close friends that have been logging 75-150+ miles per week for a decade, injury free."

I don't have strong opinions about this, but a few questions (and an observation):

How old are they?
On trails or tarmac?
Will their knee joints be worn out prematurely?

Those old hunters didn't have the life expectancy we enjoy today.

I'm not trying to say people shouldn't run far fast or often, heck after the bike crashes I've had, who am I to tell people how to get their jollies?

I'm just trying to get a handle on the health benefit argument, (without quoting any science papers).

Well Craig, I guess Dr. Atkins was right?

As to running 75-100+ miles per week. There are a lot of factors to include terrain, footwear, and most importantly intensity. My son is a fairly well known distance runner, and during the past 9 years I have really followed distance running in great detail, tracking the runners he competes against. We often compare notes and discuss race strategies — I do let his coaches to the coaching :)

I can say that nearly 100% of them suffer an occassional injury. Most are stress related.

But there are master runners (many are old farts like me), who have been running for years, even decades, without injury. These guys and gals compete, but most not a high level. Those who train year round, often go years without an injury.

""How old are they? Will their knee joints be worn out prematurely?""

I just ran a 50k (32 mile) trail race Saturday.
I consider that a Short race.
Feel better 2 days after the race than I did 2 days before.

During the race a 68 year old runner picked me up off the dirt after I tripped and fell. There were at least 10 people over 65 in this race. They have many years of ultras. I don't think they are wearing out prematurely.

Thanks Art. It seems that it's the usual story. As Craig said earlier, listen to yourself, use good judgement, and then you'll know how far you can push without causing long term problems for yourself.

Best wishes to all for an injury free season.

Will those 75-150 MPW runners I know blow their knees out?
Who knows. They're certain to have injuries.

But won't we all?

How many "My foot hurts" posts appear here from simply walking?

I'll take my chances (although I believe they're slim) that running distance will have some bizarre effect on my heart or hurt my knees. What's the alternative when it's something you love? I'm sure as hell not going to log my meager 30 minutes of doctor recommended daily cardio while watching Fox News on a treadmill at a 24 Hour Fitness (followed by light stretching and a warm shower, of course).

Can my body afford to keep running?
Or can I afford not to run?

Look at the plethora of ailments that plague our society today: all a result of crappy diet paired with not doing anything vigorous.

And for any regular distance runner, I really don't think marathons, especially slow, easy ones, are that big of a deal. I think they're only "extreme" to a society full of people (including doctors) that are having an increasing amount of trouble getting through life without elevators.

Yeah, that's wildly biased speculation, but I'm stickin' to it.

Now, for my sake and yours, I'm giving it a rest.
:)

Edit- And Brian: I'm not trying to put down what you're posting, I read your links and they make me wonder. But I'll counter them with more of my links. And you'll counter with your articles. And I'll counter with more abstracts and quotes, and then we're not even discussing what we think, we're simply having an internet evidence war…I'll respectfully bow out now.

"Brain fart on my part :)"

I know how that goes, Nick. I'm surprised I remembered it myself. Running has also been near and dear to me. I raced middle distance, primarily on the road, in my 40's and continued to run recreationally until I was 60, with a brief foray into trail marathon competition just for the heck of it in my mid 50's. I stopped running when I was 60 on the advice of a sports med doc who told me it would be prudent, given the cumulative stress on my legs, if I wanted to continue doing mountain activities on into my 70's. So I quit. But I still follow it. Once a runner…..

By way of adding my 2 cents to the posts below regarding running causing injuries, my own experience with racing and the training necessary to do it competitively is that injury comes primarily as a result of genetics, and training intensity, relative to training volume, combined with inadequate recovery. It was definitely the case with me as well as many others I trained with and competed against, not to mention many world class runners whose careers I followed. There is a huge difference between running at a relaxed pace for recreation and fitness on the one hand, and rigorous training that prepares one for racing. A finely honed racer is always one step away from injury and, sooner or later, many will end up injured. Contrast this with the legions of lifelong recreational runners who continue well into their 60's and even 70's. Long slow distance for its own sake, preferably on soft surfaces, will do you far more good than harm from what I have seen and experienced. As Craig so eloquently expressed it: "it's what we were born to do". I could not agree more.

"all a result of crappy diet paired with not doing anything vigorous."
I agree 100% that we need vigorous exercise. Where we part ways is only in length. Im a big fan of HIT/interval training and I think intensity is the key.

"Where we part ways is only in length. Im a big fan of HIT/interval training and I think intensity is the key."

It makes for an interesting discussion. I don't know how old you are, Brian, but I would be interested in your feedback as to how you fare with high intensity intervals over time. Not a criticism, just genuine curiosity. IME, intensity has always equated with an increase in strength and speed, at the expense of endurance and with an increased risk of injury. That said, I am ready to learn otherwise. Would you be willing to keep us posted?

Tom said IME, intensity has always equated with an increase in strength and speed, at the expense of endurance and with an increased risk of injury.

Are you referring to doing any intensity work at all, or just to doing mainly intensity work? What is "intense" to you? Anaerobic Threshold work? Intervals?

How do you view something like doing mainly low intensity aerobics, with one AT workout and one interval workout per week? Do you believe that is likely to lead to injury?

One more thing — how does your answer vary, if at all, with the age of the person doing the exercising?

— MV

"Are you referring to doing any intensity work at all, or just to doing mainly intensity work? What is "intense" to you? Anaerobic Threshold work? Intervals?

No, Bob. I was referring to Brian's emphasis on intensity as the dominant theme in training. IMO, intensity as in intervals or AT sessions, has its place in training to reach a higher level of fitness. In running, intensity meant hill work and intervals, either on the track or on the road. For climbing, it meant AT work on an uphill trail, usually with a light pack or no pack at all, but we also would include sessions on a step mill if there wasn't time to get out or the weather was REALLY cruddy. BUT, this kind of training always took place against a background of endurance training and had a purpose, either to race, or to function well at altitude or on climbs where the ability to move fast when necessary provided an added measure of safety. Doing it without a purpose, IMO, was just risking injury for nothing.

"How do you view something like doing mainly low intensity aerobics, with one AT workout and one interval workout per week? Do you believe that is likely to lead to injury?"

That seems to me to be a very sane approach, as a rule of thumb, that would achieve pretty much what I was talking about above with minimal risk of injury. Caveat: The risk and results will vary from person to person, and with the volume and intensity of the workouts.

"how does your answer vary, if at all, with the age of the person doing the exercising?"

Excluding the genetically gifted, intensity should have an inverse correlation with age if one is to avoid injury.

Tom, thanks for the reply.

I am not a racer — just interested in getting in better shape. Knowledge is only personal experience and some reading — no coaching.

My understanding is that the low-intensity work is actually a very important part of aerobic training — the base building — and that in the end a balanced program such as I mentioned (mainly low intensity aerobics, with one AT workout and one interval workout per week) is likely to actually get better results than always going hard, as well as less likely to cause injury.

— MV

Im still pretty young, I won't pretend to have all the answers this is just my opinions. There are endless approaches to HIT training and I haven't tried them all. I have print outs of training programs that last as little as 3 min. up to 40 min.
There is also high and low impact training to throw into the mix.
Here is a good example of low impact high intensity training:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBqgbMsohZI

high impact might be more like what I do : jump rope/push ups/burpees/ect, ect. in timed intervals.
I do run as well I just keep it at about 15-20 min. I also use the Heavyhands system (Len Schwartz) most of the time.
I run up a local hill and then rest on the way down and repeat -stuff like that.
There are endless variations.
You are right, you most defiantly can still be injured and you must take care not to get too intense! and hurt yourself.Thats where proper form comes in.

science debate aside,I have to wonder how much personality plays into this as well.
I get bored on long running sessions and it dosen't appeal to me. But relatively short all out work does. I usually like to play hard then rest hard the rest of the day.

"My understanding is that the low-intensity work is actually a very important part of aerobic training — the base building — and that in the end a balanced program such as I mentioned (mainly low intensity aerobics, with one AT workout and one interval workout per week) is likely to actually get better results than always going hard, as well as less likely to cause injury."

Bob,

I think you've got it pretty well dialed in. Rest is, IME, the most underrated part of training-absolutely critical if you are going to prevent injury. If you proceed on the basis of what you posted, you will do just fine. As you gain experience, you will invariably begin to refine and adapt the principles to your unique set of capabilities and goals.

"science debate aside,I have to wonder how much personality plays into this as well."

Personality plays a huge role, Brian, for good and for ill. It can take you to new heights of achievement or lead to a premature end of your athletic career. It is the ultimate challenge in sports: Know yourself and control yourself. A solitary journey every athlete must take.

Brian,

My understanding is that low intensity is not just less of a high intensity workout — rather, it trains a different aspect of aerobic training. That aspect is important, and to get it you must do a meaningful amount of low intensity training.

High intensity training is for improving your anaerobic threshold and lactate tolerance (depending on just which kind of high intensity training you are doing). Low intensity training is for your aerobic base — things like increased mitochondria — and high intensity traning will not do that.

Tom obviously knows a lot more about this than I do, and has a lot more experience, so I trust that he will correct me if I am wrong.

— MV

Most elite distance runners spend months working on their base or low intensity workouts. Once the base goals are acheived, then they gradually move to high intensity, interval type of training, intermixing days of low intensity, during the racing season. Once racing season is over, there is a short rest period and then the cycle begins again.

During the summer, my son usually runs around +/- 100 miles a week. Mostly runs of 10 – 20 miles. The lower milage runs are done during twice a day running sessions. Longer runs are usually once a day. During racing season, the mileage tapers off as the season progresses. After a race, it is common to do a slow recovery run the day after up to 20 miles.