Born To Run (extremely long post, but fascinating to me)

[jostenmeat]

Welp, I've been on a bit of a reading binge lately, and I've borrowed this book from a friend (owner of a mountain biking business in fact, who has now avidly picked up barefoot running). So, coming from someone who used to think that running as the most boring thing known to man, I have become so fascinated by reading this book (almost done, like maybe 30 pages left to go). I have already taken a couple of jogs this week, and recently started looking at barefoot running forums. Certain specialty shoes like the Dharmas (more for daily wear) or Vibram Five Fingers are pretty expensive, and well I guess I'll see if this little bug takes hold or not first. Yet from my very initial readings, it seems that even using the VFF is still pretty different from barefoot. Ok, so for this mostly-science-oriented group here, I think that chapters 25 and 28 are the most fascinating, and I sort of want to offer the nutshell on those, but mostly ch 28.

Chapter 25 talked mostly about the foot itself, and the (bad) implications and increase of injuries that resulted after two men from Oregon created the first Nike running shoe in 1972. They created a market, and then sold to it. In a 1989 study conducted by Dr. Bernard Marti where he gave questionnaires to 4,358 runners (45% of which had been injured during the previous year), there was no correlation between injury and anything like weight, mileage, speed, running surface, motivation, or even previous history of injury. The only correlation that was found was that runners with shoes that cost more than $95 were more than twice as likely to get hurt than runners with sub $40 shoes. There are more cited studies that I won't regurgitate here, but basically it comes down to the idea that the softer the shoe, the more you will get injured. Impact is not reduced with our shoes, but immediate pain is. But the initial pain when learning to run is a good thing, at least according to this book, because it teaches us how to run the proper way by avoiding this pain; pain is a teacher. I believe I am picking up so far that minimal contact (time-wise) with the ground is desired, and that there is more use of the ball of the feet; don't take my word for it though.

The world record holder in the mile, Alan Webb, also believes in barefoot running. His barefoot training had strengthened his arch so much, it kept getting higher, and he saw his shoe size reduce from a 12 to a 9! In physics, bridges, the easiest way to ruin the strength of an arch is to support it from directly underneath. Kenyans run barefoot until the age of 17 according to Dr. Gerard Hartmann.

In 2001, two Nike reps visited former NCAA cross country coach of the year, Vin Lananna, coaching at Stanford (where he had nailed down 5 national team championships, and 22 individual titles). See, Nike was sponsoring them, but the reps were shocked to hear that Coach Lananna said they gave up on these Nike shoes for training because his team was running not only faster by going barefoot, but also with less injuries.

_______________________________________________________________

But now for my favorite chapter so far, 28: evolutionary biology. Oh man, I'm already afraid of how much I'm going to type here. I found this stuff to be extremely fascinating. Basically, we can outrun many creatures, that you wouldn't believe it, so far as the distance is long enough. The average human stride is even longer than a horse's gait; you're thinking no way, but it's because the horse is inefficient in that it kicks its legs well past the point of contact, and it's only well into the backswing that it finally does make contact with the ground. There is a 50 mile race in Prescott, AZ, called Man Against Horse, and humans took down an 8 year winning streak from 1999-2006!!

We have very special biology. We have a nuchal tendon that helps us use our heavy head as a ballast when running (pigs don't have one, and this is a major reason they are so inefficient at running; the head wobbles everywhere). We have the special Achilles tendon, which helps us to be much more efficient in running. As a biped on two legs, we are not forced* to take one breath exactly for every stride as many animals like cheetahs (the organs slam into the lungs that force the expiration), jackrabbits (with a "slinky" like spring in their belly for running/breathing efficiency), and other creatures. Perhaps even more importantly, we don't depend on this breathing apparatus to cool ourselves down like so many creatures; we have millions of sweat glands instead! Wow, how efficient is that for long distance running! A cheetah will overheat and shut down at 105 degrees, according to a Harvard evolutionary bio professor who actually put one on a treadmill and stuck a thermometer up its butt.

So, according to that Harvard guy, Dr. Dan Lieberman the homo sapiens brain expanded so much it became about 7x larger than the brain of any comparable mammal. This required a steady source of protein. If the bow and arrow is about 20k years old, the spear about 200k years old, how did we hunt down game for say 2 million years? With our bare hands!! We ran them down till they dropped! You wonder, well, deer, antelope, kudu, so many creatures run faster than us. Yes many of these creatures have a slightly faster top speed. The catch here is that our jogging* speed is already into these creatures running mode (where energy expenditure is excessive). We can jog all day and night long.

This idea is why certain scientists believe that homo sapiens survived, and that the "superior" Neanderthals did not. The latter were stronger, had bigger brains, developed special hunting tools made from stone, and hunted strategically in phalanxes. Well, then the ice age ended, and the homo sapiens much lighter weight, and thus the ability to continuously run, helped them survive.

One of the keys to not getting out smarted by our prey is to make sure you keep your eyes on the hunted animal. Because what they will do once they are very fatigued is to rejoin the pack again as best they can, and then an imposter prey will come out of the pack. If you're not paying attention, you wil tire before any of the prey. The best running hunters in the world, when they cannot distinguish visually, they look at the tracks of the individual animals to know for sure. They understand so much from tracks, they are even their form of self diagnosis in terms of fatigue and dehydration. They constantly study their own tracks too.

A friend I have who has taken courses in tracking animals really wants to watch this, which is the only recorded event of a running hunt. I think it's supposed to be a 4 hour chase.

I could go on, but I'll stop there! Some fascinating people in other chapters include Emil Zatopek (the friendliest of all runners, triple gold medalist, who chose to die cleaning toilets in uranium mines rather than represent the Soviet Union) and Scott Jurek (who set ultradistance records on first tries, yet would wait for the very last runner at the finish line even if it took a day without sleep, rest, or food). There is quite a bit about the Tarahumara Indians of Mexico as well.

 

[MDS]

Chapter 25 talked mostly about the foot itself, and the (bad) implications and increase of injuries that resulted after two men from Oregon created the first Nike running shoe in 1972. They created a market, and then sold to it. In a 1989 study conducted by Dr. Bernard Marti where he gave questionnaires to 4,358 runners (45% of which had been injured during the previous year), there was no correlation between injury and anything like weight, mileage, speed, running surface, motivation, or even previous history of injury. The only correlation that was found was that runners with shoes that cost more than $95 were more than twice as likely to get hurt than runners with sub $40 shoes. There are more cited studies that I won't regurgitate here, but basically it comes down to the idea that the softer the shoe, the more you will get injured.

That's very interesting to me. I ran track in middle school but dropped it at the start of high school. I did continue to run 1-3 miles almost daily, mostly in competition with my dad to get the fastest mile time.

My dad bought me a pair of Brooks running shoes that were super light. At the time (about 1980-81) those would have been shoes that were closer to $100 than $40. I knocked off more than 30 seconds from my best mile time just by changing shoes!

The funny thing is though, my mile times from then on were always consistent with my personal record (5:32) but I never beat that time ever again. Then of course life happens, you get older, and lose interest in things you used to love. I don't really care for running anymore which is a shame because it's great exercise.

 

[cutter]

less is more...for running shoes anyway.

There is a lot of information available on using minimalist footwear- I was always a "the more cushion the better" person when it came to running shoes. I have since changed to a more minimal approach, using Nike Free's and Inov-8 220's as my shoes of choice. The changes I have seen include a resolution in my plantar fasciitis, and less knee pain.

I have heard a lot about that book, I'm going to have to give it a read!

 

[Matt34]

I love running and the minimalist shoes interest me but I haven't found a pair that I like yet. I ordered some New Balance minimalist shoes a month ago but I think one of them was defective as it a a "arch" in the sole that bruised the heck out of the bottom of my foot.

Thanks for the heads up on the book, I'll have to pick it up for the Ipad.

 

[lsiberian]

I'm skeptical, but intrigued. I'd love to try out some different free shoes, but the cost is steep for an unknown.

 

[jostenmeat]

I have heard a lot about that book, I'm going to have to give it a read!

Thanks for the heads up on the book, I'll have to pick it up for the Ipad.

Hey thanks for the input all. I should say that the book is not all about what I posted on (in fact my post was really about two chapters, and they have been by far the most science oriented ones). A lot of the book is about the frustrating and sometimes humorous search for the Tarahumara, the one American who become a part of their culture, and about certain ultra-runners. I just mention this out of fear that one of you may have felt misled by my post. Ok good that's outta the way.

Matt, that's neat that you're already trying some out. I asked the friend who lent me the book, and he said those Dharmas are great for basic daily use, but as far as running shoes, he absolutely insisted on going shopping with me! He says it's a lot about my unique physiology, my goals, stuff like that, who knows man, I guess it's like going to a speaker store with an Audioholic, but in this case like going to a shoe store with a runaholic.

 

[jostenmeat]

I'm skeptical, but intrigued. I'd love to try out some different free shoes, but the cost is steep for an unknown.

My friend is pure barefoot now, even on streets I think. He says he's logged about 400 miles in our area on bare feet now. He didn't even start very long ago, IIRC, but he's also one of the most athletic among our friends (like CA state wrestling champ in HS, awesome mountain biker, yada yada).

I've got to pick his brain more. I think I read on a forum that some might start off with socks, and those are pretty cheap. I think it was in the actual book where the idea of starting off barefeet on grass was offered . . .

 

[Swerd]

JM - Thanks for the very interesting read.

I used to be a runner in high school and college. I ran cross country (poorly) in the fall, and middle distance in the winter and spring on the track. My favorite races were the half mile and mile. Today that would be 800 and 1500 meters. I last raced as a sophomore in college and realized it was time to retire. There were guys who could beat me at any distance between a ¼ mile and 6 miles. My best half mile time was 1:56 and I was still left in the dust. Our best runner at the time could run that in 1:48.

Shoes were very important to everyone, but everyone's preferences were very different. You had to find what worked for you. In the fall we generally ran 70-80 miles a week, and shorter distance but faster in the spring. The type of ground or surface you ran on made a very big difference in how it felt and what shoes did or didn't work. I am very suspicious of the bare foot fad, but I'm old and don't run. I have bad knees and a pinched nerve in my foot. Walking barefoot on that is painful!

This was in the mid to late 1960s, before Nike. The best shoes then were German imports Adidas and Puma. New Balance was a small American company that had recently started. In 1966 you were considered weird if you wore running flats as street shoes. By 1969, it was a wide spread fashion. The shoe companies learned they could sell lots of cheaply made shoes to the public who ran very little or not at all. There was a big difference between real running shoes and street shoes that looked like them. By the time Nike came along in the early 70s, the fad was widespread.

The worst injuries I had were my knees. I eventually needed surgery to remove torn cartilage from my left knee. In 1975 that was major surgery, I was in a hospital for a week. Arthroscopic surgery was not yet widespread. But every runner I knew suffered from shin splints, severe blisters, and minor muscle strains. You had to grow tough callouses on your feet, and keep your Achilles tendons well stretched.

You have to be very careful with statistics and correlations. Your point about the correlation between runners' injuries and the cost of their shoes is interesting, but possibly misleading. My experience with running showed me that shoes, especially training shoes that you used daily, wore out fast. If you spent $95 dollars instead of $40 on them (especially back in the 1970s when that was a lot of cash), you'd more likely use them past their prime, making injury more likely. Most statisticians could give you a long list of silly things that are highly correlated, like the phase of the moon and the incidence of heart attacks. My favorite is the correlation between climate change and the decreasing number of pirates.

You also have to be very careful with evolutionary explanations. They can be lots of fun to think about, but often are too simplistic. There may be a lot of different reasons why homo sapiens succeeded when neanderthals faded, such as major climate changes (receding ice age) occurring at the same time. Various animals and plants died off or developed in response to the climate. Remember that neanderthals were successful for a very long time, until something critical changed. My favorite idea is that homo sapiens learned how to ferment grains to make beer and bread, while neanderthals didn't.

 

[jostenmeat]

Swerd, I must have failed to clearly imply that it WAS the severe climate change that had to do with the demise of the Neanderthal. No more marbled mammoth steaks for them. The book also talks about the *significant* differences in energy consumption as far as long distance running between two humans/hominids of greatly varying weight, with 160 lbs and 100 lbs as the compared examples, IIRC.

I haven't taken a run for the heck of it since last millennium. I've taken three jogs last week already! My right knee has a bit of a twinge. My first two runs were with the cheapest athletic shoes I could find, some Adidas $40 pair that are way dead, living its life on camping trips and trails. Because of that twinge, I went with flatter athletic-looking-but-not-really $20 white shoes from Payless. I think I might try barefoot or at least minimalist faster than I thought.

Mind you, I played basketball and tennis pretty seriously when younger, lettering in both in HS. I was pretty lucky with injuries, nothing more than very mild shin splints, heel bruise, stuff like that.


I am careful with correlations. If you read how I typed up the post, well I hope it's how it would read, I kept in mind that the "book was saying . . . "

However, if you put doubt into a doctor's research published in The American Journal Journal of Sports Medicine (Marti's wasn't the only one from this journal that was given as evidence, and there are other scientists from other countries who found similar results as far as extensive-almost-dead-certainty of running injuries), how about turning the tables and asking the shoe companies instead? From the British Journal of Sports Medicine, as recently as 2008, Dr. Craig Richards demanded of the major shoe companies:

1) Do you claim that wearing your shoes will decrease risk of musculoskeletal running injuries?

2) Do you claim that wearing your shoes will increase your distance running performance?

3) If yes to any of the above, where is your peer reviewed data to back it up?

The number of companies that replied: zero.

For the beer, cheers to homo sapiens. The Tarahumara's corn beer was mentioned on at least a few occasions. Though mild in alcohol content, it was strong enough to get them silly drunk for the rare stress-relieving bashes where you might end up in the bushes with someone else's wife.

 

[jostenmeat]

You had to grow tough callouses on your feet, and keep your Achilles tendons well stretched.

Interestingly, the book seems to offer a couple of studies saying that stretching was actually bad for you! hahahaha.

Another (formerly) great athlete I know has recently injured his back big time, I mean very badly, while stretching before a round of golf. He is a scratch golfer, who has done a lof of ice climbing, rock climbing, mountaineering, living at Fountainebleau for a year of something when younger, and of all the things that incapacitates him, it was some stretching!

 

[Swerd]

Interestingly, the book seems to offer a couple of studies saying that stretching was actually bad for you! hahahaha.

I found stretching out the leg muscles helped me quite a lot. The calf and the hamstring. I knew some lazy sprinters who badly pulled their hams. It would take the whole season to heal. I always heard that to avoid shin splints you had to stretch out your calf muscles.

The calf is one of the biggest muscles a human has, far bigger than the two little ones in front of your shins. When the calf contracts, it presses the ball of your foot down, swiveling at the ankle. It provides much of the acceleration in running. The two little muscles in front of the shin do the opposite motion, after your foot lifts off the ground. If the calf doesn't fully relax in between steps, the front of your foot still points down as your foot comes down on your next step. If both the calf and the two little muscles pull at the same time, the little muscles always loose that tug of war. The result is shin splints, lots of small painful muscle tears.

If you aren't doing any running faster than jogging, I suppose stretching out is less important. But for anything faster, stretching out and warming up are essential. At least that was the dogma I was taught. In high school, until I learned how to warm up enough before a race, I never could do well. I dropped my best half mile time from 2:13 to 2:03 in one race because of that.

 

[audiofox]

I've been intrigued with the notion of barefoot running for some time now-your post may prod me into giving it a shot. I run mainly in the local neighborhood, so the main challenge is to find a path that is relatively free of debris (no shoes means things like broken glass are now a potential hazard).

 

[Swerd]

This thread mentioned the idea that pre-historic humans survived by running barefoot over long distances. And that idea has allowed some to conclude that we should run barefoot today. All the best distance runners today are Africans who at some point in their lives ran barefoot. So if it works for them, we should do it too. I think that's a large leap, but speculating about novel evolution ideas is always fun.

I remember a popular writer on human evolution, Desmond Morris. He wrote a controversial but popular book some time ago called The Naked Ape. He was fun to read because his speculation was often outrageous, probably making serious anthropologists and evolution biologists wince. But it sold books.

I once heard him give a talk while promoting his latest book, where he wondered why humans are the only great apes that like to swim. Other apes, like chimps, gorillas, and orangutans seem to fear water and carefully avoid going into deep water. Human infants are born instinctively knowing how to hold their breath and paddle while immersed in water. Nearly all human toddlers love playing in water. The other apes panic and drown. I don't know if his generalization about great apes and swimming is correct, but it makes an entertaining story. He proceeded to image a scenario where humans evolved from an ape predecessor that lived a semi-aquatic life, like otters or beavers. They lived both on the land and the water. They slept and bore their young on dry land but hunted and fed in the water. It would explain why humans are the only apes without fur and why infants have that swimming instinct. The only trouble with this idea is there is not a shred of evidence to support it, and there is abundant archeological evidence that says humans evolved on the rather dry great plains of Africa.

It just may be possible that running barefoot falls into that same category. Perhaps some anthropologist digging in Africa will find a fossilized pair of Nikes and put an end to this theory.

 

[jostenmeat]

I found stretching out the leg muscles helped me quite a lot. The calf and the hamstring. I knew some lazy sprinters who badly pulled their hams. It would take the whole season to heal. I always heard that to avoid shin splints you had to stretch out your calf muscles.

The calf is one of the biggest muscles a human has, far bigger than the two little ones in front of your shins. When the calf contracts, it presses the ball of your foot down, swiveling at the ankle. It provides much of the acceleration in running. The two little muscles in front of the shin do the opposite motion, after your foot lifts off the ground. If the calf doesn't fully relax in between steps, the front of your foot still points down as your foot comes down on your next step. If both the calf and the two little muscles pull at the same time, the little muscles always loose that tug of war. The result is shin splints, lots of small painful muscle tears.

If you aren't doing any running faster than jogging, I suppose stretching out is less important. But for anything faster, stretching out and warming up are essential. At least that was the dogma I was taught. In high school, until I learned how to warm up enough before a race, I never could do well. I dropped my best half mile time from 2:13 to 2:03 in one race because of that.

I've always attributed muscular injuries in the legs of baseball players to having to go full out bonkers after you might have been sitting on your azz for 2 hours. You could take a right fielder with above average power who had nary a ball hit to him, who struck out on the first AB, fouled out on the second, walked on the third, then tries to steal a bag from a dead stop to 90 ft away in the time it takes some people to clear their throat. Even though they might* run a fraction of the distance that basketball players do, I wouldn't be surprised if their muscular injury rates (with lower body muscles) were comparable or even much worse. Just a hunch; no evidence to offer. Full blast sprinting from a stationary position seems to be a violent thing, and I would submit that it's quite a different activity than long distance running.

This thread mentioned the idea that pre-historic humans survived by running barefoot over long distances. And that idea has allowed some to conclude that we should run barefoot today. All the best distance runners today are Africans who at some point in their lives ran barefoot. So if it works for them, we should do it too. I think that's a large leap, but speculating about novel evolution ideas is always fun.

I remember a popular writer on human evolution, Desmond Morris. He wrote a controversial but popular book some time ago called The Naked Ape. He was fun to read because his speculation was often outrageous, probably making serious anthropologists and evolution biologists wince. But it sold books.

I once heard him give a talk while promoting his latest book, where he wondered why humans are the only great apes that like to swim. Other apes, like chimps, gorillas, and orangutans seem to fear water and carefully avoid going into deep water. Human infants are born instinctively knowing how to hold their breath and paddle while immersed in water. Nearly all human toddlers love playing in water. The other apes panic and drown. I don't know if his generalization about great apes and swimming is correct, but it makes an entertaining story. He proceeded to image a scenario where humans evolved from an ape predecessor that lived a semi-aquatic life, like otters or beavers. They lived both on the land and the water. They slept and bore their young on dry land but hunted and fed in the water. It would explain why humans are the only apes without fur and why infants have that swimming instinct. The only trouble with this idea is there is not a shred of evidence to support it, and there is abundant archeological evidence that says humans evolved on the rather dry great plains of Africa.

It just may be possible that running barefoot falls into that same category. Perhaps some anthropologist digging in Africa will find a fossilized pair of Nikes and put an end to this theory.

According to this book, it ain't the Africans, but the Tarahumara of Mexico.

Swerd, with all the skepticism in the world, isn't it funny that the anti-barefooters don't have any scientific evidence either? I mean, where is it? I ain't saying one is right and the other is wrong. But orthotics and shoes are big business, man, that's for sure!! Kind of like esoteric speaker cables? Has science truly shown that orthotics and shoes are better for EITHER a decrease in injury or increase in performance? Where is this evidence? Personal anecdotes? If anecdotes are all it is, then that premise is no stronger than the author's.

So, what makes this book fascinating is that I've never even HEARD of these ideas before. It IS interesting to investigate though!

In case it's not clear, the majority of the book has to do with long distance running, like ultra marathons, 100 miles, 300 miles, 400 miles, running down and hunting animals by foot. The idea is to run quite slowly, in fact "painfully" slow according to some. A rule of thumb would be that it should be slow enough to carry a conversation. Many would say not to attack a climb, because the minimal time gained is not worth the great expenditure in energy loss; some would recommend just walking it.

The author was really bummed that running had him tear his hamstrings twice, repeatedly strain his Achilles, sprain both ankles, with arches that were so pained that he had to walk downstairs backwards. He used to play basketball five years before he wanted to try marathoning. He never got hurt doing Class IV rapids on a boogie board, mountain biking across the Badlands, but a few miles on feet, and he is writhing in pain.

So when he was travelling to Mexico for an unrelated assignment, he was fascinated by a travel magazine with a picture of "Jesus running down a rock slide". He then learned it was a Tarahumara man (who are the greatest runners in the world according to this book; the "racers" here do not compete in the world, save for the exception where they were duped and mistreated by an American businessman who even tried to sell their blood samples for the race, accusing the organizers of stealing their DNA, and they won the Leadville 100 outright for the two years they competed, and the first year where they entered, it was a 52 year old man from Tarahumara who won.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadville_Trail_100
(note the part where it says less than half the entrants finish within the 30 hour time limit, on the 15,600 feet worth of ascent/descent.)

"Leadville was also the venue for the American debut of the Tarahumara runners of Mexico. Tarahumara teams competed in the Leadville 100 in 1993 and 1994 and won the event outright. In 1993, 52 year-old Tarahumara runner Victoriano Churro came in first, followed by his 41 year-old teammate Cerrildo in second. In 1994 a five-man Tarahumara team took on Ann Trason in a much-publicized race in the ultra community. 25 year-old Tarahumara runner Juan Herrera won in a record time of 17:40 that stood for 11 years until Matt Carpenter's record-breaking run in 2005. Trason's time of 18:06 was good for second place overall and is still the current course record for female runners."

Well, reading about guys that run over 400 miles at at time, that were decades older than him, wearing the most primitive looking sandal types of foot wear, yet were grinning like idiots while being totally pain free obviously had him scratching his head. How did a few miles kill him, and these old farts could run across state lines with thousands of feet of elevation change thrown in to boot?


He visited prominent sports medicine experts and podiatrists. The second one was offended that he was being paid a visit after hearing about the name of the first podiatrist (he thought he was being tested against the best).

Dr. Joe Torg (also faculty at Temple) told him that he was f'd, and that he should buy a bike. EDIT: He also pushed $400 orthotics, $150 in shoes, but two pairs to rotate so make it $300. However, by far* the most pricey thing were the visits to his office.

http://www.temple.edu/medicine/faculty/t/torg.asp?pms=(torg J[au%29

M.D. #2 went unnamed, and mentioned that Dr. Torg was the Godfather of sports medicine, and it was silly that the patient would even visit him if he had access to M.D. #1.

M.D.#3 Irene Davis (Director of the University of Delaware Running Injury Clinic) said that running was just straight up BAD FOR HIM.

http://www.udel.edu/PT/davis/index.htm

They all told him to quit! For his health!


Why don't antelopes get shin splints? Why don't wolves get bad knees? Why aren't mustangs disabled with impact injuries? These were questions the author wondered about.

Well, by the end of the book, he is partaking in a 50 mile race involving only a small handful of the elite ultra runners of the world. No intention to win whatsoever, but to simply survive in triple digit heat on rocky trails, with a descent and ascent of 6500 ft. Whatever the reasons were, it's a pretty amazing turn around for the author; being told by top sports doctors that he should never run again, to happily running way further than he ever imagined.

The book was fascinating enough for me to run three times already. It's not about winning. Heck, it's really not even about muscles or avoiding injury. It's mostly about being happy and free.

 

[Alex2507]

It's mostly about being happy and free.

I'd be happy if ice cream and chocolate were free.

Oh my ... did I just blurt that out?

Sorry but let me say that this is a great read (the thread). For the record I believe in shoes. In terms of anecdotes I'll say that it's like the guys who are in wicked good shape and climb sky scrapers from the outside. To me the stairs are better but ultimately ... you guessed it: elevators rule.

 

[Swerd]

Sorry but let me say that this is a great read (the thread).

Yes, it was a great read. Much better than reading the weekly installment of "should I bi-wire my speakers?".

Today two more Africans won the Boston Marathon in what was a very fast time. Excellent! Some say it was the tail wind, but I say it was the shoes. Of course, both runners were paid very well by their shoe company sponsors. Who out there is gonna pay that kind of cash to a bare-foot runner?

JM - even tho I had some fun with this idea, I do appreciate the time and effort you put into this. Thanks. Even though I'm convinced I need shoes, I'd not be surprised at all if someone else does better without them. It's not such a simple subject, unlike bi-wiring.

 

[jostenmeat]

I'd be happy if ice cream and chocolate were free.

Oh my ... did I just blurt that out?

Sorry but let me say that this is a great read (the thread). For the record I believe in shoes. In terms of anecdotes I'll say that it's like the guys who are in wicked good shape and climb sky scrapers from the outside. To me the stairs are better but ultimately ... you guessed it: elevators rule.

The Tarahumara eat quite a bit of chia and pinole. One of two friends that I'm supposed to start running with (they did a 5.3 in the hills on Sunday, one of them barefoot, the other minimalist), says he's trying to source some, haha.

Man I bought a bit of chocolate recently, still haven't opened it, but it blows me away how much saturated fat is in that stuff (recently read the nutritional data on it). You know, amazingly, I remember checking out the biggest fattest rustic bacon I could find, and it took three slices of them to match the cholesterol and saturated fat of just one slice of Tillamook cheddar. So while I still eat just a bit of cheese here and there, give me the bacon every time. Matter of picking my spots I think, and the bacon has a lot of bang for buck flavor in the flavor-to-unhealthy ratio. I don't eat it often, but I figured I should share that, and I probably already have for all I know.

Today two more Africans won the Boston Marathon in what was a very fast time. Excellent! Some say it was the tail wind, but I say it was the shoes. Of course, both runners were paid very well by their shoe company sponsors. Who out there is gonna pay that kind of cash to a bare-foot runner?

Yes, who indeed?! If you clicked on the Alan Webb (you know, the world record holder for the mile) link from my first post, the third sentence on the wiki on him says this, "He competes professionally for Nike". But his experience with barefoot training might have been the first important anecdote given in chapter 25.

If this thread has been fun, maybe I should have started a thread about Fatal System Error too while it was still super fresh in my mind, as I also thought that was extremely fascinating as well. I am done with non-fiction for the moment, and am 1/3 through Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. Next up could be a Feng Shui book my friend recommended, but I won't be surprised if my interest can't last the book, we will see. I intend to borrow my friend's Kindle to read Tom's latest novel as well. Reading and running for the first time in a while.

 

[Matt34]

Yes, it was a great read. Much better than reading the weekly installment of "should I bi-wire my speakers?".

Today two more Africans won the Boston Marathon in what was a very fast time. Excellent!

It was a record time actually.

 

[Alex2507]

Oh that's it! I remember how much I liked reading Zen and the authors novel after that. It was a long time ago but maybe the new glasses I'm getting is going to cure my reading dry spell. These are to be my first reading glasses in the form of premium progressive bifocals so I can to biwire all the better.

I didn't know about the bacon/cheese business. Whodathunkit?

 

[jostenmeat]

Oh that's it! I remember how much I liked reading Zen and the authors novel after that. It was a long time ago but maybe the new glasses I'm getting is going to cure my reading dry spell. These are to be my first reading glasses in the form of premium progressive bifocals so I can to biwire all the better.

I didn't know about the bacon/cheese business. Whodathunkit?

Yeah, surprising ain't it? I failed to mention how much worse this 4" long piece of Belgian dark chocolate (72% cacao) I have is than even the cheddar. Just about twice as bad. Therefore, 6 of the largest pieces of rustic bacon I could find (this was for Julia Child's coq au vin recipe I did last year, which is why I even bothered looking for the stuff) is about as bad as this one piece of chocolate. I mean it's only like 1.5 oz or something.

Stay off the chocolate, but eat your bacon! Though better to double check the nutritional info yourself.

EDIT: the above is ONLY related to saturated fat. Chocolate doesn't have cholesterol. I guess it depends what the goals are, and if it's simply weight loss, then calories are pretty much the thing to look at I suppose. Even if there are theories about what "kind" of calories they are and how they are burned. In the book, an ace ultra-marathon trainer says that these ultra races are pretty much an eating and drinking contest with a bit of running and scenery thrown in.