Running

[IronFist]

Does your body adapt to running in the sense of calories burned?

Like say you're totally out of shape, and you go run 1 mile in 12 minutes. You're all tired and out of breath when you finish, and you're pulse is racing. You have just burned x calories.

Say you keep running for months and months. You get better, etc.

Now, you go run 1 mile in that same 12 minutes. Am I correct in assuming that you've just burned less calories than the first time you did it? Your heart rate is lower now when you finish, so that means less calories burned, right?

So if you want to burn a lot of calories when you run, you have to keep increasing the demand placed on your body, right?

My friend wants to know, and I don't know much about running.

Thanks,

IronFist

[rubthebuddha]

not sure it's that simple. i think it's more along the lines of your heartrate times the length of exercise. just think of the load you're putting on your respiratory system times the length it is under load.

now, this comment:

My friend wants to know, and I don't know much about running.

that friend wouldn't be the same person who quit ptp because he had no endurance and also started running on behalf of his marathonish girlfriend but wound up going into cardiac arrest just shy of 1½ miles?

[Ford Prefect]

I think you adapt as your VO2 Max increases and your heart rate improves, but I think the calories burned while running are more a function of how fast/hard your legs are working and how much weight they have to move. Your legs are much bigger muscles than your heart and require a lions share of the energy (calories) to keep them moving.

In other words, I think calories used during running are more dependent on how heavy you are and how fast you're going rather than how efficient your cardiovascular system is.

[IronFist]

that friend wouldn't be the same person who quit ptp because he had no endurance and also started running on behalf of his marathonish girlfriend but wound up going into cardiac arrest just shy of 1½ miles?

No The friend who wants to know is the "marathonish girlfriend."

And for the record, the next week I ran 1.8 miles and was a little less tired when I finished than I was after the initial 1.2 miles. So there!!!

Ford said:
In other words, I think calories used during running are more dependent on how heavy you are and how fast you're going rather than how efficient your cardiovascular system is.

So, what if your weight is exactly the same on the two runs, and the speed and time are the same, but the only difference is that on the first run you suck are totally tired when you're done, but on the later run you're awesome and aren't very tired at all. Like this:

Run 1: Distance = X Time = Y Weight = Z Finishing heart rate = 170

Run 2: Distance = X Time = Y Weight = Z Finishing heart rate = 80

Did Run 2 burn less calories than Run 1?

IronFist

[rubthebuddha]

my gut tells me the run themselves burned no more, no less, if you assume the quality and form of the run was the same. the better then runner, more often, the less work they have to do. just comes with refinement.

moving Y lbs. X miles in theory should require the same effort. i think the bigger difference would be that, since the more in-shape person (let's call him Slim, and the less in-shape person Chubs) has a more efficient cardio vascular system, he'll be quicker to recover and be able to go a greater distance, because he wasn't as taxed in relation to HIS personal maximums.

i would also think that Slim would have a generally faster metabolism as well, and would lose weight better during resting periods. could be overgeneralizing here though.

i have a few more thoughts on this, but i can't seem to sort them out in my brain. maybe having ford or plcrane or someone else correct me on what i just said will straighten them out.

[Ford Prefect]

I think the difference would be negligable.

[TigerJaw]

Perhaps, if Chubs is unfit, he has smaller leg muscles that use fewer calories. Slim is therefore using more claories, not just when running but generally. Obviously, this wouldn't be much of a difference becasue the increase in lean mass for a runner would be relatively small but it might offset the other effect.

[Ford Prefect]

That's logically unsound though. If chubs had smaller leg muscles, then he'd in fact be working them more intensly since those small muscles would have to move his heavy body. So:

small leg muscles = less calories used but more intense work

large leg muscles = more calories used but less intense work

It would seem they would cancel each other other out and be more or less equal.

[TonyM.]

They do cancel each other out, exept larger thighs have the unpleasant fault of rubbing together when you run sometimes forcing you to run bowlegged to stop the chaffing. Still prefer the larger muscles though.

[IronFist]

So you don't adapt. Alright. Thanks.

IronFist

[TigerJaw]

No, you do adapt. The question is if the adatations lead to you using fewer or more calories. I suspect that there are so many factors to consider that it's not a simple linear relationship and probably depends on your age, build, gender etc. I suspect that these are in fact second order effects and as such, can be ignored.

[IronFist]

I always thought that heart rate had a big effect on calories burned, or if not, at least it was kind of an indicator.

Since an experienced runner can run the same distance at the same speed as an inexperienced runner, and finish with a much lower heart rate, I assume that meant fewer calories burned.

Since I'm so skinny I never really cared about burning calories, but now I'm curious.

So provide scientific data, please

(or just summarize it)

IronFist

[GeneChing]

How Sore Is Too Sore to Run? We Asked 2 Running Doctors, and Here's What They Said
April 18, 2019
by MAGGIE RYAN



Runners are notorious for pushing through the pain when it might be smarter to ease up. To be fair, it's often hard to know when a pain is just plain soreness from a tough workout or run, or when it's serious enough to merit a break. And whether you're training for a race or competition or are just dedicated to your routine, taking a break can feel tougher than a tempo run or a set of burpees. POPSUGAR asked two exercise physiologists and running experts when exactly it's OK to run when you're sore and when it's better to stop and rest.

To review, the soreness we're talking about stems from micro-tears in your muscles, and is also known as delayed onset muscle soreness, or DOMS, which is that stiffness and soreness you'll feel for a day or two after a hard run or workout. A sharper, more muscle-specific pain may indicate a strained or pulled muscle, which you'll need a doctor to diagnose or treat.

When Can You Run?

"If running is not provoking or making your pain and soreness worse," said Steven Mayer, MD, sports medicine specialist at the Northwestern Medicine Running Clinic, "I'm very comfortable with you continuing to run as you normally would." If the soreness isn't getting worse when you run, essentially, you should be good to go — it's likely not running-related or a muscle strain or pull, so you won't make it any worse. An easy run can even soothe soreness, said Michael Fredericson, MD, professor and director of physical medicine and sports medicine at Stanford University.

However, Dr. Mayer told POPSUGAR that it's best not to start increasing your mileage or intensity until the soreness has passed. "Most running injuries we see are overuse injuries," he said. "It starts out as something mild, so you keep going and it gets worse." Pushing your pace, distance, or intensity when your muscles are sore can lead to tightness and inflammation, which can cause a muscle tear. "Once it gets to that point, it gets very hard to treat," Dr. Mayer said. Easing up on your training is the best way to avoid that outcome.

When Should You Stop?

On the flip side, if you think that running caused your injury — and if running on it makes it feel worse — both Dr. Mayer and Dr. Fredericson agreed that it's best to stop and give yourself time to recover. It's likely that the injury is related to running, so continuing to run could aggravate it. "Focus on your stretching for a week or two," Dr. Mayer said. You can start slowly bringing running back in after a few weeks, stopping again if you start to feel pain. The soreness could also be related to a strained or pulled muscle, in which case it's essential to rest it from any exercise until you get a doctor's OK.

You should also avoid running on a sore Achilles tendon, Dr. Fredericson said. Pushing a sore Achilles too far can lead to Achilles tendonitis, which occurs when the tendon gets inflamed and which can have you off your feet for a lot longer than simple soreness.

You should also make sure your soreness and pain is coming from a muscle, and not a bone. Push on the area that's sore; if it's hard, then the pain is coming from a bone. That can be a sign of a more serious injury, like a stress fracture. Look out for swelling around the source of pain as well. If you see either of those signs — bone pain or swelling — visit your doctor for an evaluation.

What Can You Do Instead?

If soreness or injury puts you out of running shape for a while, it's time to turn to lower-impact activities. Luckily, you have a lot of choices. "This is when the pool is great," Dr. Fredericson said. Swimming laps is easy on your joints and a good cardio replacement for running; Dr. Mayer recommended water jogging as well. You can also hit the elliptical or the stationary bike, or try a low-impact cardio abs workout for the gym or at home. The key is to find an activity that doesn't exacerbate your running injuries while still giving you the workout you want.

"I think people are always scared that they won't be able to exercise," Dr. Mayer said. "But there are very few injuries that would force you to stop completely. We may have to modify or switch from running to something else, but you can find a way to stay in shape while treating a specific problem."

Image Source: Getty / KOLOstock

Random ttt just to give this neglected subforum some luv.

[SteveLau]

ttt 4 2019!, thanks for your referred article. I agree with it completely.

A week ago, I had a bad hiking trip in joining a local hiking group. The distance was too long (~ 6 km). More than 1 km was through bush and trees. After that it took me about a week to fully recover from sore legs and feet. If you figure that I will not join trip in that hiking group any more, you are correct. During the week of recovery, I was still having active rest, doing BB, MA, and even a running session. But the running did not include sprint which I usually do if my physical condition allows it. The important point is my muscle soreness did not get worse because of keep on doing my regular training exercises. And that should be the correct principle.




Regards,

KC
Hong Kong

[mawali]

Does your body adapt to running in the sense of calories burned?

Like say you're totally out of shape, and you go run 1 mile in 12 minutes. You're all tired and out of breath when you finish, and you're pulse is racing. You have just burned x calories.

Say you keep running for months and months. You get better, etc.

Now, you go run 1 mile in that same 12 minutes. Am I correct in assuming that you've just burned less calories than the first time you did it? Your heart rate is lower now when you finish, so that means less calories burned, right?

So if you want to burn a lot of calories when you run, you have to keep increasing the demand placed on your body, right?

My friend wants to know, and I don't know much about running.

Thanks,

IronFist

When you start to run, your body is not accustomed to the activity (actually your muscles) so you get tired quickly and you stop or else it could be dangerous. Then there is perceived exertion, where being not accustomed to the activity, you are working harder to reach a goal which required the equivalent of gong (frequency, duration and intensity) and you need the time to reach a place where you can run 3 miles.
You start by running (jogging) at a pace where you can talk and run without getting out of breadth for about 1 mile the first month. At the second month, your muscles begin to work efficiently so you become "less tired" and you become better at burning /using glycogen as fuel. Caloreis are of secondary importance but you become efficient at burning fat stores over time providing you make this a lifelong activity. Short term work is not work the while btu being active in all spheres of life is always a better strategy.
There is something called Karvonen's formula regarding your heart rate at a specific age. See the family doctor for further explanations.
The link is about measuring heart rate and intensity:
https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-l...y/art-20046887