EVOLUTIONARY-FITNESS Archives

Evolutionary Fitness Discussion List

EVOLUTIONARY-FITNESS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"D. Tweed" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Evolutionary Fitness Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 8 Dec 2003 21:43:43 +0000
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (46 lines)
To reply to a digest, insert the relevant message header; don't reply to the digest header
-------------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, 8 Dec 2003, Automatic digest processor wrote:

> Is there any real evidence that jogging or running is bad for you?  Of
> course, running can be taken to the extreme with marathons or ultra-
> marathons.  But I would like to say to those running skeptics, go out an
> look at the people getting good times in 5k races.  They look to be in good
> shape to me.

Leaving aside the actual question (apart from anything else I don't have
any personal data to go on), this strikes me as a slightly flawed
methodology: the people who are getting good times in 5k races _at the
moment_ are going to have to be pretty fit _at the moment_, because, if
you assume you have to be fit to run well, you're by definition choosing
to sample those for whom a lifestyle with running in it works to make them
fit enough to run well at this point in their lives.

The two questions I'd be intersted in are (i) what do people who were
getting good 5k times 15-20 years ago (whether they are still running
today or not) look like now (i.e., does success at running have any
correlation long term with good or bad health)? and (ii) given a set of
motivated people who start running, after some appropriate time period
what proportion are `getting good 5k times' (i.e., is there any suggestion
that there's something stopping everyone becoming a good 5k runner (and
thus healthier), eg, some genetically endowed physical property that makes
some people `suitable' for running)? Of course to be reliable the set of
observed people would have to be of a reasonable size. (Note: a better
statistician/experiment designer than I am could probably point out big
flaws that would need to be controlled for in both those questions; I'm
not claiming to be anything but an amateur at this.)

Sorry to play the pedant again, particularly since other goals in my life
mean I'm currently not living a very EvFit lifestyle :-(

___cheers,_dave_________________________________________________________
www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~tweed/  |  `It's no good going home to practise
email:[log in to unmask]  |   a Special Outdoor Song which Has To Be
work tel:(0117) 954-5250   |   Sung In The Snow' -- Winnie the Pooh

-----------------------------------------------------------------
The FAQ for Evolutionary Fitness is at http://www.evfit.com/faq.htm
To unsubscribe from the list send an e-mail to [log in to unmask]
with the words SIGNOFF EVOLUTIONARY-FITNESS in the _body_ of the e-mail.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2