[freehunter]

Everyone says "I'm paying for X behavior from my 20s" when they reach middle age. In reality, it's just that's when the body begins to wear down and people naturally want to blame it on something so we invented a euphemism for it.

It's not science, there's no evidence. People in their 50s start to hurt more, and injuries that never healed right can be ignored when you're young, but start to hurt again later on. It's just a fact of life. If you tore your ACL in high school, when arthritis starts to kick in, you're going to feel that old injury again, because a torn ACL never really heals.

[zzalpha]

Is this meant to agree with my point or rebut it?

This all started when sndean wrote the following:

Eventually you stop listening to everyone, even your coach. Running (and most sports) would do well to follow science and have a cited source following every statement. It's a little absurd when someone tells me I'm going to get injured if I don't do more barefoot running. I've been wearing this same model of Brooks shoe since I was 15. If you can give me a link to an article on Pubmed, I might read it.

rb808 replied with:

Wait until you get into your 40's and 50's, that's often when lots of bad habits start to cause problems.

I noted (obliquely, a bit snarkily) that this type of claim is literally exactly what sndean was talking about: that people make all kinds of claims with no evidence to back them up. And then rb808 demonstrated exactly that: "Oh, there may not be evidence now, but trust me, you'll pay some day..."

Your comment... I'm not even sure where it fits in, exactly. Yes, obviously people's body's age and don't heal as fast. No one is disputing that (and as a person approaching 40, I'm living it).

But what does that have to do with this specific, unsupported claim: that barefoot running is healthier in the long run as measured over decades.

[freehunter]

It's meant to say "chill out man". Far too often someone on HN says something that's just common knowledge or off-the-cuff and someone else responds with "where's your evidence and peer reviewed study?". It's nonsense. Actually it's worse than that, it's rude.

I'm not arguing for or against anyone's specific claims, just telling you that you don't need a scientific study to say that as people get older, their bodies tend to hurt more and areas they've injured but never let heal hurt more than other parts. I don't think rb808 was necessarily arguing that either, just pointing out that bodily damage isn't always immediately noticeable. But you apparently need scientific proof of that?

Some days I think if I said "the sun rose over the horizon this morning" I'd get a follow-up saying "show me your sources or delete your comment". Science isn't a cult or a religion. If you need a peer reviewed study to tell you that improperly healed injuries will hurt more as you get older, you should talk to the elderly more often.

[zzalpha]

I feel like we're talking past each other...

I'm not arguing for or against anyone's specific claims, just telling you that you don't need a scientific study to say that as people get older, their bodies tend to hurt more

Yeah, but... no one disputed that! It wasn't the subject of the argument.

To be clear, the argument is: Is barefoot running better for you over the long term?

That's it. That's the argument. My follow-up comment was specifically intended to explain that to you, since you seemed to have misunderstood.

Unfortunately, it seems like my follow-up wasn't clear enough.

It's all very puzzling. For all I know we're in violent agreement, here, if we could just align on what's being discussed...

[magic_beans]

Ha! A pretty big problem with HN (or really, a problem with programmer types), is the astounding lack of common sense that comes from an overly-rigid attachment to the scientific method.

[linkregister]

I agree. You'll probably not get the satisfaction you're looking here on HN, just more anecdotes.

I recommend a forum for kinesiologists, physical therapists, podiatrists, or orthopedic specialists. HN is great for software and software entrepreneurs; not much else.

[erikpukinskis]

> In reality, it's just that's when the body begins to wear down and people naturally want to blame it on something so we invented a euphemism for it.

The body "wearing down" is not a thing. You're talking about repetitive stress injuries. The body is built to work as long as you need it to, and replenish itself daily.

[MagnumOpus]

> The body "wearing down" is not a thing... The body is built to work as long as you need it to

This is so obviously wrong that I wonder if you are deliberately trolling. You can just look at wrinkling skin, decreased peak performance and all the other pieces of evidence that the regerative abilities of the body degrade after age 30-40. Or you can look at the thousands of papers in the areas of cellular senescence and its many consequences: DNA damage, lipofuscin accumulation, glycoxidation, lipid peroxidation of the inner mitochondrial membrane, atherosclerosis and probably dozens of other processes that translate to the "body wearing down".

[erikpukinskis]

> wrinkling skin

A.K.A. sun damage

> decreased peak performance

Peak performance happens once. That's a mathematical truth. Just because something isn't operating at peak performance doesn't mean it's "worn down"

> all the other pieces of evidence...

There's lots of evidence that people acquire damage throughout their life. And I would certainly agree that as you approach 100 years old, the repairing slows down.

I'm just saying someone who is in their 50s and saying their body has "worn down" is not in that situation. They damaged their body. If you're 80 years old it's a different story.