[throwaway803453]

David Goggins is that you ? I have been exercising my entire life and running is the only activity that routinely gives me injuries that last for nearly a year. Most of us probably don't have the best form but watching Goggins get his knees drained last year made me question if humans were meant to run regularly past a certain distance and past a certain age.

[post_from_work]

The combination of constantly running long distances and constantly walking long distances with ridiculously heavy loads is one aspect that I find totally obnoxious about military training, and particularly the Western/NATO approach to small unit tactics.

It injures people in training (degrading readiness), and often leaves veterans with debilitating life-long lower-body problems that also cost the government a fortune in disability payments.

I've watched several Green Berets on YouTube state fitness goals for SF training of "You should be able to run a 7-minute mile pace, INDEFINITELY, with no preparation." No. That's DUMB. If your leadership puts you in a situation where that is necessary, your leadership is DUMB too.

[notacoward]

> If your leadership puts you in a situation where that is necessary

While I'm mostly inclined to agree with your higher-level point, I think this particular argument hurts more than it helps. Military leaders plan for unexpected situations in the ultimate adversarial environment. They don't mean to put people in this situation, but they plan for it anyway because they want troops to survive even when things don't go as intended. Being able to reach an objective on time is important, and being able to run away from trouble even more so. These are elite units, put into the highest-uncertainty kinds of situations. In that context, at that age, seven-minute miles for an hour or so is not at all unreasonable. It's not even that far from what I could do, despite being 56 and never having been any kind of physical elite. "Indefinitely" and under load might be pushing the idea too far, but the idea that there should be some minimum requirement is fundamentally sound. It's the repetition and the normalization of tactics unnecessarily requiring such high levels of physical prowess that creates problems.

[pengaru]

> I have been exercising my entire life and running is the only activity that routinely gives me injuries that last for nearly a year

What are you doing, running ultra-marathons?

[throwaway803453]

No, probably more dumb in the "man-up" sense: running immediately after waking in below freezing weather while it's still dark out without warming up or wearing warm clothes. I felt superhuman and that feeling is addictive.

Perhaps that is why running injuries are so common ? You can't keep pushing yourself to deadlift more, for example, without it being painfully obvious your form is not right. And you just know that the person looking back in the mirror should not deadlift 315 lbs. But with running there is no obvious indication and the environmental factors keep changing. Then you're spending months stiff and in pain. You feel 20 years old one week and 90 years old the next.

[notacoward]

I've written a couple of reasonably well-received guides about running in a New England winter. As you've clearly learned, such activity is its own specialized thing, requiring its own habits and preparations even beyond running the rest of the year. My guides focus mainly on situational awareness (e.g. always knowing your escape route around piles of snow if a car comes along) and gear. You've identified a couple of gaps (e.g. the winter-specific dangers of running in the early morning) and reminded me that those guides are generally due for an update. Thank you.

[throwaway803453]

Thanks in advance for the advice. Please share a link when you can.

[notacoward]

Here's part 1, with a link to part 2.

https://obdurodon.silvrback.com/winter-running-part-1

Again, thanks for your help.