| A few questions about this... Fit athletes can run quite fast at a low heart rate, that in some cases might even be lower than walking for regular people. That is to say, the runners are exerting themselves less from a cardiovascular perspective than an unfit person walking. E.g. I can run 8min/mile pace on the flat at a 120bpm heart rate (around 67% of VO2max). But I know people who have the same (or higher) heart rate by just walking or doing house work. So what exactly are we saying by pointing out that running is bad for you? High heart rates for a long period of time are bad for you? The action of running is bad for you? Something else? None of this research makes sense to me. But why just running? What about other sports like cross country skiing, or rowing? Mountaineering? What is it specifically about running which is bad? Or are all these other sports bad too? I had a cardiovascular age test done recently which uses pulse wave velocity [1] to determine arterial stiffness. It turns out my "cardio age" is 11 years younger than my actual age and I run at least 50 miles a week. Mostly slow, some fast. So that seems to contradict some of this research, or the pulse wave velocity test is BS? On another note, there's so much nonsense in that linked thread above I don't even know where to start. Great timing because I enjoyed reading this hackernews thread [2] about the phenomenon that most info about a subject is wrong and you only really notice it if you are an expert or have first hand knowledge. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse_wave_velocity
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40733956 |
A fit individual going for a 12 mile or less run probably won't have these problems unless they're in an extreme environment.
To your point, I'm sure you could do similar types of damage from other activities done for long periods of time if the proper hydration isn't followed.