home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.running
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!news.service.uci.edu!unogate!stgprao
- From: stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini)
- Subject: Re: Reasons needed for running
- Message-ID: <1992Dec21.161821.7009@unocal.com>
- Sender: news@unocal.com (Unocal USENET News)
- Organization: Unocal Corporation
- References: <1992Dec12.113006.9343@iscsvax.uni.edu> <15890051@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> <1992Dec19.031114.15436@mic.ucla.edu>
- Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 16:18:21 GMT
- Lines: 22
-
- In article <1992Dec19.031114.15436@mic.ucla.edu> rush@eggneb.astro.ucla.edu (Brian Rush ) writes:
- >In article <15890051@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> jgr@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (John Rohrbaugh) writes:
- >>
- >>Ken Cooper said something to the effect of, "If you are running more than
- >>3 miles 3-4 times a week, you are doing it for reasons other than your
- >>health".
- >That is absolutely false. The health benefits from running are greater
- >the more you run, even up to 10 or more miles a day (if you know what
- >you
- >are doing and don't hurt yourself and take care of yourself
- >otherwise). People always say that you only need to run for about 30
- >minutes 3-4 times a week because that is about the level past which
- >the marginal returns on you running investment decrease most
- >drastically, BUT THEY STILL EXIST!
-
-
- The most-quoted study in area is of an east coast 25(?)th alumni group
- where there was considerable improvement in health for people who
- exercised aerobically 2000 kcal per week, but not much improvement thereafter.
- Not there was a decline in health beyond 2000 kcal either.
- This probably saying there is a lot more difference between coach potatoes
- and people who run 30 miles a week, than between 30 and 60 miles a week.
-