DISCLAIMER: Please note that this is not meant to hurt feelings, but rather, open eyes. I am illustrating my opinion with brutal honesty and zero political correction with support from scientific evidence. Reader’s discretion is advised.
(Also today’s post for AlbanyCrossFit.com— check it out!)
Now that you’ve found CrossFit, what athletes do you consider to be the healthiest, functional, and most fit? I’m talking about pure physical aptitudecompletely independent of nutrition (I know, I know, they go hand in hand—but for a moment, try and separate the two).
…Well?
In my opinion, the most physically fit individual is capable of doing any functional movement at any given moment. This includes swimming, lifting heavy weights over long AND short distances, running sprints, climbing rope, etc.
So… what doesn’t this include (even in the “etc”)?
Marathon runners.
But wait a second… why not? I mean, they are able to run… and run… and…. run….
Probably—however, the human race has not evolved to run 30+ miles at once (i.e., is that really functional?). Not only do some studies illustrate that marathon running is damaging to the heart, but marathon runners (or runners in general) also have a high potential to lose a considerable amount of muscle mass… especially if their diets aren’t legitimate and they aren’t doing enough (or correct) supplemental lifting.
So, in terms of functionality… strength wins. Sorry, but losing muscle does not.
In terms of heart damage, if you are not an experienced runner (that is, aerobically trained), MRI data shows that “lack of real aerobic fitness may directly impact the ways the heart organizes itself to survive the stress of marathon running”, resulting in damage that may last for up to 3 months1.
“Duh”, you’re thinking. But check this out: even for experienced marathon runners, heart damage is likely. A study conducted in the UK by Liverpool John Moores University and the Countess of Chester Hospital concluded the following:
“This study suggests that running continuously over 50 or 100 miles may not be good for the heart. 96 percent of the finishers developed a significant increase in cardiac Troponin I, which can be an indicator of heart muscle damage — and 12 percent showed signs suggestive of significant cardiac damage. They also developed significant electrical changes on their ECGs and, in some cases, quite bizarre changes. However, there was no proven correlation between the changes in cardiac Troponin I and the ECG changes.” 2
Please be assured that I am not trying to skew your participation in a 5k or the NYC marathon— we should all want to try a new challenge once in a while. My point of view is simply that one should not specialize or engage only in long distance running. The benefits do not outweigh the costs, especially when it comes to overall strength and functionality.
Just keepin’ it real… :)
REFERENCES:
1) ScienceDaily. “Marathons Damage the Hearts of Less Fit Runners for Up to Three Months, MRI Data Suggest”. Oct 25th 2010.http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101025005836.htm.
2) ScienceDaily. “Ultra-Endurance Running May Not Be Good for the Heart, Study Suggests”. Aug 31st, 2010.http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100831073517.htm.
