Why most women shouldn't run

sam30

Ososlo wrote: »

I don't understand why anyone thinks I was trolling. I don't know anything about Let's Run and how it is seen by the serious athletics community here or anywhere else. This is a subject I'm interested in. I wondered how your musculoskeletal make-up (if that's the correct term to describe the make-up of your skeleton) has an influence on your abilities as a runner. I googled it and that site came up and I was interested to hear about how some people might be more predisposed to injury due their natural make up and how some of us just might not be naturally built to be decent runners and a few other related things. 'Nature or nurture' - Tunguska got it and I thought it would lead to a decent debate.

If I had known that website was viewed by people as it is then I wouldn't have posted it.
I'm really sorry I bothered now. Only a few people seemed to 'get' what I was asking about.
I'll research better next time and ask The Elders if what I quote is acceptable or not. Forgive me:rolleyes:

fair play to you i think it is very important subject the distinction between men an women in terms of injury risk, how can people involved in sport not be interested in research that shows women have up to 5 times the risk of a severe knee injury? undoubtedly female runners need to do more strength and conditioning that focuses on improving their neuromuscular abilities than their male counterparts. Excessive femur adduction/internal rotation is a huge contributor to injury and the female pelvis anatomy puts their gluts,deep hip rotators at a disadvantage that they need to work on to limit injury risk. if people on here think that is somehow sexist or put up some picture of some world class female athlete with terrible running form to 'prove' such things dont matter then there is a serious epidemic of head in the sand on here.

walshb

sam30 wrote: »

fair play to you i think it is very important subject the distinction between men an women in terms of injury risk, how can people involved in sport not be interested in research that shows women have up to 5 times the risk of a severe knee injury? undoubtedly female runners need to do more strength and conditioning that focuses on improving their neuromuscular abilities than their male counterparts. Excessive femur adduction/internal rotation is a huge contributor to injury and the female pelvis anatomy puts their gluts,deep hip rotators at a disadvantage that they need to work on to limit injury risk. if people on here think that is somehow sexist or put up some picture of some world class female athlete with terrible running form to 'prove' such things dont matter then there is a serious epidemic of head in the sand on here.

Do you think that the article's author was trolling?

sam30

walshb wrote: »

Do you think that the article's author was trolling?

I dislike the term trolling. It has no meaning in the real world ( i.e. not on the internet) . He raised an important issue that it appears from the lack of engagement in the actual topic not many runners are aware of or think is important which is a shame if they are involved in coaching/treating females

Deenie123

I was heading out in the car this morning with my mother in the passenger seat and saw a woman running. Very, very wide hips and mildly overweight. The way she was running looked extremely uncomfortable and looking at the angle of her knees and hips from behind I just thought "That girl is going to do herself damage". My mum, who knows nothing about pretty much any sport commented without any prompt "Gosh, I suppose it's good she's running but she really doesn't look suited to it, her hips look too wide".

Even to completely untrained uninterested eyes, really wide hips don't look right running. It looks painful.

Now don't get me wrong, I admire that girl so much for having the motivation to get up off the couch and go for a run. Fair play to her and I wish her every success. I just can't shake the feeling - as someone who's had multiple knee and foot injuries in the past - that having such an extreme angle from her hips to knees to ankles just can't be good for her skeleton.

But at the same time, if I saw a narrow hipped overweight guy running I'd probably feel sorry for his knees too.

Surely each individual has a cut off maximum weight after which point they'd be doing better by their body (i.e. less damage to it) to get on a bike or cross trainer to reduce their weight before running again? Over half of Irish women aged 20+ are overweight or obese. Most women don't have tiny narrow hips, so combined with over half being overweight, is the logical conclusion not that most women should get on a cross trainer or bike or go for a fast walk to reduce their weight (and hence the damage to their knees) before taking up running?

RayCun

A lot of women run badly, a lot of rotation of the upper body and hips, knees in tight and feet kicking out. But I think that's more lack of training than anything intrinsic

downthemiddle

Deenie123 wrote: »

I was heading out in the car this morning with my mother in the passenger seat and saw a woman running. Very, very wide hips and mildly overweight. The way she was running looked extremely uncomfortable and looking at the angle of her knees and hips from behind I just thought "That girl is going to do herself damage". My mum, who knows nothing about pretty much any sport commented without any prompt "Gosh, I suppose it's good she's running but she really doesn't look suited to it, her hips look too wide".

Even to completely untrained uninterested eyes, really wide hips don't look right running. It looks painful.

Now don't get me wrong, I admire that girl so much for having the motivation to get up off the couch and go for a run. Fair play to her and I wish her every success. I just can't shake the feeling - as someone who's had multiple knee and foot injuries in the past - that having such an extreme angle from her hips to knees to ankles just can't be good for her skeleton.

But at the same time, if I saw a narrow hipped overweight guy running I'd probably feel sorry for his knees too.

Surely each individual has a cut off maximum weight after which point they'd be doing better by their body (i.e. less damage to it) to get on a bike or cross trainer to reduce their weight before running again? Over half of Irish women aged 20+ are overweight or obese. Most women don't have tiny narrow hips, so combined with over half being overweight, is the logical conclusion not that most women should get on a cross trainer or bike or go for a fast walk to reduce their weight (and hence the damage to their knees) before taking up running?

I was watching TV yesterday and I saw a premier league soccer player miss an open goal, it was painful and I'm sure many of those in attendance thought that he shouldn't be playing soccer.

BrowmThomas

I ran 6kms today....All 11.5 stone of me.

I consider myself to be quite overweight. I might not have looked the prettiest sight but my knees and ankles are fine.

SERIOUSLY, some of the comments here are pathetic. Women with wide hips/how we look/damaging ourselves....coming from women???

Deenie123

downthemiddle wrote: »

I was watching TV yesterday and I saw a premier league soccer player miss an open goal, it was painful and I'm sure many of those in attendance thought that he shouldn't be playing soccer.

Love it when someone gives a completely facetious answer.

In seriousness, do you think it's better for someone overweight with a very high angle between their knee and hip to be running, or to be doing a lesser impact sport until they can reduce their weight to a point where running won't be so damaging to their joints? And I didn't say it was painful for me to watch her, I said it looked painful. As in, that running in that manner would cause pain. In a literal sense.

tunguska

BrowmThomas wrote: »

I ran 6kms today....All 11.5 stone of me.

I consider myself to be quite overweight. I might not have looked the prettiest sight but my knees and ankles are fine.

SERIOUSLY, some of the comments here are pathetic. Women with wide hips/how we look/damaging ourselves....coming from women???

I think there are legitimate concerns being addressed, why should it matter if other women are commenting on the issue and have different views?

BrowmThomas

tunguska wrote: »

I think there are legitimate concerns being addressed, why should it matter if other women are commenting on the issue and have different views?

I have wide hips, run 3/4 times per week and have done for some time. I am 1 of those bring attacked on this thread.

I think there is more than enough pressure put on women to be skinny/perfect without reading this here. I run as I enjoy and if that was me being commented on in earlier post, I'd be very annoyed.

Murph_D

I think it's irrelevant whether comments on this subject are made by men or women. Neither is a greater authority from a sports science POV. Why should it matter?

Whether or not there is a legitimate physiological basis for this argument, there are lots of counter arguments. Women may be able to compensate for any natural disadvantage, if there is one in the sport of running, as opposed to football, for example, with specific training. Or not - most of us simply don't know.

I see as many overweight men as women out running. Both have challenges to overcome. Heavy men seem to hit the pavement particularly hard, for example, which possibly leads to problems. Here on Boards, as many men as women seem to suffer from running related injuries.

tunguska

BrowmThomas wrote: »

I have wide hips, run 3/4 times per week and have done for some time. I am 1 of those bring attacked on this thread.

I think there is more than enough pressure put on women to be skinny/perfect without reading this here. I run as I enjoy and if that was me being commented on in earlier post, I'd be very annoyed.

But you seem to be implying that no woman has any business having a different viewpoint from the one you have. Maybe I'm wrong and that's not what you're saying?

BrowmThomas

tunguska wrote: »

But you seem to be implying that no woman has any business having a different viewpoint from the one you have. Maybe I'm wrong and that's not what you're saying?

No, not at all. I assumed poster before me was a woman. I just think as someone 5"7 & 11.5 stone that people like me were attacked for being heavy and running. I have never had injuries.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, I think it is unfair to make women feel worse reading some of the opinions here.

Hannibal Smith

Im seriously paranoid about running now! All I see when I see another runner is a target on their back for me to catch. ..I never even noticed hip to knee angles! !! I hope to god I wasn't that woman someone saw out running this morning

Ososlo

This thread is gone soooooo off-tangent at this point it's really going nowhere and the things been discussed have nothing to do with the sentiment of the original post. It's only going one way now... downhill fast...

Can it be closed?

walshb

Anyone who is obese or quite heavy and who is pounding the pavements is probably not doing themselves any favors. Male or Female. Simple: If in doubt it's probably best to go see a doctor before embarking on any high intensity/cardio regime.

walshb

BrowmThomas wrote: »

No, not at all. I assumed poster before me was a woman. I just think as someone 5"7 & 11.5 stone that people like me were attacked for being heavy and running. I have never had injuries.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, I think it is unfair to make women feel worse reading some of the opinions here.

I wouldn't consider 5 feet 7 and 160 lbs as being heavy. Male or female.

BrowmThomas

walshb wrote: »

I wouldn't consider 5 feet 7 and 160 lbs as being heavy. Male or female.

You just made my day....Thanks

Peterx

walshb wrote: »

I wouldn't consider 5 feet 7 and 160 lbs as being heavy. Male or female.

Your BMI is 25.6. This BMI indicates you are overweight. There is an increased risk of developing heart disease, diabetes and certain cancers with a BMI in this range. Losing weight is beneficial and can be achieved through healthy eating and being active daily. It is a good idea to set a realistic target of amount of weight you would like to lose over a number of weeks. If you are muscular as a result of a lot of sport you don’t need to lose weight. -

See more at: http://www.safefood.eu/Healthy-Eating/Weight-Loss/BMI-calculator.aspx?gclid=Cj0KEQiA7NyiBRCOhpuCm9Dq6b4BEiQA9D6qhZ3NabVS6l_sLAG10uos9VvHHV_cPyFNslbRyUU2oXUaAuc48P8HAQ#sthash.wTZmqU9H.dpuf

Peterx

http://www.safefood.eu/SafeFood/media/SafeFoodLibrary/Documents/Publications/Research%20Reports/Bodyweight-Perception-with-accepted-changes-JC-version-2.pdf

interesting reading

walshb

Peterx wrote: »

Your BMI is 25.6. This BMI indicates you are overweight. There is an increased risk of developing heart disease, diabetes and certain cancers with a BMI in this range. Losing weight is beneficial and can be achieved through healthy eating and being active daily. It is a good idea to set a realistic target of amount of weight you would like to lose over a number of weeks. If you are muscular as a result of a lot of sport you don’t need to lose weight. -

See more at: http://www.safefood.eu/Healthy-Eating/Weight-Loss/BMI-calculator.aspx?gclid=Cj0KEQiA7NyiBRCOhpuCm9Dq6b4BEiQA9D6qhZ3NabVS6l_sLAG10uos9VvHHV_cPyFNslbRyUU2oXUaAuc48P8HAQ#sthash.wTZmqU9H.dpuf

Thanks for the info, but my point still stands. It's far from heavy. BMI is not an exact science. It's an educated and researched guideline.

walshb

BrowmThomas wrote: »

You just made my day....Thanks

You're welcome. And I hope the running is helping you stay fit and trim and healthy.

pwurple

Peterx wrote: »

Your BMI is 25.6. This BMI indicates you are overweight. There is an increased risk of developing heart disease, diabetes and certain cancers with a BMI in this range. Losing weight is beneficial and can be achieved through healthy eating and being active daily. It is a good idea to set a realistic target of amount of weight you would like to lose over a number of weeks. If you are muscular as a result of a lot of sport you don’t need to lose weight. -

^^^^
BMI calculator fail.

The BMI there for 5ft7 at 160pounds is 25.1
1 single pound less and it's in the normal range @24.9.
I'd call that borderline.

Peterx

walshb wrote: »

Thanks for the info, but my point still stands. It's far from heavy. BMI is not an exact science. It's an educated and researched guideline.

pwurple wrote: »

^^^^
BMI calculator fail.

The BMI there for 5ft7 at 160pounds is 25.1
1 single pound less and it's in the normal range @24.9.
I'd call that borderline.

24.9 BMI is borderline overweight (unless the person is quite muscular) but each to their own.
The bodyweight perception report I posted above does make for interesting reading on this topic.

pconn062

Ok, think we're done with this when we're discussing someones BMI. Shame, as I actually think it could be a useful discussion