Running Puts You A Step Ahead of Diabetes

[xMenace]

Las Vegas Now - Breaking News, Local News, Weather, Traffic, Streaming Video, Classifieds, Blogs - Running Puts You A Step Ahead of Diabetes (http://www.lasvegasnow.com/Global/story.asp?S=7424815&nav=menu102_2)

Paula Francis, Anchor
Running Puts You A Step Ahead of Diabetes
Updated: Nov 29, 2007 01:00 AM

Many of the more than 17,000 participants expected for the Sunday Dec. 2 Las Vegas Marathon are first-time runners.

They may be running for any number of reasons, but they're getting a health benefit that may not even know about. They're leaving a little-known condition called pre-diabetes in the dust.

In this week's Dealing With Diabetes report, a local specialist says running puts you a step ahead of diabetes.

Las Vegas resident Wendy Rountree has always enjoyed sports, as an "observer." Running marathons was strictly something that "other" people did.

Wendy said, "Basically, I couldn't run from here to the corner. I literally couldn't run from here to the corner, without huffing and puffing."

In 2006, Rountree left the sidelines and ran in her first half-marathon. And she plans to cross the finish line again this year.

"You'd be amazed at what you're able to do," she said.

This kind of lifestyle change is an excellent way to fend off pre-diabetes, a condition in which your blood sugar level is higher than normal but not high enough to be classified as Type-2 diabetes.

Las Vegas endocrinologist Fred Toffel says there's an alarming prevalence of pre-diabetes.

"They say there's 22 million people with diabetes. There's probably at least that many if not more with pre-diabetes roaming around out there, not knowing about it," said Dr. Toffel.

But studies show that people with pre-diabetes who improve their diet, lose some weight, and take on regular exercise cut their risk of Type-2 diabetes in half.

Dr. Fred Toffel said, "I'll tell you, I have very few people in my practice who are marathon runners. The reason is that marathon runners tend not to get Type-2 diabetes.

Dr. Toffel stresses it doesn't take marathon-level training to make a difference. Even moderate regular exercise may stop the progression of pre-diabetes.

[Scratch]

I like running but I guess a few on here know that by now.

But mostly, I'm a big fan of the idea that each and every one of us could stand to get more physical activity. It's too easy nowadays for people to be sedentary, we've got so many entertainment options that don't require us to move around much and the work we do is much less physically demanding than 50, 100, 150 years ago. Combined with a much more steady, ample, and targeted to our gluttonous desires food supply, our environment is radically different than that of our evolutionary ancestors.

Get active. Our bodies are adapted to be constantly renewed by the demands of physical rigor. If you don't use it, you lose it.

[kel4han]

Too bad it doesn't change type 1 onset. I was an avid runner at the time of diagnosis, and for 3 years prior. :(

[BlueSky]

Too bad it doesn't change type 1 onset. ...
No, it doesn't. But exercise will still help you prevent insulin resistance. The combination of T1 and insulin resistance is the absolute pits!

[Tropo]

It's surprises me that people still run with so many better exercise options available.

Running tends to be a catabolic exercise which means it breaks down muscle tissue rather than building it up. Most long distance runners look withered and scrawny...even at younger ages.

Marathon running is so extreme it could hardly be considered a healthy activity.

[Evermont]

No, it doesn't. But exercise will still help you prevent insulin resistance. The combination of T1 and insulin resistance is the absolute pits!

Excellent point! Is it not also correct that exercise can resolve some amount of existing insulin resistance?

I think it's great to reinforce the benefits of exercise for diabetics at every turn. It's also worth pointing out that there are benefits to regular exercise which help with any number of other things as well as diabetes. This should be important to diabetics AND non-diabetics.

It's surprises me that people still run with so many better exercise options available.

Running tends to be a catabolic exercise which means it breaks down muscle tissue rather than building it up. Most long distance runners look withered and scrawny...even at younger ages.

Marathon running is so extreme it could hardly be considered a healthy activity.

I agree - but that's easy for me, I'm just not built for running. I do work the large muscle groups with a well rounded approach. I use a regular and recumbent exercise bike, a stair-stepper, an elliptical, and I walk on and off road, I snowboard and I'll take up snowshoeing soon too. I'd also use an arc machine if I had one - I even hit the treadmill sometimes. All better than running I think.

[Tropo]

I agree - but that's easy for me, I'm just not built for running. I do work the large muscle groups with a well rounded approach. I use a regular and recumbent exercise bike, a stair-stepper, an elliptical, and I walk on and off road, I snowboard and I'll take up snowshoeing soon too. I'd also use an arc machine if I had one - I even hit the treadmill sometimes. All better than running I think.

I'm the same. At 103kg bodyweight the stress of running would be far too much on my joints. I think runners should be under 70kg.

We have similar approach to exercise. A sample cardio workout for me would be 20 minutes rowing (concept2), 20 minutes lifecycle, 20 minutes elliptical, 20 minutes treadmill (walking on incline). My favourites being the rowing and bike.

[Scratch]

It's surprises me that people still run with so many better exercise options available.

Running tends to be a catabolic exercise which means it breaks down muscle tissue rather than building it up. Most long distance runners look withered and scrawny...even at younger ages.

Marathon running is so extreme it could hardly be considered a healthy activity.
I don't think this a completely accurate representation. While longer long distance running can be more catabolic, it's not a form of exercise that has to be catabolic. I would also have concerns about the idea projected that running will leave one scrawny and withered looking -- there are many distance runners and marathoners even who aren't scrawny and withered.

I would agree that perhaps long distance running favors those people with body types that are lean, basic physics predicts that those with less mass to move should be easier to move and probably more easily moved over longer distances.

Running is an excellent cardiovascular exercise that improves the function of the heart, circulation to the legs (which may be especially good for diabetics), and bone density in the legs.

Ultimately, better is a relativistic term, dependent upon what you wish to achieve, what you enjoy, what you need to do in the context of your physical makeup.

For me, I like running. I especially like emotional states I find when I begin running beyond an hour and for whatever reason I don't get that same sort of high when I walk or bike. The experience that I had while running 13.1 miles in Philadelphia ended up being one of the most beautiful mental states I have ever known.

So I've found running to be highly beneficial physically and emotionally. The "better" cardio exercises of biking and walking don't have the same sort of draw to keep me motivated like that. In that way, perhaps better is better seen as what works to get the person active and out of the sedentary lifestyle. If that's walking, go for it. If that's running, go for it. If that's weight training, go for it.

And I don't seem to be withered.

[Scratch]

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y147/xulfercirtsag/flexing_10_02_2007.jpg

[volleyball]

Scratch, thats a good early xmas present for the ladies here.


The more elitest runners have less mass to run faster. The ones who only run is what give the activity a bad name. You include running in an overall fitness routine.
I have large muscular legs and inefficient feet so a 5k for me expel more energy than a half marathon for runners used to that.
a good 45 minutes a day with elevated heart rate and some small things throughout the day is sufficient for most of us.

[Tropo]

And I don't seem to be withered.

No, you don't appear to be withered, however you appear lean with a light bodyweight and have the type of physique that suits running...and you're still young.

I'm sorry if you took my post personally, but the comment I made about running making people appear withered was in relation to long-distance running. I'm talking about people who run at least 100 kilometers per week.

If a person has a light bodyweight, and they're still young, perhaps running is a fair choice of exercise, but it's still a poor choice in the long run especially when joints start losing their integrety as people age.

I wouldn't recommend that anyone runs unless they play a specific sport which requires running ability. There's just too much impact on all the leg joints and hips when running and the 'reward to risk' ratio is far too low. Very few runners will be able to keep it up in their later years and it will probably cause chronic injuries in the long run.

Here's an exerpt from a study done to determine stress loads on the body when running:

Impact Forces on the body when running (http://www.posetech.com/library/cs-05-2001.html)

Running can be considered an uninterrupted series of small jumps from one foot to the other. During each foot strike the body is exposed to repeated impact forces estimated to be two to three times the body weight of the runner. Applying this fact to a 150-pound runner, who has an average of 400 foot-strikes per foot per mile, during a one-mile run each foot would endure between 60 and 90 tons of force. Typical runners training from 40 to 80 miles per week could expect to expose their bodies to approximately 16,000 to 32,000 impacts per leg per week, equivalent to about 2400 to 7200 tons of force. This is an astounding amount of stress to the lower extremities that increases the likelihood of injury.

These are the forces on a 68 kg runner. They would be almost double for me at over 100 kg bodyweight.

[Tropo]

And I don't seem to be withered.

No, you don't appear to be withered, however you appear lean with a light bodyweight and have the type of physique that suits running...and you're still young.

I'm sorry if you took my post personally, but the comment I made about running making people appear withered was in relation to long-distance running. I'm talking about people who run at least 100 kilometers per week.

If a person has a light bodyweight, and they're still young, perhaps running is a fair choice of exercise, but it's still a poor choice in the long run especially when joints start losing their integrety as people age.

I wouldn't recommend that anyone runs unless they play a specific sport which requires running ability. There's just too much impact on all the leg joints and hips when running and the 'reward to risk' ratio is far too low. Very few runners will be able to keep it up in their later years and it will probably cause chronic injuries in the long run.

I notice you talk about mental "highs" when you run. This can be a trap, because it often causes people to persist with a particular exercise or program when it's no longer good for them...and causes people to overtrain, often to extremes. People "addicted" to an exercise often become very depressed when they are forced to stop due to injuries. It's better to approach an exercise program intelligently rather than emotionally.

Here's an exerpt from a study done to determine stress loads on the body when running:

Impact Forces on the body when running (http://www.posetech.com/library/cs-05-2001.html)

Running can be considered an uninterrupted series of small jumps from one foot to the other. During each foot strike the body is exposed to repeated impact forces estimated to be two to three times the body weight of the runner. Applying this fact to a 150-pound runner, who has an average of 400 foot-strikes per foot per mile, during a one-mile run each foot would endure between 60 and 90 tons of force. Typical runners training from 40 to 80 miles per week could expect to expose their bodies to approximately 16,000 to 32,000 impacts per leg per week, equivalent to about 2400 to 7200 tons of force. This is an astounding amount of stress to the lower extremities that increases the likelihood of injury.

These are the forces on a 68 kg runner. They would be almost double for me at over 100 kg bodyweight.

[Tropo]

Sorry, I did an edit and accidentally posted twice.

[Scratch]

I'm sorry if you took my post personally, but the comment I made about running making people appear withered was in relation to long-distance running. I'm talking about people who run at least 100 kilometers per week.

That's a better clarification.


If a person has a light bodyweight, and they're still young, perhaps running is a fair choice of exercise, but it's still a poor choice in the long run especially when joints start losing their integrety as people age.

You shouldn't exclude the possibility that if not done to overuse beyond the ability of the body to repair itself, that running can be beneficial to the strength of joints, to the ligaments and tendons, to the bones. Muscles that don't get used wither, muscles that are used maintain or gain strength depending upon the load and proper recovery. Bones, tendons, and ligaments seem to be similar in that way. It is something that must be carefully regarded by a person running as tendons are avascular, but if the body is properly stressed and given sufficient nutrition and recovery then running doesn't destroy joints.

I notice you talk about mental "highs" when you run. This can be a trap, because it often causes people to persist with a particular exercise or program when it's no longer good for them...and causes people to overtrain, often to extremes. People "addicted" to an exercise often become very depressed when they are forced to stop due to injuries. It's better to approach an exercise program intelligently rather than emotionally.

It's important to use intelligence in monitoring and using an exercise program or activity, but it's rather near impossible to discount the emotional factor, isn't it? We are human beings and rational intelligence is a rather recent evolutionary overlay on top of the more primitive wiring.

I don't think either of us would argue that any behavior or activity taken to extreme levels is potentially destructive. We might disagree about what constitutes an extreme level and I was wanting to present that running can be quite beneficial, beneficial to cardiovascular health, circulation to the legs, bone density, and yes, for the joints.

If a person likes walking that's done without extremity, that's good.

If a person likes cycling that's done without extremity, that's good.

If a person like martial arts done without extremity, that's good.

If a person likes rowing done without extremity, that's good.

If a person likes running without extremity, that's good.

[Tropo]

I made my point about the emotional highs that people get from exercise being negative because I've personally seen many people literally destroy their bodies because they didn't know when to quit or take a break...so addicted were they to the "high" mental state. By the time they had to stop, the chronic injuries they had sustained were irreversable. I've also done a fair bit of damage to my own body due to going to extremes in my younger years...in the gym.

Overtraining is a huge problem in most sports and something that requires much discipline to overcome.

These mental highs seem particularly dominant in runner's psyche. I think it has a lot to do with the activity being very automatic (and natural) so it becomes easy for a person to switch off and just enjoy their mental state. In contrast, a gym workout requires constant thought input.

Although running can strengthen joints, ligaments and tendons, it will only do so if they are not damaged in the process, which is so very easy to do when running.

The other exercises you mentioned (rowing, biking) will strengthen the bones and connective tissue without the risk of impact damage. Rowing and biking will also strengthen the muscles to a much larger extent than running.

When a person becomes a faster runner, it's usually at the expense of muscle tissue. Accomplished long distance runners are usually very lean and don't carry much muscle (or fat). When a person becomes a better rower or cyclist, they have to increase their muscle mass and strength in order to achieve their improved performance.

It doesn't matter how fit and healthy a person is, the joints will lose their integrity as a person ages. Developing a healthy impact free exercise regime while a person is still young will be an advantage in the long run.

Scatch, from looking at your photo I would guess that you are also involved in strength training. Is this true?