Re: The Runner's Physique

Quoted message said:

Dad? Is that you???

The child is the father of the man, so I can only presume you had
quite an infancy!

Quoted message said:

I don't find them homoertoic, butt the lifters who are humping each
others buttholes obviously do.

But you said "butt" instead of "but"...that's a dead give-away of a
Freudian slip!

Quoted message said:

Dad? Is that you???

The child is the father of the man, so I can only presume you had
quite an infancy!

Quoted message said:

I don't find them homoertoic, butt the lifters who are humping each
others buttholes obviously do.

But you said "butt" instead of "but"...that's a dead give-away of a
Freudian slip!

Michelle said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Elflord said:

Her running distances weren't constant. Maybe she can tell us how
many miles she ran in the last 6 months if she has it in a
spreadsheet.

According to the data in the Garmin Training Center database, I have run
450 miles since Nov 11 of last year. However, I have run approximately
twenty miles without using the Garmin during that period, so the total
is about 470 miles.

I commend you on your loyalty to your Garmin (-;

That would predict a weight drop of 15lb or so, assuming a body weight of 160lb,
and assuming running economy is the same as the typical test subject.

It would seem plausible to me that a woman over 60 running at ~13mpm would have
somewhat worse running economy than a typical test subject (e.g. college
student or athlete running at around 8mpm), so the numbers seem to me to be in
the right ballpark.

Cheers,
--
Elflord

Michelle said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Elflord said:

Her running distances weren't constant. Maybe she can tell us how
many miles she ran in the last 6 months if she has it in a
spreadsheet.

According to the data in the Garmin Training Center database, I have run
450 miles since Nov 11 of last year. However, I have run approximately
twenty miles without using the Garmin during that period, so the total
is about 470 miles.

I commend you on your loyalty to your Garmin (-;

That would predict a weight drop of 15lb or so, assuming a body weight of 160lb,
and assuming running economy is the same as the typical test subject.

It would seem plausible to me that a woman over 60 running at ~13mpm would have
somewhat worse running economy than a typical test subject (e.g. college
student or athlete running at around 8mpm), so the numbers seem to me to be in
the right ballpark.

Cheers,
--
Elflord

Michelle said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Elflord said:

Her running distances weren't constant. Maybe she can tell us how
many miles she ran in the last 6 months if she has it in a
spreadsheet.

According to the data in the Garmin Training Center database, I have run
450 miles since Nov 11 of last year. However, I have run approximately
twenty miles without using the Garmin during that period, so the total
is about 470 miles.

I commend you on your loyalty to your Garmin (-;

That would predict a weight drop of 15lb or so, assuming a body weight of 160lb,
and assuming running economy is the same as the typical test subject.

It would seem plausible to me that a woman over 60 running at ~13mpm would have
somewhat worse running economy than a typical test subject (e.g. college
student or athlete running at around 8mpm), so the numbers seem to me to be in
the right ballpark.

Cheers,
--
Elflord

Michelle said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Elflord said:

Her running distances weren't constant. Maybe she can tell us how
many miles she ran in the last 6 months if she has it in a
spreadsheet.

According to the data in the Garmin Training Center database, I have run
450 miles since Nov 11 of last year. However, I have run approximately
twenty miles without using the Garmin during that period, so the total
is about 470 miles.

I commend you on your loyalty to your Garmin (-;

That would predict a weight drop of 15lb or so, assuming a body weight of 160lb,
and assuming running economy is the same as the typical test subject.

It would seem plausible to me that a woman over 60 running at ~13mpm would have
somewhat worse running economy than a typical test subject (e.g. college
student or athlete running at around 8mpm), so the numbers seem to me to be in
the right ballpark.

Cheers,
--
Elflord

In article <[email hidden]>,

Charles said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Learn how to read for comprehension.

To the extent that this newsgroup has a jackass infestation, you're
aggravating the problem. A lot.

She doesn't exactly bring out the best in people does she?

I give them the opportunity to show their true selves.

--
13.1 Because I can

In article <[email hidden]>,

Charles said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Learn how to read for comprehension.

To the extent that this newsgroup has a jackass infestation, you're
aggravating the problem. A lot.

She doesn't exactly bring out the best in people does she?

I give them the opportunity to show their true selves.

--
13.1 Because I can

In article <[email hidden]>,

Charles said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Learn how to read for comprehension.

To the extent that this newsgroup has a jackass infestation, you're
aggravating the problem. A lot.

She doesn't exactly bring out the best in people does she?

I give them the opportunity to show their true selves.

--
13.1 Because I can

In article <[email hidden]>,

Charles said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Learn how to read for comprehension.

To the extent that this newsgroup has a jackass infestation, you're
aggravating the problem. A lot.

She doesn't exactly bring out the best in people does she?

I give them the opportunity to show their true selves.

--
13.1 Because I can

Andrzej Rosa said:

What they don't say (and what you read into it anyway) is that people lost weight.
There was a reference provided? Why didn't you check it?

Sorry, if your claim has moved to "running does not cause weight loss of any
kind", then I guess we'll just have to disagree. But it seems odd that you would
claim this, since I thought you also believed that running causes people to end
up extremely skinny, which presumably requires losing weight.

It is possible to commence an endurance (not the same as "running"😉 program and
not lose weight. I don't unfortunately have enough time to go through and do
this.

I'm not dismissing what you have, but it does contradict what I have seen and
experienced.

Quoted message said:

Does it make sense to run for half an hour three times a week? That's
what most people would call running.

Michelle's average over the last year would be about 2hrs a week (470 miles at a
pacve of about 13 minutes a mile). Perhaps you should ask her if she thinks it
was worth it.

Cheers,
--
Elflord

Andrzej Rosa said:

What they don't say (and what you read into it anyway) is that people lost weight.
There was a reference provided? Why didn't you check it?

Sorry, if your claim has moved to "running does not cause weight loss of any
kind", then I guess we'll just have to disagree. But it seems odd that you would
claim this, since I thought you also believed that running causes people to end
up extremely skinny, which presumably requires losing weight.

It is possible to commence an endurance (not the same as "running"😉 program and
not lose weight. I don't unfortunately have enough time to go through and do
this.

I'm not dismissing what you have, but it does contradict what I have seen and
experienced.

Quoted message said:

Does it make sense to run for half an hour three times a week? That's
what most people would call running.

Michelle's average over the last year would be about 2hrs a week (470 miles at a
pacve of about 13 minutes a mile). Perhaps you should ask her if she thinks it
was worth it.

Cheers,
--
Elflord

Andrzej Rosa said:

What they don't say (and what you read into it anyway) is that people lost weight.
There was a reference provided? Why didn't you check it?

Sorry, if your claim has moved to "running does not cause weight loss of any
kind", then I guess we'll just have to disagree. But it seems odd that you would
claim this, since I thought you also believed that running causes people to end
up extremely skinny, which presumably requires losing weight.

It is possible to commence an endurance (not the same as "running"😉 program and
not lose weight. I don't unfortunately have enough time to go through and do
this.

I'm not dismissing what you have, but it does contradict what I have seen and
experienced.

Quoted message said:

Does it make sense to run for half an hour three times a week? That's
what most people would call running.

Michelle's average over the last year would be about 2hrs a week (470 miles at a
pacve of about 13 minutes a mile). Perhaps you should ask her if she thinks it
was worth it.

Cheers,
--
Elflord

Andrzej Rosa said:

What they don't say (and what you read into it anyway) is that people lost weight.
There was a reference provided? Why didn't you check it?

Sorry, if your claim has moved to "running does not cause weight loss of any
kind", then I guess we'll just have to disagree. But it seems odd that you would
claim this, since I thought you also believed that running causes people to end
up extremely skinny, which presumably requires losing weight.

It is possible to commence an endurance (not the same as "running"😉 program and
not lose weight. I don't unfortunately have enough time to go through and do
this.

I'm not dismissing what you have, but it does contradict what I have seen and
experienced.

Quoted message said:

Does it make sense to run for half an hour three times a week? That's
what most people would call running.

Michelle's average over the last year would be about 2hrs a week (470 miles at a
pacve of about 13 minutes a mile). Perhaps you should ask her if she thinks it
was worth it.

Cheers,
--
Elflord

In article <[email hidden]>,

Michelle said:

I give them the opportunity to show their true selves.

Encouraging trolls by engaging them is frequently referred
to as "butt-sniffing," which I think is a pretty good
metaphor.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - [email hidden]

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

In article <[email hidden]>,

Michelle said:

I give them the opportunity to show their true selves.

Encouraging trolls by engaging them is frequently referred
to as "butt-sniffing," which I think is a pretty good
metaphor.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - [email hidden]

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

In article <[email hidden]>,

Michelle said:

I give them the opportunity to show their true selves.

Encouraging trolls by engaging them is frequently referred
to as "butt-sniffing," which I think is a pretty good
metaphor.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - [email hidden]

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

In article <[email hidden]>,

Michelle said:

I give them the opportunity to show their true selves.

Encouraging trolls by engaging them is frequently referred
to as "butt-sniffing," which I think is a pretty good
metaphor.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - [email hidden]

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

Elflord said:

Michelle said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
Elflord <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Her running distances weren't constant. Maybe she can tell us how
many miles she ran in the last 6 months if she has it in a
spreadsheet.

Quoted message said:

According to the data in the Garmin Training Center database, I have run
450 miles since Nov 11 of last year. However, I have run approximately
twenty miles without using the Garmin during that period, so the total
is about 470 miles.

I commend you on your loyalty to your Garmin (-;

That would predict a weight drop of 15lb or so, assuming a body weight of 160lb,
and assuming running economy is the same as the typical test subject.

It would seem plausible to me that a woman over 60 running at ~13mpm would have
somewhat worse running economy than a typical test subject (e.g. college
student or athlete running at around 8mpm), so the numbers seem to me to be in
the right ballpark.

I use this software program and it doesn't give me the total mileage
run but it does provide total calories burned through exercise. It
says since January (when I began tracking) I have burned a total of
27,442 calories running (or the equivalent of 7 lbs), and a total of
42,507 calories (12 lbs) if you include walking too.

Looking at this program, I just realized I started tracking at 119
lbs, not 122, as I stated earlier. (I started exercising back in June
'06, but I can't be sure how much I lost because I didn't track as
carefully and didn't even buy a scale until January). But, I can be
sure that the net change has been exactly 12.2 lbs lost since January
19.

Probably all my restaurant eating out "cheat days" wiped out any
deficit I was trying to maintain... ha! Because you can look at these
numbers and assume that all my weight was lost through exercise
alone.

jen

Elflord said:

Michelle said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
Elflord <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Her running distances weren't constant. Maybe she can tell us how
many miles she ran in the last 6 months if she has it in a
spreadsheet.

Quoted message said:

According to the data in the Garmin Training Center database, I have run
450 miles since Nov 11 of last year. However, I have run approximately
twenty miles without using the Garmin during that period, so the total
is about 470 miles.

I commend you on your loyalty to your Garmin (-;

That would predict a weight drop of 15lb or so, assuming a body weight of 160lb,
and assuming running economy is the same as the typical test subject.

It would seem plausible to me that a woman over 60 running at ~13mpm would have
somewhat worse running economy than a typical test subject (e.g. college
student or athlete running at around 8mpm), so the numbers seem to me to be in
the right ballpark.

I use this software program and it doesn't give me the total mileage
run but it does provide total calories burned through exercise. It
says since January (when I began tracking) I have burned a total of
27,442 calories running (or the equivalent of 7 lbs), and a total of
42,507 calories (12 lbs) if you include walking too.

Looking at this program, I just realized I started tracking at 119
lbs, not 122, as I stated earlier. (I started exercising back in June
'06, but I can't be sure how much I lost because I didn't track as
carefully and didn't even buy a scale until January). But, I can be
sure that the net change has been exactly 12.2 lbs lost since January
19.

Probably all my restaurant eating out "cheat days" wiped out any
deficit I was trying to maintain... ha! Because you can look at these
numbers and assume that all my weight was lost through exercise
alone.

jen