#139 The Not So Simple Thing

Recently I wrote a post where I highlighted a few (okay, a lot) of the tips, advice and rules I believe are essential to successful running and racing.

However, I took some slack (mostly and deservedly from my coach) for a massive oversight among the things I mention. And in light of my current situation in which I struggle daily with a stubborn, stiff and sticky hip/groin, I would like to make an important addition to my list and fittingly, provide it with its very own post. This "Golden Rule" being:

Stay healthy!

You can't run, train or race if you're injured. And you really shouldn't run or race if you're in considerable pain and discomfort. Minor aches and pains are all part of the process but major injuries, chronic pain and and ongoing issues will ultimately derail your training and all but inhibit your ability to improve.

Staying healthy sounds simple but it's actually anything but. It takes a great deal of consideration for everything from what, when and how much you eat, to how well and often you sleep, to what you do every minute and every hour that you're not running and training. 

Staying healthy means stretching, massaging, rolling and icing before and after each run. 

It means staying well hydrated and eating the right foods at the right time in order to fuel and recover from your training. 

It means seeing specialists (physios, chiros, sports docs, etc.) when you don't know what's wrong or need additional help getting back on track.

It means being educated and informed on the basic and not-so-basic aspects of running and training. 

It means supplementing your running with cross-training, strengthening or no training at all. 

It means developing a support team and learning from the experience of others.

It means taking time to rest and recover and realizing when you're pushing too hard. 

It means recognizing and accepting your own individual strengths, weaknesses and limits and not letting your goals, ego or determination get the best of you. 

Ultimately, staying healthy takes considerable time and energy, commitment and effort. And that's also why we often ignore it and take it for granted. Yet when we lose it, when it declines, or when we can't run or train as much as we want to, it immediately becomes our greatest and primary concern. It should always be our primary concern.

There is no simple way to stay healthy. There is no one thing we can do. I can't tell you how to stay healthy, but I insist you do everything possible to do it. It will be worth it. 

#135 Killing the Blues

"Leaves were falling, just like embers. In colors red and gold, they set us on fire. Burning just like a moonbeam in our eyes."

I'm not exactly sure what it is about December... The limited daylight and cold, dreary days? The upcoming holidays with busy schedules and consumerism? The arbitrary but ever-present pressures of a new year with all its hopes, dreams and aspirations? Whatever it is, I always find that December, for me, brings on a kind of year-end depression and heightened anxiety about what's to come.

Many – even those very close to me – will be surprised to hear that I have struggled – and still do – with mental health issues. Depression, anxiety, obsessive-compulsiveness and disordered eating. And while I have dealt successfully with most of these and am often able to control any relapses, I do still occasionally succumb to life's many and mounting stresses and fall back into deep and dark spaces.

"Now I am guilty of something, I hope you never do. Because there is nothing, Sadder than losing yourself in love."

Running to me has always been as much about maintaining positive mental health as it has about chasing fast times and PBs. Running was, has and is one of few 'aspects' of my life where I feel I have complete and constant control. No matter what life throws at me, a run will seemingly makes things better (if only for the time I am away). Running is the rock that provides a foundation and allows me to safely and confidently be me. It provides me with a valued and important identity, belonging to a group and working and contributing to both individual and shared goals and outcomes. It provides me with purpose. 

"Now you asked me, just to leave you, To go out on my own. And get what I need to. You want me to find what I've already had."

Now, as I continue to struggle with an ongoing injury/issue and am prevented from training and performing at my best, I am in what seems a highly uncertain and unsafe place. I am lacking motivation that has always been there and failing to enjoy an activity I usually love. And while I continue to run for my own sanity, I know I may be preventing myself from healing and getting back to the place where I can train and improve again.

If there is one, the point I am hoping to make is that running and training, to me, is not as simple as "run or don't run". It's not always easy to stop, especially when you don't have too. 

Just as good habits are sometimes hard to make, bad ones are hard to break... so what happens when what you're doing is a bit of both? We are told to "listen to the body" and "know your limits"... but what of what our heart and our head says? What do we do when the two are at odds?

"Somebody said they saw me, swinging the world by the tail. Bouncing over a white cloud, killing the blues."

#40: Birthday

Finally, a post today...and guess what? It’s about running! There's also a part about pancakes.

Yup, surprise, surprise, all I’ve got to talk about is running. I’ve become so boring that even I can’t stand to listen to myself talk. I think it’s why my plants are dying.

Part I: Dan Way Day 25th Edition.

So about a week ago it was my birthday and I just so happened to turn a quarter-century in age. For my special day I went home to the metropolis of Ingersoll, ON to see some friends and family and also to “run” the Rick Hansen Relay which just happened to be traveling through my hometown 25 years to the day that I was born! Cool huh. Despite only having to “run” 250m (the reason I’m putting run in quotation marks is because I had to carry this massive medal which proceeded to pound incessantly into my sternum when I tried to run so I really just jogged awkwardly), it was actually quite fun. I didn’t set any 250m personal best (it actually took about 2min) but I did have my entire fan club present (ie my mother, father and my Oma and Opa) and it was only raining slightly. I also got a sweet track suit and commemoration medal to take home; thanks Rick Hansen for the birthday present! The rest of day was spent baking gingerbread cookies, eating Oma’s pancakes and playing Mexican dominoes (something about a train…) So far, being 25 wasn’t so bad.

Me after finishing my leg of the 25th Anniversary of the Rick Hansen Relay in my hometown of Ingersoll, ON. Oh, and a woman taking bribes in the background

The celebrations actually got even better Wednesday and lasted pretty much all week long. Friday I had a party at my place in TO and it was a joyous occasion that involved some of the best people in my life, some mild binge drinking and even some of my infamous dancing (Yes! It's worse than Elaine's "little kicks"). At some point we made it to a local bar/club and my little brother (who isn't even of age!) bought us shots of tequila and while it seemed a good idea at the time, it ended up knocking me flat off my feet about 12 hours later in the mid-afternoon on Saturday. Thankfully, it was an off day. Thanks to all those who made this past year great and who will make next year even greater. Cheers.

Part II: "Great sport begins where good health ends." Bertolt Brecht

I also mentioned that we’ve starting training again and running plenty. I did 110km in the first week on the program and will do something similar this week too. It hasn’t been bad, but it’s definitely A LOT of running. And the main point I wanted to make today, which I realized at some point between km 11 and 13 on the day’s 18k easy/recovery run was this: Running this amount (and training more generally) is certainly NOT about good health! I won’t go so far as to say that it’s UN-healthy, but it’s probably not totally inaccurate to use this term, which I definitely think applies to ‘sport’ generally and high-performance sport specifically (another post for another day).

So ya, running 100+km per week is not about health. That is far from the top of my list of reasons for running. Consider that the ‘Canadian Physical Activity Guidelines' suggest that Canadian adults accumulate 150min per week of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA), preferably in 5 sessions of at least 30min duration but can be as short as in 10min bouts. I mean I do a weekly long run that amounts to that (150min) and on average will run well over 60min per day! All in all, I’m probably doing about 3 times as much! I’m also in a state of perpetual fatigue and endure constant aches and pains. It's an ongoing process of breaking down and building back up...

Don’t get me wrong: I do it because I love it and consider it an invaluable and essential part of my life. Being committed and dedicated is important to me and provides structure and a sense of accomplishment and satisfaction. My closest friends are my training partners and coaches and my social life has merged with my running life. I am also extremely physically healthy and probably fitter than most everyone I know (although this fitness specifically relates to cardiovascular function and endurance... I couldn’t lift weights to save my life!).

I guess the point I’m trying to make is that it could be problematic to equate what I do and good overall health. Again, I’m not un-healthy or anything, but health and fitness should not be considered synonymous. I also want to point out that I wouldn’t recommend what I do to most people since it would likely break them down and spit them out. For most people, I’d suggest trying to meet those Canadian guidelines would be much more worthwhile.

Some might disagree with me completely and you wouldn’t be wrong to do so. This is an opinion and a very personal one at that. From my experience, running and training is enjoyable about 90% of the time and doing it is an absolute pleasure. But there are also days when it’s brutal and I want to quit and give up more than anything else (but I don’t!). It’s also problematic in the sense that “health” is a very subjective and personal term. So what is considered healthy for some, might be downright deadly for others.

Okay, that’s enough from me. In sum: if you want to be “healthy,” go find something (physical activity related) you love to do and do it for at least 150min per week. More is often better...as long as it’s within reason.

A final note: Today, according to my 'Daily Mile' profile, I went over 4000km for the year and I'm still going strong... (Mostly) good times!

#30: Revolution 9

Two in one day; I'm on a roll...

Kass Gibson is one of the smartest people I know. He's also among the funniest. Those traits together, intelligence and humour, create an effective and winning combination that is surely absent in far too many academic-types. Anyway, I am extremely fortunate to get to hang out with Kass quite often, and today during a regular graduate student-style coffee break (long and often) on a simply sensational Friday afternoon, I was once again humbled and inspired by his wisdom and thoughtful insight.

I was talking to him about my most recent blog post: About what types of interventions might be most successful for increasing physical activity (PA) levels and the importance of offering incentives to increase physical activity (since persuasion and regulation are unlikely to work). The first question he asked was:

"Why is it so important that people be physically active? Why should we tell them this is important in the first place?"

It might seem ignorant but it's an excellent point. “You live your life; I'll live mine!” I would normally agree, HOWEVER in Canada, we support a ("free") publicly funded health care system. This essentially means that when you or I get sick, everyone else pays for it (literally). In theory, it's a great idea: We all help each other out in their time of need. But what happens when certain types of people benefit more from the system than others? I'm talking of course about a population that is becoming increasingly (and overwhelmingly) unhealthy. Although you could debate it; heart disease, stroke, hypertension, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, many cancers, mental illness, and dementia all affect a disproportionate amount of people: People who I would argue are less healthy and who are often personally responsible for their lack of health. To make my point: I don't feel I should be paying for the millions of Canadians now developing diabetes and heart disease because they choose to be sedentary.

Without much fuss, Kass eventually agreed that was a fair point. However, rather than offer the financial incentives and tax credits (that far too often benefit the already advantaged middle and upper classes); why not remove the barriers that undoubtedly prevent so many people from becoming active in the first place (adoption) or maintaining activity in the long term (adherence). At first I brushed the idea off as far too simple-minded. "If I can overcome these said 'barriers'; then why can't others?!" But the more I got to thinking, the more one must acknowledge that barriers do exist (or perhaps more importantly...are perceived to exist).

I then began coming up with a list of potential "barriers" to physical activity and as you will see, there are a lot of them! These barriers are not necessarily physical barriers (there isn't a giant wall blocking the entrance to the park), but can be anything that limits access or opportunity to be active.

Here are but a few (mostly adapted from Trost et al., 2002) organized into different types:

Demographic and biological factors: age, sex, gender, education, working class occupation, children, genetics, income/socioeconomic status (SES), injury/illness, disability, marital status, race/ethnicity, religious affiliation, being overweight or obese

Psychological, cognitive and emotional factors: attitudes, control, enjoyment, expectancy beliefs, intension, mood/affect, normative beliefs, knowledge/understanding of health, time, locus of control, perceived current health, personality, body image, psychological/mental health, self-efficacy, self-motivation, stress, susceptibility to illness

Behavioural attributes and skills: activity during childhood, youth and adolescence, activity during adulthood, alcohol, dietary habits, coping skills, processes of change, school sports, smoking, mental illness, sports media use, Type A behaviour pattern

Social and cultural factors: exercise group size, exercise/PA models, group cohesion, family influence, physician influence, social isolation, social support from family, spouse, friends, peers, staff, instructor

Physical/built environment factors: access to facilities (actual and perceived), lighting, climate/season, cost of programs, disruption of routine, scenery, traffic, home equipment, crime rates, hilly terrain, neighbourhood safety, sidewalks, dogs, urban vs rural locations, noise

Physical activity characteristics: mode, duration, frequency and intensity of activity, perceived effort.

WOW! That's quite a list. When reading it, many barriers (perhaps better called factors, variables, correlates or determinants), will NOT seem modifiable which is true. So it then must be determined which factors CAN be changed and what the overall effect of changing those factors will be (in order to increase PA levels). We must also consider things like the feasibility, timeline, cost, and many practical considerations. This can (and should) seem pretty overwhelming.

I might be a bit of an idealist (picturing a perfect world where everyone is physically active and healthy) but I am also a realist. We can't change the world (I'm also a pessimist) all at once; rather we need to make small, gradual steps to affect meaningful change over time. Currently, I might argue that rather than change anything 'for the better'; we should simply attempt to 'stop the bleeding' and try and ensure that we don't change 'for the worse'. Either way, it's a tall order.
Okay, so I realize that I've been rambling on for quite a bit and I fear I haven't really made a point so should probably attempt to do so. Here's the take home message:

I think that 'asking' that people be physically active and healthy (as a direct result of this) is a necessary and important 'request.' The health care system is designed in such a way that we all end up paying for those who are inactive and unhealthy (here I assume that increased physical activity equates to better overall health, and am supported heavily by the literature). And rather than simply offer incentives for individuals to be active; we also need to consider removing or altering the 'barriers' that exist to prevent PA. Some of these barriers cannot be changed but many can. Demographic and biological factors cannot be changed per se, but they can be overcome. Psychological and behavioural barriers are those being addressed by myself and other exercise/PA psychologists and ultimately require "changing" the individual. Changing the build/physical environment will likely come from policy (government) and will take time. We can’t change the nature of PA: it’s physically (and mentally) tough to do and can be unpleasant; but we can change our attitudes toward it. We can embrace it.

What are your thoughts? What factors and barriers are most important and in most needing of change?! For now, I plan to stick with my monumental (and perhaps foolish) task of trying to change individuals (whether they know it or not)...

#29: Revolution 1

Many of you should be well aware that we are currently facing an “epidemic of inactivity.” Sedentary lifestyles have become the norm and less than 15% of Canadian adults meet (inter)national recommendations for daily and weekly physical activity (PA) known to improve and enhance health and well-being. This then often leads to many more complicated problems (lack of fitness -> overweight/obesity, heart disease, diabetes, cancer, poor mental health) that ultimately end up costing every one of us since we all contribute to our publicly funded health care system. Individual health is not only a personal responsibility, but a social one too!

Knowing that Canadians are inactive is all well and good but the real question then becomes: How do we convince, promote and motivate individuals to be more physically active?

Preaching (education, public messages, etc) about the value and importance of PA doesn't seem to be working. I think most people would agree that exercise and physical activity is good for us! The evidence for this is simply irrefutable. So what are the other options? Surely we can't force people to become physically active. There is no law that says you MUST be physically active and thus regulating PA also seems bleak for meaningful intervention. Another tool then is to perhaps offer incentives or rewards for those who choose to be physically active. Incentives are very often economic in nature (think tax credits like the Children Fitness Tax Credit) but could also be symbolic and personally-derived (think an increased sense of well-being, superior health and fitness, improved body image and self-esteem, etc). So far there are few, financial or otherwise, incentives offered to promote physical activity and I feel this is an area of much potential in the near future.

For now, I would like to share/propose an idea I had for a general "program" or "project" that I hope can convince and challenge more of us to be physically active. I just came up with it an hour ago so probably haven’t thought it through…
Nevertheless, I stems from my own personal passion for physical activity and from an activity that I truly believe any one can do: running!

"Bet you can't run just one: Meters to marathon."

Starting to run can be an intimidating and daunting task and will not be successful the first time out. It takes time, patience, practice and perseverance. The first time I ever ran was back in high school and I can remember planning to go around the block (about 5k) I made it only about 2k before I was on my hands and knees gasping for air. I proceeded to walk for several minutes before trying again and sure enough it was not long before I was walking slowly again, clutching my churning stomach and pounding lungs. That is a memory I will never forget. I can't remember the second or third time I ran, or even the tenth, but I do recall the slow, gradual process of getting better and being able to go further and further. This provided me with a great sense of accomplishment and satisfaction; sensations which have only intensified and accumulated over time.

Running can no doubt provide a plethora of advantages and benefits over other activities: increased physical health and fitness: endurance, strength, flexibility, speed; improved body composition, image and satisfaction; enhanced self-efficacy,-confidence and -esteem; decreased stress, depression and anxiety; social interaction, friendships and membership; social support and recognition; it is fairly inexpensive and requires no special equipment, facilities or fees; it can be done alone or within a group; feelings of pride, accomplishment and success; and ultimately a sense of self-satisfaction. Running has it all! The proposed goal of 'Meters to Marathon (MTM)' is to encourage individuals of all ages to embrace recreational running as not only a mode of exercise or health behaviour but as a lifestyle.
Beginners, amateurs and pros alike can benefit tremendously from regular running and the subculture of running. The task is simple: Take it one day at a time and try to run a little more each day. Be sure to warm up briefly beforehand and cool down afterwards, and ensure you have a comfortable pair of shoes and apparel. Start with a brisk 10min walk then try and run/jog for a few minutes, maybe 5 at the most, then walk some more. Keep track of your progress (write it down) and set a realistic goal. Start by running three days a week and add a fourth day after a week or two. Listen to your body and know when to back off or take an extra rest day. Don’t allow yourself to overcompensate on food for the activity you’ve done. This isn’t a weight loss program and the goal here is increased fitness; not decreased “fatness’ (although they often compliment each other!). The process will be invigorating, reinforcing and intensely rewarding. Good luck.

#27: From Us to You

I just spent my entire Friday morning writing this blog post; I hope it's a good one.


So, I’ve been trying to come up with interesting ideas for blog posts and went from having nothing a few days ago to being overwhelmed with ideas and topics. I began by composing my personal thoughts and feelings on the topics of euthanasia and physician assisted suicide which I’ll argue (in support of) should be as much about compassion and respect as about ethics and economics. I become instantly overwhelmed in the discourse and literature so have put that off for another day (stay tuned). I then read a Globe and Mail article about fertility treatments for the obese and of course had a few things to say about that (I think they should be banned on the grounds that being biologically infertile due to obesity is a clear sign that one should not be having children as well as that I worry about the environment the resulting child will be raised in). There was also an article about another (very unoriginal) women raising money for charity by “running” a marathon and eating nothing but McDonald’s for a month (if you missed it I think this is ridiculous, foolish and doesn’t even deserve a comment). Then yesterday during my second lecture in public health policy, I (and the whole class) was challenged by the professor to actually do something to contribute to our collective understanding of the topic which is what I will attempt do today...

So I’m taking (another) course called ‘ An Intro to Public Health Policy’, which is an area I am entirely new too. I was accepted to a special program called the CIHR (Canadian Institute of Health Research) Strategic Training Program in Public Health Policy and thus am required to take some additional courses, attend ‘policy rounds’, ‘lunch and learns’ (can’t argue with free food), ‘institutes’ and ‘training pods.’

Essentially what this means is that we (40 or so students) get a comprehensive overview of the public health system here in Canada as well as what are current topics and issues being addressed. My ‘expertise’ in this area or what I bring to the table is my passion for physical activity and our dire need to get people active. I am thus going to briefly give an overview of public health and more specifically the relevance and implication of physical activity/exercise for the topic. So here it goes...

A good definition of Public Health taken straight from Wikipedia is: "the science and art of preventing disease, prolonging life and promoting health through the organized efforts and informed choices of society, organizations, public and private, communities and individuals" (1920, C.E.A. Winslow).

Another one is: “Many, but not all, of its activities deal with the health of populations. Much, but not all, of the focus is on prevention. Some, but not all, of the activities are carried out by organizations designated as ‘public health” (Deber).



Public health ‘outcomes’ or goals include, but are not restricted to, the “health protection and promotion” functions such as disease surveillance, disease and injury prevention, health protection, health emergency preparedness and response, health promotion and relevant research undertakings (Kirby and LeBreton). I won’t talk at all about policy (since I still know nothing about it) but just know that public health policy is essentially concerned with the rules, laws, regulations and legislation that is concerned with any public health issue.

Confused? Relevant public health topics might include community/city water treatment and fluoridation; pesticide and chemical use; immunization for the flu, and other infectious diseases; tobacco use and second hand smoke; obesity; healthy eating and nutrition (labels on food); alcohol and drug regulation; physical activity and exercise and there are many many more.

Remember that health is multidimensional and includes physical, emotional and social components. It is not merely the absence of disease or illness. While Western cultures and societies routinely attribute ‘health’ to mean physical/physiological health, it is far more complex than this. Each individual ‘aspect’ of health is known to affect (both good and bad) the others: good physical health is known to contribute to positive emotional and social health outcomes; poor social health can compromise physical and emotional health; good social health can enhance emotional health but compromise physical health; and so on and so forth. It’s complicated!

The point I want to make is that physical activity is, should or at least can be a major component of positive health and wellbeing. It certainly contributes to good physical health (fitness) but can also benefit one’s emotional and social health as well. It is thus an important topic and aspect of public health. One’s individual health is thus not only a personal responsibility but also a social responsibly. “Personal responsibilities are social responsibilities” (MDF Doyle). Our health attitudes and behaviours both directly and indirectly impact others and society as a whole.

Currently very few Canadians are physically active. In fact only about 15% of Canadian adults meet the recommendations for daily and weekly physical activity (Colley et al., 2011). The recommendations endorsed by Health Canada (through ParticipACTION and the Canadian Society of Exercise Physiologists (CSEP)) as well as by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) are as follows:

“For adults:

To achieve health benefits, adults aged 18-64 years should accumulate at least 150 minutes of moderate- to vigorous-intensity (think brisk walking, cycling, jogging, cross-country skiing) aerobic physical activity per week, in bouts of 10 minutes of more. It is preferred that activity be achieved as at least 30 minutes on 5 days of the week.

It is also beneficial to add muscle and bone strengthening activities using major muscle groups, at least 2 days per week.

More physical activity provides greater health benefits.”

The recommendation for older adults (65 years and older) are essentially the same as for adults, while children and youth are suggested to accumulate at least 60 minutes of exercise EVERY day and vigorous and strength training activities at least 3 times per week. See the following link for more detailed info: http://www.csep.ca/english/view.asp?x=804



Now I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: telling people to go out and exercise for 30 minutes a day, 5 times a week at so and so intensity (heart rate) is NOT going to work. Exercise sucks; it’s terrible! No one wants to be told they have/need to do something and certainly not told that they need to do it continuously and indefinitely, especially if it’s actually kinda hard and demanding (physically, mentally and perhaps socially). I understand why I (and we) need to do it (to become healthier and more fit), and luckily I’ve found a way to actually want to do it and to enjoy it; but I acknowledge that it’s not going to work for everyone. The idea of physical activity is far more important than exercise. It has to become enjoyable, pleasurable, and fun. It has to become routine and normalized; a lifestyle. It should become something we/you want to do, not something you need to do it. And let’s face it; you don’t need to do it! Choosing to be physically active is a personal choice; no one is going to force you to do it.


Physical activity: It can be fun too!

I’ve rambled on much longer than I should so I’m going to stop. I hope by now you a) better understand what public health is and why it’s important; b) understand that physical activity (and dare I say exercise) is an important aspect of personal AND public health; and c) what the physical activity recommendations are for you and your loved ones. I didn’t say why physical activity is important or why recommendations for it are necessary but I hope you can begin to see why they are.

#25: For No One

It seems like ages ago that I last wrote anything about anything and while I still have very little important to say, I felt it was my duty to put together something for your collective amusement. So here it goes...

The primary reason that I haven't had time (or energy) to do much writing is that marathon training has stepped up a notch and a large minority of my time is spent running; and when I'm not actually out running, I'm thinking and mentally preparing for the next time I will be. To be perfectly honest, I have to admit that I've become a bit obsessed with it of late to the point where it's becoming distracting. It should come as no surprise to anyone that I take my running and training very seriously (perhaps too much so!) and want to do the best possible job I can in order to succeed. As this is my first attempt at the distance, there is a great deal of trust and belief that must be had that the training and hard work will in fact pay off come race day. While tempo, race pace and speed work are an inherent parts of the training and workouts, I will never come close to actually running the given distance (42.2km) at the planned pace (4:00/km) which means that I must have faith that I will be able to complete the task on the day given the training I have dedicated 14 weeks towards.

I won't go into too much detail because they simply aren't exciting in the least, but my mileage has increased to roughly 120km per week which will continue for the next two weeks before beginning a two week taper leading to October 16th. I'll be doing a tune-up race this weekend in St. Catherine’s (the Run for the Grapes Half-marathon) where we (Doyle and myself) will plan to start out roughly at goal pace and then pick it up in the second part of the race as long as things are feeling good. This will provide confidence in executing a plan and also test our physical fitness and mental stability.

But enough about my running. There are some other topics of recent interest that I'd like to comment on and hope you find it insightful.

First up: The Running Room and who is and isn't a "runner". I know that I've said/written/suggested here and elsewhere that running for me is a pursuit of excellence and self-improvement and thus race times and performance play a major role in my personal motivation for running. But I also understand and appreciate that this is not true or important for everyone. In fact, there are hundreds of reasons why individuals run and all of them are equally acceptable and worthy. Not everyone can run a sub 3 hour marathon or a sub 40 10k nor should they be expected too. There is no one size fits all definition of what it takes to be a runner and so as long as we share an interest and passion for running and the value and significance it adds to our lives; then we are all runners. I do not intend to differentiate types and qualities of runners (although difference surely exist) or suggest that some are less worthy of the title of "runner" than others; but again, I do acknowledge that differences do exist and may mean different things to different people. And while I may have criticised the Running Room in the past for catering, marketing and ultimately profiting from a particular demographic that I do not relate well too; they do an exceptional job to get people involved in the sport and increase the overall popularity of running. Ultimately what matters to me is the promotion and pursuit of increased health and fitness; something I will support every time. And we should all be agreed that anyone interested in running is on side with these goals. So let's agree that we are all runners and we are all in for the same pursuits of improved health, fitness, and personal satisfaction.

Next: Women's (professional) sport. A friend of mine and previous colleague is very active in pointing out the unfair discrimination and inequality that woman’s sport continues to face and the uphill battle that it faces. Yes, I agree, it sucks and it's unfair. Men get paid more, get more attention and get more opportunity to develop and succeed in the sporting world. Women DO deserve equal opportunity to participate and enjoy the many advantages that sport can provide and offer... BUT when it comes to professional sports, we are taking about a business that is interested in profits and entertainment value. And let's face it, women's sports can't deliver! No one cares about women's basketball, softball or even hockey (the Olympics are a 4 year exception) because let's be honest, it's boring and women aren't as good as the guys. This is an inarguable fact; not one that is socially constructed or perceived. A woman will never run faster than a man in the 100m or even the marathon; she will never jump higher or throw a javelin further. She will not score more goals, sink more baskets or hit more home runs. And while I agree that these accomplishments are essentially meaningless in themselves; people want to see the fastest, strongest and most skilled...and that will always be a man. This isn't misogynist or sexist; it's fucking true! End of story.

Finally: obesity. Yes, my topic of eternal interest and (unfortunately) one that is not likely to go away any time soon. Perhaps not surprising (or maybe so) is that my primary 'opposition' to obesity and indirectly to people who are obese is one of (public) health. I do not believe that being overweight/obese is healthy (not physically, emotionally or socially!) and thus I am an advocate of its prevention, intervention and treatment. Obviously, doing any of these things has and continues to be an extremely problematic issue that gains a considerable deal of attention and this is only likely to grow in the near future. I therefore can offer no obvious solutions to fix this monumental problem. This will require a great deal of time and likely will need to consider specific individuals and small samples rather than large groups or populations, which is why I believe we have failed so greatly so far. The obesity "epidemic" is a social problem that is 'caused'/results from individual (in)action and thus requires individual solutions. Essentially, I believe that being healthy (which in this case means not being obese) is not only a personal responsibility; but that it is also a social responsibility. Bad habits and behaviour are dangerously contagious, especially when such behaviour requires doing nothing at all! Obesity is also a (socio)economic issue, a cultural and ethnic issue and even an aesthetic issue; and despite a growing voice to suggest otherwise, it IS an issue and one which needs to be addressed. I admit that there are dozens, hundreds, and perhaps thousands of factors and determinants which all contribute to the final effect (an increasingly obese society); but that does not mean that the problem is so hopelessly complicated that it is futile or naive to suggest simple solutions. Fundamental thermodynamics offers the simplest of these solutions: by decreasing one's energy intake (Eating Less!) and increasing its expenditure/usage (Moving More!), physical mass (ie body weight) can be converted (not technically lost) to other forms and the body will get smaller! So we can tax junk food and sugary drinks; we can ban food advertising to kids; we can put bigger labels on food packages; we can teach kids about healthy eating and even suggest that they get more physical activity... but we also have to tell everyone to do the math and find out what balance of energy, in vs out, works for them and keeps them healthy.

And one last thing: If you own a bike, please don't ride it on the sidewalk! I used to think that slow walking people annoyed me most in this world, but my ire has now been firmly directed towards the idiots who feel the need to cycle in the middle of downtown Toronto sidewalks. There is absolutely no need for this. It's not only about safety and following the law; it about courtesy and common sense. My patience with the human race is reaching it's limits...

#20: Being for the Benefit of Mr Kite!

A confession.

My true thoughts on exercise and the relentless pursuit of health.



I will begin my saying that what I do as a runner, I do not classify as exercise. I am an athlete who trains and competes. Thus running to me is a sport, a way of life, and something from which I gain considerable rewards both personal (self-actualization, -expression, -gratification, -conception, -enrichment) and social (social attraction and group accomplishment).

Exercise is defined as any planned, purposeful, structured and repetitive engagement of physical activity with the aim of improving or maintaining physical fitness which encompasses a number of components such as body composition, cardiovascular fitness, muscular strength and endurance (Caspersen, Powell & Christenson 1985).

When I think about this definition I see people exercising for the sole purpose of getting in better 'shape' or attaining improved health and fitness. While this purpose is surely important to me and is definitely used to motivate my continued (exercise) behaviours; it is NOT the primary reason that I run. Rather I run for the pure enjoyment of the activity, the pursuit of athletic achievement and success (which is highly personal), the competition, and the continuous goal to always improve myself upon past performance. I would continue to run even if I knew it would decrease my lifespan, even if it meant I would compromise my health, even if it led to financial ruin, perhaps even if it led to personal self-destruction and death!

But I am not like most people. Most people who run, or walk, or work out, or whatever are doing it for a very specific reason (albeit far from the only one). They do it because 'we' (government, media, the industry) tell them it is good for them: that exercise will increase their fitness, decrease their weight and improve their overall well-being. That it will make them live longer and have a better life. We tell them that it will make them happier and 'healthier!' And perhaps it will... in fact, I would argue that it often will!

But why is this so important? That is the fundamental question. Why are we telling people to be healthier. Moreover what does health even mean? Can it be defined? Certainly not in simple terms.

Health is a multidimensional phenomenon. It involves physical, mental and social determinants which all play a unique role in establishing an individual’s well-being (Lox, Martin Ginis & Petruzzello, 2006). Health is "a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity." (World Health organization, 1946). I have no interest in defining health or arguing over what it means. For me, health is a highly personal concept that above all else means being physically functional and capable, socially fulfilled and emotionally happy and content with the person you are each and every day.

I'm sure that I've shocked many people at this point. I mean, aren't I the guy who goes around pushing physical activity on everyone and shaming and blaming those who are fat and lazy. Well yes, I am.

For me, physical activity, exercise, sport...whatever you want to call it, has brought me a plethora of benefits and rewards and has enhanced my life in numerous ways. Therefore, I personally have nothing but wonderful things to say about it and highly recommend it. But I also know that this isn't likely to be the case for many, perhaps most, others. Exercise is physically exerting, it's time-consuming, and it's even becoming expensive...

So going back to the big question: Why is physical activity, exercise, sport (and ultimately health) so important and why do we feel we need to force it on everyone?

Well here are some possibilities:

1. We have too! As a semi-socialist and democratic country, we have to at least pretend to care about our citizens and thus there is an obligation to take care of our people. Elected officials must appear to look out for the best interests of their voters, and thus make it seem as they are doing good for all people.

2. Our health care system. Isn't it great that we don't have to pay for health care?! Well no actually, because we do pay for it...and we pay a lot, with our taxes. Health care spending is becoming hugely expensive and will continue to do so. The demand for health care is also increasing and this is directly related to the deteriorating 'health' of our population. Heart disease, diabetes and cancer continue to become more prevalent. These conditions also just happen to be closely correlated with obesity...which can be prevented (in part) by physical activity. In theory, getting people more fit and less fat will reduce health care costs...in theory.

3. Capitalism. Isn't it funny how almost every problem with current society comes down to this little gem. Not only has the health and fitness industry become hugely commercialized within the past decades (think sports equipment, gyms and fitness centres, do it yourself exercise machinery, fitness apparel, books, videos, websites, personal trainers, coaching, etc. etc.), but the whole concept of being fit and healthy is inherently tied to increased productivity and thus financial gain. Paradoxically, by stressing personal health and fitness within this commercial environment, the industries actually make more profit due to failure than to success. The diet and food industries rack up billions each year and yet we continue to get more fat and less fit.

4. Social norms/ideals. How many people do you know that look like the guys and girls on the covers of Men's and Women's Health (magazine)?! Probably no one! And yet, these images are the ones we continuously consider to be the most ideal and strive toward (thin and slender females, muscular and mesomorphic males). Not only are these images entirely fake and unrealistic, but they also happen to be physically unattainable for the average person consuming them. It is no wonder that we as a society have failed to attain this ideal, and yet we continue to use it as a something to aim towards.

5. Human nature. The human body is a mortal and vulnerable object and everyone has a personal responsibility to themselves to care of it. We are told that exercise is a way in which to do this as evolutionary it has enabled the survival and success of our species. Moreover, it is natural that we want to take care of each other and look out for one another.

6. Elitism. We feel better about ourselves when we are able to do what others can not. Exercise has become an activity of the upper classes who feel a need to educate and improve the less fortunate social groups.

7. The betterment of society?! I often have a hard time believing this one although some people do consider it a realistic goal. Some people believe that an all-round 'healthier' society is also a better one.

To summarize:

Physical activity, exercise and sport can and should be used to enhance and add value to one's life. They have numerous physical, psychological and social benefits that are generally available to those who consume them. These benefits might contribute to overall 'health' which is a term that epitomizes ambiguity. For these and a number of other reasons, exercise and PA are considered valuable and important. But why do we push physical activity and exercise on our entire population? Why is it so important? Is being 'healthy' important? Is living a long time important? Would the world be a better place if everyone was fit and healthy?

If you think 'yes,' then I must ask: "why?"

#18: In Spite of All the Danger

A number of interesting articles in the Globe and Mail recently that I feel a need to comment on. I sum them up and put in my own two cents.

First up: "Want to live to 100? A healthy lifestyle won't help, study finds"
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/the-hot-button/want-to-live-to-100-a-healthy-lifestyle-wont-help-study-finds/article2118239/


Summary: Eating poorly, not exercising, being overweight, drinking and smoking may not decrease one's lifespan to the extent that most people believe. Rather, living long may be more about getting a lucky set of genes.

So what: Research and articles like this one are highly problematic in that they provide evidence and excuses for people to ignore good health advice, justify unhealthy lifestyles/behaviour and divert responsibility away from themselves to something obscure and beyond their control (genetics). There is an overwhelming amount of high-quality, thorough scientific evidence that supports the notion that eating healthy, getting regular physical activity/exercise, not smoking, drinking only moderately and maintaining a healthy body weight are associated with improved quality and quantity of life and well-being. Individual studies such as this one, which represent a small but boisterous minority using a very specific population (~500 Ashkenazi Jews), should not be used to divert attention away from that vast majority of research on the importance of a healthy lifestyle. Do genetics play a role in longevity? No doubt about it! But while you can’t change the genes you were given, the environment in which you live (your lifestyle/behaviours) can be an equally, if not more, important player in optimizing longevity (called epigenetics).

Want to live longer? Eat a healthy, balanced diet; don't smoke; exercise/be physically active every day; drink moderately (and socially) and maintain a "healthy" body weight. Moreover, surround yourself with friends, family and loved ones; be thankful, optimistic and open-minded, and finally, remember to look both ways and always wash your hands.

Another interesting article: "The ‘McRunner’ diet: How much does nutrition matter?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health/fitness/running/nutrition/the-mcrunner-diet-how-much-does-nutrition-matter/article2106870/


The jist: You must have seen this one. Similar to the potato and Twinkie "diets" of 2010, some guy decided to eat only* McDonald's for the month prior to running a marathon and then went out and ran a PB of 2:36 something (ie he did it really well!). The question becomes: how important is diet for physically active individuals?

The simple answer: Diet and nutrition are extremely important for EVERYONE! This article is but another example of poor journalism that propagates confusing messages which confound and mislead the general population. The McRunner ran an average of 160km a week and trained extremely hard for many months prior to eating this “diet”! Very few runners ever train at this intensity and even those who do aren't guaranteed similar results. This guy also obviously has a good genetic endowment that makes him able to train hard and get good results which again is very unique and rare (Playing the genetics card can go both ways). It's also important to note that he kept his energy intake consistent around 3200 calories per day which is actually at the lower end for a 6 foot ~140lb guy like this (I eat about the same amount and run 50km less!). It is also essential to note that his non-McD's foods included water, energy gels and multivitamins. This might be the most important info that is largely ignored in the article. The multivitamins specifically were likely essential to his maintained health and vigour as I doubt that any combination of McDonald’s food can provide all the vitamins and minerals needed or would they provide optimal training fuel. And because the "diet" only lasted 30 days, it is also important to consider how he would have faired if he continued for 2 months, 4, 6, a year?! I would wager that we would be presented with a much different story...perhaps an obituary!

The point here is that individual examples almost always make for very poor generalizations. This is exactly what the McRunner article and the previous longevity study have done: taken highly specific samples and put forth their unique circumstances as general fact. This is also unfortunately among my own personal biases and perhaps may be a fundamental human trait. We see that something works for one person and then assume it should work for all (making the false assumption that the world is somehow fair). This sadly, isn't true and can apply to most situations. In fact a lot of the criticism I receive pertaining to my criticisms of overweight/obese individuals is largely misplaced due to this fact. I am criticised for assuming that by eating less and moving more, weight can be lost and obesity eliminated! Obviously, this isn't the case and I admit will not work for everyone (although it should work for most). There are many good individual examples of overweight people who eat well and exercise regularly and whose weight will not change a bit. It is thus highly unfair to lump them in with the (many?) "others" who we assume eat too much, exercise too little, have no willpower or control, are slovenly, lazy and personally irresponsible (stereotypes are generally true!). So just like the BMI does a poor job of ascribing health in individual persons, it is generally accepted and accurate for determining trends at the level of large populations. Likewise, obesity is largely a social problem (and yes, it is a problem) at the level of large populations (2/3 of Canadians!) that is all too often suggested as an individual personal problem. Its resolution is thus more likely to come by changing the society/environment in which populations live rather than all the individual persons. How we begin to do this is a topic for another day…

Getting back on track: There is no right way to eat or a perfect diet to follow. The McRunner is a good example of someone who can do something that most others could (and should) not attempt. Athletes are a good example of this. We can eat far more food in general and considerably more "junk" or "unhealthy" foods and seemingly get away with it. Others might have a "fast" metabolism and never put on weight. A further problem here is determining one's perceived level of "healthiness" by their appearance or weight. There are plenty of skinny and thin people out there that represent a ticking time-bomb of ill health; while many slightly overweight people are in pristine condition.

Increased physical activity does not provide a free pass to consume as much and more of whatever foods we desire. Rather, it requires more careful and thoughtful consideration to the types and amounts of fuel needed to maintain a healthy and functional body. The long term implications of consuming large quantities of poor quality, highly processed, artificial foods is still largely unknown and so while there may be no apparent acute or short-term negative effects, the lasting and long-term effects may be severe and life-threatening.

Finally, we need to stop thinking about population sized problems (poor nutrition/diet, increased rates of overweight/obesity and decreased physical activity levels) by focusing on individual examples, persons and samples. It just doesn’t work. That said, there is also a time and a place for gross generalizations (especially if they are true) rather than select, context-specific examples that don't really hold true across multiple contexts. The long and the short of it I guess is that putting forth individual examples as fact/truth is highly problematic and should generally be avoided. Oversimplified, sweeping and generalized statements like these are much preferred:

Most people who smoke, drink heavily, eat poorly, are overweight and don't exercise will NOT live longer than those who adopt healthy lifestyles and behaviours.

Genetics DO play a major role in every aspect of our lives and who we are but they are NOT the be all and end all and should not be used as an excuse for helplessness.

Most people (including athletes) should NOT eat McDonald's everyday (or even for 30 days) but some could and would even survive and be in good health.

Most people who are overweight DO eat too much and move too little and for most of these people eating LESS and exercising MORE will lead to decreased weight and overall better health.

#12: I'm Looking Through You

Would you like lies with that?

So it seems McDonald's in their relentless pursuit of evil has decided to do some public relations and attempt to appear to be making a healthy initiative towards decreasing child obesity. How?! By adding apple slices and fruit to all 'Happy' Meals and removing a few fries. Great! So now let's all go to McDonald's and buy our children the new and improved happy meals while we celebrate our brilliant parenting with a super-sized Big Mac 'value' meal. I hope you can all see where I am going with this. By appearing to be offering healthier 'food' choices and options, especially to children who always want to go anyway, McDonald's has made it easier for parents to make the decision to go to McDonald's and thus more business for McD's. People were always going to go anyway, but now they can reduce their cognitive dissonance (knowing one option is right/preferable and yet choosing to the alternate) and guilt by convincing themselves they are making a 'healthy' choice. The only winner here is McDonald's! Does anyone actually believe that McDonald's has even the slightest bit of interest in you health or happiness?! Of course not; you'd have to be a complete idiot to think that! McDonald's and every fast food retailer like it, is interested in one simple thing: your money ($$$!) and also finding new and clever ways to collect it. I am not here to argue the nutritional value of any of McDonald's food items, since there is not point to this (there isn't any!), but rather to condone the not so subtle ways that McDonald's with it's multi-million (billion?) dollar marketing budget is able to blatantly convince (ie trick) people to eat their food day after day. The food is NOT cheap, it is NOT healthy, and it is NOT even real. Sure, it probably tastes very good; no argument there. My point is that you are giving your money and your approval to a corporation that couldn't care less about you or your families’ health and yet you believe them when they pretend to do so. McDonald's is making you think that you are making better health choices and so you sell your soul and give them your money and your business. Is eating at McDonald's a bad thing? No, I could never say that. But allowing them to 'buy' your business with effective yet devious marketing makes you the fool in this case. This is no different than their recent attempts to soften up their image by redesigning their restaurants with modern furniture and art (or so I've heard, having not stepped into a McD's in over 7 years), and their commercials and advertisements that make no mention of their food or products but rather play catchy music and have attractive models smile all the time. McDonald's is not going away any time soon, and honestly, I don't think it needs too. Okay, maybe I do; but it ain't happening. What needs to change is our ability to recognize when we are being manipulated and coerced into making unhealthy decisions yet being convinced otherwise. What they're selling; I'm not buying. I suggest you do the same!

In summary:

McDonald's offers new 'healthy' Happy Meals (which are neither healthy nor happy).
Parents don't feel so bad about taking their kids. They might even go more often!
McDonald's gets more money and customer approval.
Society loses...big time!

#9: Carry That Weight

Childhood obesity and what we ought to do about...

Many of you will be familiar with an editorial that appeared in the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and which quickly swept through local, national and international newspapers; twitter and on facebook and to which everyone seemed to voice a strong opinion. The piece suggested that perhaps children who are extremely obese (as indicated by being above the 99% percentile of the infamous BMI...ie these kids are huge!) should be subject to some form of state (government) intervention. Note: this does NOT mean they are taken from there families and placed in foster care. Those are extreme and rare situations. Rather, it means that Family Aid and Child Services would have the right to investigate, assess the home environment as being supportive and safe, probe for abuse or neglect, suggest reasonable interventions/solutions and if all else fails, consider removing children and placing them in temporary alternative care. Similar to children who fail to thrive and are underweight or malnourished, it is argued that these obese children are being over-nourished and overfed to the point where their health and well-being is being compromised (which quite frankly I agree with completely). Whether this constitutes child abuse is far from clear, but certainly it is far from optimal as (extreme) childhood obesity is associated with a multitude of physical (sleep apnea, respiratory/breathing difficulties, liver disease, diabetes and many more), emotional and social (bullying, social stigma, body image issues, depression) health problems.

Obese adults are one thing, and whether they are at fault for their condition based on individual choices or whether it is a result of the complex ‘obesogenic’ environment we currently live is heavily debated (Personally I contend that obesity is a social/collective epidemic, but essentially stems from poor individual choices). However, I find it extremely hard to place blame directly on children for their own obesity, and especially in cases where the parents are themselves obese. Clearly, these children are not being given the optimal healthy environments in which to develop and so perhaps there is a point where this does in fact constitute abuse. But how do we possibly draw a line? Does feeding a child McDonalds and donuts equate to abuse? Not really. Certainly no one would argue that offering a child cigarettes, alcohol or illicit drugs is abuse; yet providing food of questionable nutritional value is normalized and accepted. Perhaps this needs to change!

Taking children away from their parents may also create a number of equally traumatizing and negative outcomes which could prove more debilitating than the state of being obese, but this too is impossible to determine. Removing children from their homes and their parents would, again, likely be done only in the most extreme of cases when all alternative options have been exhausted. Uncovering the underlying 'causes' of a childs obesity will be essential for any sort of meaningful intervention. Certainly there are socioeconomic, race and gender considerations to contend with; but feeding a child hot dogs and ding-dongs because they cry when they don't get them is not a legitimate excuse.

So what are we to do?

We know that obese children are much more likely to turn into obese adults. We also know that obese children are far more likely to be from families with obese parents. With 2/3 of adults now classified as obese, is it any wonder that the next generation of children is already doomed to become like that of their parents and that those numbers are expected to rise? While treatment and management of obesity at the population level has largely failed; prevention must become our top priority! We must adopt and pass on healthy lifestyle behaviours to our next generations. Admittingly this is no easy task, especially because so few of our current generation have adopted those behaviours themselves. Perhaps it is time to take a stand. Having children is a freedom (and a right) we all possess (?!); but it is also an immense responsibility...one many are not capable of (this is a topic for another day). As a society, we must ensure that children are provided with every opportunity to thrive and develop, and are protected from all unnecessary harm. The burden of childhood obesity is definitely unnecessary harm, and thus I feel it is our duty to protect children from this, whether from themselves, from their parents or from the environment that promotes it. How we do this is far from clear? Government intervention and public health/education seems to me, the most feasible and immediate solution and so I will conclude by endorsing the position of the JAMA authors who suggest that state/government regulation and intervention are a promising area for the prevention and management of childhood obesity (in the most extreme cases).