Happenings

Hi All

None of you seemed to be interested in being bored with images taken on our recent tramping expedition, so I’ll burble on about the normal semi-routine happenings that Program Fitness members get up to.

Debbie Twiss, an intrepid race walker, has been dabbling in bike riding but is now due to walk around Lake Rotorua, taking part in the world-famous marathon. Recent training has been changed to predominately race walking, but not so long ago, Debbie was mixing the bike work with the walking. To this end, Debbie took part on Sunday 8th March 2009 in the Laskeys Cycle Bush Cycle Tour 60km section The rides start and finish at Tui Brewery, State Highway 2, Mangatainoka, 4km North of Pahiatua. This challenging course takes riders through the rolling farmland surrounding Pahiatua and contains a few hilly grunting sections.– Debbie finished with a time of 2:46:53 after what Debbie describes as a disastrous venture. Start problems combined with Good Samaritan assistance to another competitor, resulted in a disappointing time that has been looked on as a good training workout in preparation for the forthcoming marathon walk.

Shanna Crispin is looking forward to her next half marathon in about a month’s time. This one should be a little easier now that she has more than a year of training under her belt.

Cheers

Gary Little

"Sustained motivation is essential to achieving your potential." GRETE WAITZ

PROGRAM FITNESS

If you should be aware of someone who might benefit from being on a running or walking exercise program, please get them to log on to www.profitness.net.nz for more information on how I may be able to help. They may also wish to contact me direct via my email address. If you wish to know a bit about our Homestay operation, the website can be seen at www.foreststay.com

***************************************************

Run, Don’t Walk – The Truth About Running Versus Walking

By Rick Morris

A line has been drawn in the sand. We are squaring off – choosing up sides. A major battle is beginning. Well….maybe not. But there is a debate going on in the world of exercise. It is running versus walking. For years fitness enthusiasts have believed that walking and running burned the same number of calories per mile. This old school thinking says no matter what speed we move, we are expending around 100 calories per mile when moving over level ground. If you crawled 1 mile you used up 100 calories. Did you just sprint a mile? You still burned 100 calories. We believed this because it is what we have been told for years and years. Since we have been told this for so long it must be correct, right? Not necessarily.

The study of exercise and human movement is just like any other science. It is a work in progress. We are always discovering new information that makes some accepted beliefs outdated. Don’t forget we used to think the world was flat. Aristotle dispelled the myth of a flat earth. This confusion over calories can be blamed on Sir Isaac Newton. It is Newtonian physics that shows it takes a specific amount of energy to move a specific mass a certain distance. In other words, physics tells us that it takes the same number of calories to move your body one mile no matter how fast you are moving.

According to science, the old school is correct. But wait… not so fast. The new school proponents believe that running burns more calories per mile than walking. A recent study on running versus walking seems to support the new school train of thought.  Researchers at Syracuse University conducted a study in December of 2004 for the purpose of comparing the energy expenditure of walking and running with equations that predict energy expenditure. As a part of that study the researchers needed to determine whether differences exist in energy expenditure of walking versus running. The researchers measured the calorie burn of 12 male and 12 female subjects as they both ran and walked for 1600 meters on a track and a treadmill. Each subject ran at one specific pace and walked at one specific pace.  The scientists, headed by Jill A. Kanaley, PhD in the Department of Exercise Science, found that the women expended about 105 calories while running versus only 74 when walking. The men had similar results of 124 calories when running compared with just 88 calories burned while walking. (Med Sci Sports Exerc.2004 Dec;36(12):2128-34). That seems like a big difference, but it is actually even larger. To get the true number of calories burned from exercise, you must subtract the calories you would have consumed at rest. After taking away those “resting” calories, the net calorie burn for the women was 91 running versus 43 walking. For the men the net calories burned was 105 running versus 52 walking. So, in reality, the subjects were burning more than twice the calories when running versus walking.

It would be nice if the answer to the running versus walking question was that easy. But let’s take a closer look at this study. The subjects in this investigation walked and ran at only one pace. They walked at 1.41 meters per second and ran at 2.82 meters per second. At those specific paces, the subjects did average twice the calorie burn while running. But does that result hold up at all walking and running paces? Another study showed that it does not. This study was conducted by the Washington University School of Medicine for the purpose of investigating the energy expenditure and perceived exertion levels of walking and running at various speeds. The subjects each walked for 5 minutes at various paces ranging from 4 to 10.4 kilometers per hour and ran for 5 minutes at paces from 7.2 to 10.4 kilometers per hour. This study concluded that walking burns more calories than running at speeds greater than 8 kilometers per hour (5 miles per hour). The study also showed that walking felt harder than running at speeds over 5 miles per hour. (J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2000 Dec;40(4):297-302).

So, who is right? Does the old school thinking still hold up or is the new school correct? The answer is that both are right! Before you get mad at me for giving you a non-answer, please read on.  Generally speaking, running does burn more calories than walking. Why is that? That is a very good question with a fairly simple answer. When we walk or run, each stride results in some impact force as our lead foot strikes the ground. The mechanics of running and walking are very different. When walking we always have one foot on the ground. Our body weight is always supported. Each stride results in a force equaling our body weight being applied to our leg muscles. If you weigh 150 lbs. each stride places about 150 pounds of load on your leg. Running is very different. When running you are completely airborne between foot plants. When your lead foot comes down, it is absorbing more than your body weight due to the effects of gravity. The force placed on your leg muscles with each running stride will vary depending upon how fast you are running. When you run faster your stride becomes longer.  A longer stride equals more force with each stride. The impact for each stride will vary from 1.5 times to over 4 times your body weight, depending upon your speed. It requires many more calories to absorb these much higher impact forces and to propel yourself with the next stride.

In most cases running burns more calories than walking, but when walking at increasing paces you eventually reach a point at which the walking becomes more difficult than running. That point is called the preferred walk-run transition speed (PTS). It is at this point that walking begins to burn more calories than running. The study from Washington University showed that this point occurs at approximately 5 MPH. However, this will vary slightly depending upon your fitness level and how efficient you are at walking and running. One of the predictors of running performance is running economy. This is simply a measure of how efficient you are at running. If two runners of equal fitness levels were running a race, the runner that is the most efficient will win. That is because a more efficient runner is able to run faster with less effort. Running with less effort means you are burning fewer calories. A more efficient runner would probably reach the walk-run transition speed at slower speeds than a less efficient runner.

The bottom line is that the number of calories burned during walking and running is not a static number. It is a dynamic measure that will increase as your speed and effort level increases. Each of us will have a preferred walk-run transition speed (PTS). Running at speeds slower than your PTS will feel harder and will burn more calories than walking. Walking at speeds faster than your PTS will feel harder and will burn more calories than running. The average PTS is about 5 MPH but your individual PTS will depend upon your fitness level and your walking/running efficiency. Your calorie burn per mile will increase as you accelerate at speeds faster than your PTS.

As you can see, the answer to the question of calorie confusion is that both sides are correct. There is a point at which the calorie burn per mile of walking versus running is equal. There is also a level at which walking burns more calories per mile than running. But, at speeds of 5 MPH or faster, running will burn more calories per mile than walking. It is very difficult to estimate your exact level of calorie burn per mile without expensive laboratory analysis. In order to simplify things you will always get a fairly close estimate of your calorie burn by using the old accepted equation of 100 calories per mile. It will not be exact, but it will be close and easy.

1000 Calorie - Fat Burning Workout

Here is a great workout that will burn off some excess pounds. This workout incorporates hill training to increase your calorie and fat burn. This workout is designed for the treadmill but you can also do this workout on the roads or trail if you have the appropriate hilly terrain to run on.

1. Set the treadmill elevation at 1 percent and run for one mile at your easy pace.
2. Increase the elevation to 2 percent and run for one mile at your easy pace.
3. Increase the elevation to 4 percent and run for one mile at your easy pace.
4. Increase the elevation to 5 percent and run for one mile at your easy pace.
5. Decrease the elevation to 2 percent and run for one mile at your easy pace.
6. Increase the elevation to 6 percent and run for ½ mile at your easy pace.
7. Increase the elevation to 7 percent and run for ½ mile at your easy pace.
8. Decrease the elevation to 2 percent and run for 1 mile at your easy pace.

Total Workout Mileage – 7
Approximate Calories Burned - 1045

From http://www.runningplanet.com

MyPyramid Tracker

MyPyramid Tracker is an online dietary and physical activity assessment tool that provides information on your diet quality, physical activity status, related nutrition messages, and links to nutrient and physical activity information. The Food Calories/Energy Balance feature automatically calculates your energy balance by subtracting the energy you expend from physical activity from your food calories/energy intake. Use of this tool helps you better understand your energy balance status and enhances the link between good nutrition and regular physical activity. Keep track of your energy balance history and view it up to one year. MyPyramid Tracker translates the principles of the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans and other nutrition standards developed by the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services.

Go to http://www.mypyramidtracker.gov/

******************************************************

What is the Best Predictor of

5000-m Run Performance?

Recently researchers from Australia and New Zealand investigated the physiological determinants of 5000-m run velocity before and after 6-weeks of structured endurance training.

Thirty nine untrained subjects participated in

this investigation which included measurements of running economy, maximal oxygen uptake, final velocity at maximal oxygen uptake, and the lactate threshold.

After 6-weeks of training the maximal oxygen uptake, final treadmill velocity, and running velocity at the lactate threshold all increased. Additionally, after 6-weeks of training the average velocity during a 5000-m run increased significantly.

Interestingly running economy was not shown to

improve. When looking at the factors that are related to the average 5000-m run velocity only, the lactate threshold, maximal oxygen uptake at the lactate threshold, and maximal oxygen uptake were all related to performance.

The single best predictor of 5000-m run performance was found to be the treadmill velocity at maximal oxygen uptake. Thus suggesting that the highest velocity that can be achieved during a maximal oxygen uptake assessment gives the greatest indication of 5000-m running ability in both trained and untrained individuals.

Stratton, E, O’Brien, BJ, Harvey, J, Blitvich J, McNicol AJ,

Janissen D, Paton C, Knez W. Treadmill Velocity Best

Predicts 5000-m Run Performance. Int J Sports Med

30:40 – 45. 2009.

From www.nsca-lift.org

High Intensity Interval Training

Increases Fat Metabolic

Capacities in Skeletal Muscle

High intensity interval training has recently received a lot of attention for being a time efficient method of training.

With high intensity interval training all out efforts are repeated. Recently researchers for Canada examined the effects of high intensity interval training on fat oxidation.

Using untrained subjects they examined the effects of 6-weeks of high intensity interval training consisting of 1-hour of 10 x 4 minute intervals performed at 90% of peak oxygen consumption separated by 2-minutes of rest. The interval training regime was performed 3-days per week.

After the completion of the 6-week training program the subject’s peak oxygen consumption was increased by 9% and their power output was elevated by 21%. Additionally, it was noted that after training there was a reduction in glycogen metabolism, a decrease in lactate accumulation, a 2-fold increase in time to exhaustion, a significant increase in fat oxidation.

Ultimately this study demonstrated that 6-weeks of high intensity interval training has a powerful effect on the muscles ability to oxidize fat. The

results of this study lend support to the idea that high intensity interval training is an effective method for increasing oxidative capacity and fat oxidation.

Perry CG, Heigenhauser GL, Bonen A, and Spriet LL.

High-intensity aerobic interval training increases fat and carbohydrate metabolic capacities in human skeletal muscle. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 33:1112 – 1123. 2008.

From www.nsca-lift.org

Patellofemoral Syndrome

Diagnostic Pointers and Individualized Treatment

Michele LaBotz, MD

In Brief: Most patients who have patellofemoral syndrome can be successfully treated once contributing factors are identified during history taking and physical examination. After pain and inflammation are treated, patients are encouraged to start activities that do not provoke pain. Exercise programs should be implemented that address underlying strength and flexibility deficits. Return to play primarily relies on advancement of pain-free activity, with some allowance for patients' competitive goals. Patients remaining symptomatic after compliance with a structured rehabilitation program or those with indicators of other intra-articular pathology should be referred to an orthopedist.
A Multifactorial Pathophysiology

PFS often arises from a combination of intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Although quadriceps flexibility and function, genu varus, and hypermobile patellae have been identified by prospective studies as intrinsic risk factors for PFS, such studies are limited because of the disorder's multifactorial nature. Understanding PFS requires an understanding of the function of the patellofemoral joint. It is important to appreciate the tethering effect of tendons and ligaments adjacent to the patella, as these are major determinants of forces across the joint. In addition, overall lower-extremity alignment and the anatomic relationship between the trochlear groove and the posterior patella also produce variable forces across the patellofemoral joint. As the posterior aspect of the patella moves through the trochlear groove with knee movement, normal patellofemoral alignment and function disperse these forces across the articular surfaces.
Footwear. Physicians should also inspect shoes used for athletic activity and daily wear. The wear patterns are not often helpful in diagnosing PFS, but the condition and choice of footwear usually are. With athletic shoes, midsole cushion and support functions generally fatigue after 300 to 400 miles (about 3 months in the 30 mile/wk runner).

Coping With Patellofemoral Syndrome

Q. What causes PFS?
A. PFS is usually an overuse syndrome caused by doing "too much, too soon." Other risk factors for PFS include decreased strength or flexibility of the upper leg or hip muscles, poor alignment of the leg bones, or a combination of factors.
Q. How is PFS treated?
A. The first step is to reduce the pain and swelling. Frequent use of ice (about 15 minutes at a time), especially after exercise or when the knee is sore, can ease pain. Anti-inflammatory medications (such as ibuprofen or naproxen) can help reduce pain and inflammation (swelling). Once pain eases, you can begin a stretching and strengthening program guided by your doctor to further decrease symptoms and the risk of recurrence.
Q. Which exercises are useful for PFS?
A. Strengthening and stretching for the hamstring and thigh (quadriceps) muscles should be included. All stretches should be held for 15 to 20 seconds and repeated three times on each side. Your doctor may also recommend physical therapy or other treatments.

Q. Can I still train if I have PFS?
A. You can train if you have PFS, but you may find that symptoms tend to come and go depending on your activity level. Keep in mind, however, that the more you train through pain, the longer your knees will hurt. A good rule of thumb is to try reducing the intensity and amount of training by about half. Runners will often benefit from a temporary switch to either swimming or bicycling while the knee recovers. When you are ready to resume or advance your activity, do it slowly. Most patients can tolerate adding about 10% per week to training volume (for example, increasing from 20 miles in week 1 to 22 miles in week 2). Many factors determine when you can return to activity, so work with your doctor to determine when you can return to full activity or competition.

THE PHYSICIAN AND SPORTSMEDICINE - VOL 32 - NO. 7 - JULY 2004