>P.S. Instead of getting your friends to downvote, how about suggesting an actually-healthy alternative?
Don't complain about downvotes, it makes for boring conversation.
I say that to say this; running is way better for my back than cycling. My left leg, mostly my foot, still haven't completely recovered from the nerve impingement, but I am running 30 to 40 miles a week with no problems (lots of trail running too, check my Strava :) )
I can't cycle like I used to on any "normal" bicycles. This position, bent at 90 degrees or more, that one is required to sit while cycling is actually pretty terrible for the lower back. Also, being male and being part of a large male dominated industry - firefighting, I see lots of male cancers. That is, testicular and prostate cancers. My department is participating in a massive testicular and prostate study; We are being asked to change our chonies often and wash hands before going to the bathroom as the scrotum is a sponge for anything it touches... smashing that region when cycling for extended periods of time seems like a bad idea (and it hurts).
I went on a bike tour where I rode for 13+hrs a day for a month. At the end of the day the only thing sore was my muscles.
I weigh almost 300lbs.
A recumbent bike is a complete life changing, world altering, paradigm shifting, bundle of awesome. I beg you to look into it, or send me a PM if you have any questions.
Platform note: Hacker News doesn't support PMs, so you'll want to include in your profile an email address, or some other means of contact outside HN itself, in order to make out-of-band conversations possible.
Welcome! We're glad to have you.
I am "eyeball-level" with most cars/sedans. I am lower then most mini-vans.
As a general rule-of-thumb 75% of vehicles give me more room then they do when I ride a traditional bike. I would say that the majority of cars give me "half the lane" (which would mean that they pull over far enough that their right-side tires are in the left-side wheel track).
BUT, I still get atleast 1 vehicle a day that drives too close. In some parts of town this is more likely to happen then others, it also depends on road/traffic/other conditions too. When I am areas or during times-of-the-day where it is not as safe for me, I 'Take the Lane' and don't let cars try to drive beside me.
In my city I can either take road (12km route) or dedicated bike paths for most of the trip (20km route). I always prefer the bike paths.
Of course there's a bunch else to it - keeping the back straight and strong, etc. - this was just the thing that happened to be missing from my training, so might be for others as well.
It still seems weird to me that rowing is a competitive sport. Rowing is something you do with a six-pack of beer in the cooler and a tacklebox and reel by your side, rather than as an end in itself. But I have decidedly plebeian tastes.
I was a competitive swimmer for a large portion of life. My back hated me for it. Running has been nothing but good to me.
And more downvotes.
As for the other part of your comment, when I mentioned swimming etc. in the context of overall benefit, not harm to joints. I've yet to see evidence that cycling is easier on the joints, and I've seen plenty that it's slightly below running in terms of aerobic benefit. Sure, an elite cyclist probably has a higher VO2max than I do, but if we compare apples to apples then we'd have to compare to an elite marathon runner and I don't think that comparison would look so good.
Next time, try reading what others write, instead of cherry-picking one piece out of context to address in support of your biases.
Now this is what this site is about.
Unless you are intentionally trolling, I recommend you remove personal attacks from your discourse if you want to engage in any kind of intelligent conversation.
#2 (elevated cortisol levels) is a huge problem that is rarely discussed though. I'm still trying to figure that one out.
Defining our terms is critical in conversation (and something I probably need to work on as well).
I never said that they did. Who's jumping to conclusions now? The person I was responding to clearly has an axe to grind with running specifically, and the most likely reason is that they prefer something else. I see that a lot from lifters and cyclists especially. For some reason they feel a need to explain why their choice is as good as running, which is in itself interesting. I don't see swimmers (for example) who feel compelled to explain why their choice is as good as running. Nor do I see anyone trying to impugn exercise in general (because that would be stupid).
I don't know what sport/exercise that person prefers, though, because they didn't say. It would have been nice if they had, to balance out the relentless negativity. When one casually equates "regularly" with "excessive" and then lists only negatives, it implies an overall negative. Identifying a basis for comparison might have been enlightening instead of offensive.
To your point 1: done properly, running isn't particularly harmful to joints and tendons, and some studies even seem to show that running can be beneficial in that regard[1]. The rapid changes in direction that cause the most stress are less prevalent in running than just about any other sport, not even considering the impacts that can occur e.g. in contact sports. Injury rates are not particularly high in running compared to other sports, and even if that were so you should be careful about confusing correlation with causation. A lot of people get injured while running mostly because it's an incredibly popular form of exercise. Do you seriously think there would be fewer injuries e.g. among the same number of people playing rugby?
To your point 3: I know a lot of weight-training addicts like to make that claim, but it's just not true for any reasonable definition of fitness. Running isn't particularly good for weight loss, but weight loss has little to do with fitness. Ditto for weight gain, even in the form of muscle. When it comes to the kind of fitness that actually matters - i.e. developing one's heart and lungs to prevent the chronic problems that kill millions every year - only a few kinds of exercise are better than running. Swimming, rowing, and cross-country skiing come to mind. There are probably a few more, but lifting weights is certainly not on the list.
You personally don't like running? Fine. No exercise is ideal for everyone. But spreading FUD that discourages others from pursuing a healthy habit doesn't seem very constructive.
P.S. Instead of getting your friends to downvote, how about suggesting an actually-healthy alternative?
[1] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/12/161209100236.h...