Hacker News Reader

>why not?

We didn't evolve to run on tarmac or concrete. Public roads are strewn with broken glass and fragments of metal. Regular distance running is punishing on your joints, even if you're a forefoot runner with perfect form.

View on HN

> Regular distance running is punishing on your joints, even if you're a forefoot runner with perfect form.

The studies I'm aware of (e.g. [1]) point in the opposite direction: runners have a lower risk of osteoarthritis, potentially because they have a lower BMI. As an avid long distance runner myself, if you have any evidence to the contrary, I'd be very interested to read it.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23377837

I did not see the original source, but this secondary source shows that running is the second most injurious sport, right behind football.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3724624/How-running-...

I would be skeptical about any claim supported by a Daily Mail link. I couldn't find any references to the study they "cited" on Google Scholar, either.

Okay, but we did evolve to run on dirt and rock, neither of which are particularly soft. Equally important, studies indicate that impact does not decrease when running on softer surfaces. Runner instinctively step harder on soft surfaces and more softer on hard surfaces, to get the same feedback from their feet and legs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com