Jogging is bad for you -- the new theory of Dr. Al Sears debunked

Dr. Al Sears has set forth a revolutionary theory that aerobic exercise such as long distance running is bad for you (linked to at the George Noory Coast to Coast website http://www.coasttocoastam.com/). This theory has apparently not yet been refuted by anyone or reconciled to and compared with the traditional theory adhered to by almost everyone even now, that aerobic exercise such as long distance running is good for you.

Dr. Sears in making his arguments combines: assertions not backed by evidence or citations of scientific literature; evidence that he says is backed by scientific literature without providing a footnote linking to the study; evidence supposedly backed by scientific literature that is footnoted and linked to a study.

Thus a mere assertion takes on the color of a hypothesis strongly supported by data.

His argument that long distance running is bad for you is combined with: arguments that long distance running does not improve the health and arguments that anaerobic type interval training boosts the health more than aerobic-type nonstop training like long distance running. These arguments are presented jumbled up together as if proving that long distance running is useless or not as good for you as intervals or wind-sprints, proves that long distance running is bad for you.

With regards to the idea that long distance running is bad for you, Sears presents two pieces of evidence:

A 1995 study by Sanchez-Queseda showing that long distance running increases the level of LdL (low density lipoprotein) and TG (triglyceride)in the blood and increases their oxidation (it is a commonly held belief that high levels of LDL and TG lead to blood clots and heart attacks)

A study showing that aerobic exercise disrupts blood thinner vs thickener level and elevates clotting level and inflammation

Also Dr. Sears asserts without providing any evidence that I can see, that: long distance type aerobic exercise shrinks the heart and the lungs; and, aerobic exercise results in the harm of the body producing fat for use as a fuel.

In this post I take up the argument re the long distance running type aerobic exercise increasing the LDL and TG levels and the level of their oxidization in the blood of the long distance runner during and after the long-distance aerobic exercise.

Sears' book that presents his theory that aerobic exercise is bad for you, was written in 2004; yet one of his main three evidential arguments against long distance running is based on a 1995 study.

Even an amateur such as myself could easily find in one evening, several studies that came out between 1995 and 2004 that contradict Dr. Sears' argument.

Several studies that have been done since 1995 have shown that persons who engage in aerobic long distance running type exercise have in their blood, both before they exercise and during and after the exercise relatively high (compared to less exercised individuals) levels of substances that counteract balance and neutralize increased levels of LDL and TG and increased oxidization of LDL and TG.

Even person who do not regularly exercise, produce during and after exercise elevated levels of substances that counteract balance and neutralize high levels of LDL and oxidization of LDL in the blood.

Dr. Randolph Howes has produced a lengthy and impressive pdf that challenges the whole taken for granted notion that high levels of LDL and high levels of LDL oxidization have anything to do with heart disease in the first place.

Although Dr. Sears enunciates the principle that wisdom is to realize that what is important is what happens to the body after exercise and that this is not the same thing as what happens to the body during exercise, Dr. Sears is focused on the elevated levels of LDL and TG in the blood during long distance exercise.

the consensus opinion as of 2009 as reflected by a review of the literature regarding the subject of elevated levels of oxidants caused by exercise: such elevated levels of oxidants may be healthy in that they trigger and promote reactions in the body which produce anti-oxidants or other beneficial chemicals. Meaning, these chemicals signal the body that the body has exercised, and prompt the body to react to the exercise by producing wonderful natural wholesome chemicals.

sears ignores that even the exercise that he adores and pushes, anaerobic exercise, releases into the body the same substances that he loathes, which are released into the body by the aerobic exercise that he despises.

Even Sanchez-Quesada himself, in a 1998 article coming out three years after the 1995 article Sears bases his argument on, argues that ascorbic acid as found in orange juice counteracts the increased susceptibility to oxidation of LDL that is caused by intense aerobic exercise.

I personally know from having studied training from the point of view of performance improvement, that it is a myth that interval training of the type enthused over by Dr. Sears, is 100% anaerobic and 0% aerobic.

Actually to some extent interval wind sprint type training is aerobic. Thus aerobic training of the type Dr. Sears despises, improves performance and results when it comes to the anaerobic training that Dr. Sears adores.

Anaerobic improvement promotes aerobic improvement and aerobic improvement promotes anaerobic improvement so one could say they are like two sides of a coin. I suspect that aerobics prepares the mind and the body for anaerobics.

Everybody know that if if you give a person a physical work level that outstrips his nutrient intake you can work him to death. Such a worker would be better off limiting his activities to correspond with his limited nutritional intake.

It is common sense that since healthy nutrients enhance athletic performance, this means that athletic performance uses up, depletes, the beneficial chemicals in the healthy nutrients.

Therefore with regards to point number one, the alleged harm caused to the body by long distance running type aerobic exercise due specifically to the increase in production and oxidization of LDL and TG, the logic and the evidence is overwhelmingly against Dr. Sears.

As of now I am convinced that the rest of Dr Sears' arguments alleging that aerobic exercise is harmful will likewise collapse.

My natural tendency is to sometimes feel like going out and running say 9 miles slowly non-stop. This is my way of recovering from the interval training of the type advocated by Dr. Sears.

Sometimes if the choice is between interval training and not doing anything, I will choose to not do anything whereas it would have been better if I had followed the alternative of doing slow nonstop long distance running.

Sometimes if I have not been exercising for a few days, long slow non-stop running comes naturally to me as the first thing to do when I start exercising again. The slow running loosens me up and prepares me mentally and physically for the challenge of the interval type running. Similarly the general consensus: increase in free radicals produced by exercise promotes healthy reactions that neutralize the supposedly harmful substances that instigate these reactions and also accomplish other beneficial effects.

Long distance nonstop running sometimes improves my sense of physical and mental well-being more than interval training. Quite possibly the optimal course of action for me is following my own natural inclinations, mixing wind-sprint interval type training with long distance non-stop runs.

I am an individual, different from all other individuals on earth. What is good for my mind might be different from what is good for the minds of others. What is good for my mind could be good for my body.

I've heard that successful men rest from one type of activity by performing another type of activity. Likewise, one could rest from aerobics through anaerobics and vice versa.

I say this all as someone who is not good at long distance running and would prefer to have to do it as little as necessary to maintain mental health.

I simply find that sometimes long distance running is the superior course of action; I and millions of others resent (or would resent if we knew about Dr. Sears) the implication that by going out and running a few miles nonstop slowly we are damaging our bodies.

We resent the idea of facing disrespect in society, unemployment and even high insurance payments simply because sometimes we like to go on long slow runs.

See:

http://books.google.com/books?id=AbmXeprR82sC&pg=PT23&lpg=PT23&dq=%22al+sears%22+study+aerobic+studies&source=bl&ots=Tn40ukn9Ks&sig=FFyJjdwjxFPam55Uo2bwctTo5Bw&hl=en&ei=8UgvSpXvE-GMtge9wsH8Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4#PPT27,M1

http://ajpendo.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/276/6/E1083

http://avmajournals.avma.org/doi/abs/10.2460/ajvr.2000.61.886?journalCode=ajvr

http://www.acsm-msse.org/pt/re/msse/abstract.00005768-200702000-00010.htm;jsessionid=KvyGvZJZ6yy4L18K0LJvZblKJvcZXybn1bS0X79yl9G1cws39KD2!-1260103914!181195628!8091!-1?nav=reference

http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/reprint/86/7/3243.pdf

http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:eV91zk85Dt0J:perweb.firat.edu.tr/personel/yayinlar/fua_3/3_6141.doc+sanchez-quesada+%22increase+of+ldl%22&cd=23&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

http://www.dynamic-med.com/content/8/1/1

http://bjsm.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/38/5/e22

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2642810

http://www.thepundit.com/downloads/cardiovascular.pdf

@2009 David Virgil Hobbs