Showing posts with label Recovery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Recovery. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 12, 2022

Going Deep

There has been a valuable and eye-opening movement occurring recently in the running community. It involves professional athletes coming forward and sharing their stories and struggles with eating disorders, body dysmorphia, OCD, and mental illness. Finally, the media and company sponsors are allowing individuals to dive deeper into the causes and factors that contribute to these types of illnesses instead of republishing the same boring "help" manual that's never insightful or actually helpful. 

Unlike the many sources that have attempted and failed to offer any kind of deep insight into recovery, the videos and article below are among the first to really hit the nail on the head when it comes to offering a glimpse into the struggle of these kinds of disorders. Too often, the focus is on the tie between athletics and weight when, in fact, eating disorders a far more complex than an individual simply wanting to stay lean in order to perform well. Sometimes the two are completely unrelated, in fact. In one of the most honest and informative interviews on the topic, Tim Tollefson gets to the heart of many of these disorders when he says, " I've spent a lifetime hating myself for what I'm not instead of being thankful for what I am." 

The problem with authors, podcasters, and self-proclaimed professionals who address the topic is that they typically discount the deeper issues in favor of offering superficial advice, and this advice is nearly always focused on the symptoms of the illnesses rather than the core issues. 

I was so angry to see articles in Trail Runner that suggest "Just eat enough!" or "Eat a fucking Dorito!" as if solving a life-threatening illness or disordered eating patterns comes down to forcing yourself to eat. It's such a childish, unhelpful approach, a slap in the face of those of us who struggle. That's why the messages that people like Tim, Molly, Kaci, and Allie are sharing are so incredibly important. In a sea of published information that barely scratches the surface, these athletes and select journalists and producers are willing to dive deep into a place of vulnerability in order to give others a better understanding of what an eating disorder or struggling with mental health is all about. 

And exploring disorders and recovery can land a person in a very dark place. Still, hearing someone open up in a relatable way is far more helpful than anyone suggesting I just eat enough. Listening to what Tim went through and his willingness to address his mental health moved me in a way I haven't been in a long, long time. God, how I can relate to the self-hatred and fear of being seen. Some days, it's incredibly difficult to get out the door, and I don't mean for a run, though that can be equally difficult in certain states of mind. I'm sure I'm not alone. In my own life, these fears have only gotten worse despite my semi-firm commitment to stay at least somewhat healthy. 

I'm keeping this short because the videos and article below speak for themselves. There's not much to add except to reiterate that our struggles shouldn't cause us shame. Everyone has issues of one kind or another. It's how we address them and how we explore the reasons why we turn to unhealthy behaviors that matter. Without understanding the root causes, our own triggers, and the steps we can take to ease the unease we experience in recovery, we will tend to stay stuck or relapse. Recovery isn't about running well when your life is on the line, and healing doesn't come in a pretty, black-and-white package. Most of us live in the gray with occasional dips back into the black hole of despair, but that doesn’t mean all is lost. There is hope.  

Trigger warning for those who are sensitive to eating disorder content and images. 

Molly https://www.runnersworld.com/health-injuries/a41534525/molly-seidel-struggles-with-mental-health/

Allie https://www.milesplit.com/articles/321497/allie-ostrander-under-pressure-gaining-your-life-back

Kaci https://runningmagazine.ca/trail-running/watch-kaci-lickteig-and-others-open-up-about-disordered-eating/

Tim https://runningmagazine.ca/trail-running/ultrarunner-tim-tollefson-shares-mental-health-challenges-in-new-film/ 

Tuesday, October 4, 2022

A Step Behind

I've mentioned before that this hasn't been the easiest year for me, both physically and emotionally. Due to a cascade of injuries that stemmed mostly from my foot and ended with a big mess in my left hip, I had to take a lot of time away from running, probably the longest amount of time away from "my" sport than I have since I started running, way back when I was just barely a teen. Throughout the extended break, I didn't give up exercising entirely, even when I could hardly walk, though part of me wanted to. I switched to the stationary bike as much as possible, as boring as it can be, and continued doing some Pilates or yoga-type movements. However, I lost inspiration, and my brain ended up in a depression fog. The days and weeks and eventually months of going through the motions bled into each other so much that I lost track of time. Suddenly, almost a year had passed.

For the most part, I didn't feel like doing much, so I watched Netflix, slept, and ate comfort food. More concerning, I lost a bit of weight from what those around me were telling me (I don't own a scale), and a big part of me wanted to check out completely. In the end, I'm not sure if it was simple compulsion that drove me to carry on or if it was the idea that I'd probably feel worse if I did nothing all that was the incentive, but, either way, I kept going, as ugly as it looked and felt at times. Having obligations such as work and an older parent to tend to prevented me from doing anything drastic, that and a fear of death. Experiencing tremendous pain and such extremely limited mobility for so long made me question what it would take for someone like me to overcome my fear and end things. I guess "damn" or "hooray!" for this occasional hope in me that won't be completely squashed; I can't decide which. 

As soon as the tears, pulls, and nerve damage started to heal -- one bone fragment is just going to have to stay lodged near the ischial tuberosity from where it was apparently dislodged because there's no sense in digging around in there and disrupting things with surgery when it probably wouldn't solve much -- I started to jog a little. I can't say it feels good -- my body is all lopsided now and hurts -- but in a way, it has been nice to move outdoors again. It's embarrassing and terrible that jogging anything under an 11-minute mile feels challenging and awkward. 

I have no idea how I ever managed to run 7 to 7:30 a mile just a few years ago in a race, let alone 5:40 pace in races at one time in my life. From my shuffling perspective, those faster paces seem impossible. I try not to get too down on myself, but holy shit it's difficult because an average harder pace of between 9:40 -10:22 when it feels like a sprint, even if it's on a hilly course, is, in reality, fucking SLOW. At this point, though, I can't seem to trust my body. I don't want to break it, so I'm dragging myself around slowly, even on the downhills. It's all very weird. I must look like Frankenstein shuffling around on the streets, only with quicker arm movements. Oh, and because of the nerve issues, I can't seem to run trails unless they're basically gravel roads, nothing technical at all. I'd just trip and probably fall.

In all of life lately, I feel like I'm a step behind. Before I can fully gather my thoughts on a topic to blog about, the world has already moved on. Part of my reasons for delaying a more timely response is the way people react. On social media and elsewhere, it appears as though individuals are incapable of reading opinions without immediately jumping to conclusions, drawing lines in the sand, and lecturing from high horses and soap boxes alike. Either you're on one side, or you're on the other. There's nothing in between. This is the case with everything from the Amber Heard vs. Johnny Depp trial to climate change. It's intimidating to jump into any conversations. 

When I initially read about the terrible and tragic case of Eliza Fletcher, a teacher who was abducted and murdered while she was out for a run one early morning in Memphis, I found most people to be sensitive as they offered condolences to her family and friends. Very quickly, though, two groups formed, one that blamed the teacher for running early in the morning, and the other that insisted women's safety shouldn't be discussed because the problem is the criminal. Considering there were about 1.3 million violent crimes and 24,576 homicides in the United States in 2020, I'm pretty sure criminals aren't going to suddenly be rehabilitated to the point where nobody has to worry. I understand the sentiment; it wasn't her fault, but scolding people who offer ideas on safety isn't going to solve anything. Problem-solving is never the goal of loud complainers, though.  

The Crime Junkie podcast has a huge following, and nobody ever claims that their message, Be Weird, Be Rude, Stay Alive, is victim blaming. It's simply advice in a world with a lot of unhinged people living in it. While there were a few people who accuse Eliza and others like her of wrongdoing for running alone in the early morning, something she did regularly, most were doing no such thing. I believe there's a way to discuss how to be safe when running without criticizing anyone's running habits. Though it's not quite the same thing, people offer advice about being careful when it comes to driving, being out in nature where there are wild animals, or any number of other situations where there are risks. It's not meant to be a slam on what anyone does. These cautions come from concern and a desire to be of help, especially after such a terrible incident. 

From what I understand, Eliza took precautions by running familiar routes. Her cell phone and water bottle were found in the area where she was abducted, so it's not like she was completely reckless. I've gone on far more dangerous adventures and simply got lucky. Throughout high school and college, I would dive up to the higher mountains and run solo for a couple of hours, no water, no phone (back then, we didn't have portable ones), only a spare long-sleeved t-shirt wrapped around my waist, and I wouldn't tell anyone exactly where I was headed. Occasionally, I would jokingly tell my roommates or my mom that I was going running in the mountains and to call the authorities if I wasn't back by 3 p.m. Looking back, I realize how foolish this was and how lucky I am that nothing happened. So much of what happens in life comes down to chance.

On an unrelated note, I'm surprised how often publications like Trail Runner publish nutrition advice written by coaches or authors who are completely unqualified to guide anyone on diet. The only people who should be handing out actual dietary advice, especially to athletes who are more prone to developing eating disorders, are physicians (and not random ones, your own physician) and registered dietitians. Articles like this one that suggest athletes just wing it and eat whatever they want discount the dangers of not getting enough of the right nutrients for training. While the article cautions against going to extremes, it's all very vague, and the overall message is "just eat enough," similar to the "Just eat a fucking Dorito" concept in a previous article about eating disorders. For those who struggle, it is not that simple, and I'm sick of anyone suggesting it is. 

What's worse is seeing people who claim to have struggled constantly talking about all the junk food they eat. I addressed a similar issue recently when I commented on people who show images of themselves pretending to eat pasta or other foods that, for whatever reason, are often classified as fear, cheat, or junk foods. If it's true that you scarf down loads of foods that are not rich in nutrients, fine, nobody should judge you for it, but also, nobody needs to see or hear about it. You do you. Enjoy your food and stop inflicting your neuroses or habits on others. 

Mostly, stop being a fraud. I always come back to the idea that it's great to see healthy or recovering individuals share fun food moments, an accomplishment around food, a creative recipe, or a pretty meal at a restaurant. What I don't give a shit about is someone claiming to eat tons of whatever food and isn't that cute! presented as a fucking article. It’s not, and it’s not informative or interesting. 

While I fully agree that food should be enjoyed and that there are no real "bad" or "good" foods, failing to get enough protein or nutrient-dense foods in your diet can lead to undernourishment. I know because this happened to me when I was attempting to recover and eating a diet far too heavy in sweets. I suffered for it and felt awful. By the way, I intentionally linked to a Trail Runner article written by Maria Dalzot, M.S., R.D., C.D.N., someone more than qualified to address the nutritional needs of athletes. 

The saying, "Eat enough, always. Eat too much, sometimes. Eat too little, never." is flawed on many levels. Define "too much" or even "not enough." Too much, according to whom? Given how difficult it is for many of us who struggle or have struggled with eating issues to judge quantity, fullness, and serving sizes, these kinds of cutesy sayings are meaningless. In the throes of my own illness, I remember always thinking I ate "too much" after every meal. Also, there are times when eating too little is required, before surgery, for example. My friend couldn't eat before presentations because she was so nervous that she might throw up. In that case, it was healthier for her to eat too little and then make sure she got enough nutrients sometime after the presentation. It's so important to not get caught up in anyone else's rules around diet. Your diet should be individualized. 

The following is about as vague a statement as one can write.  

My take: people should eat foods that they enjoy to fuel the work they are doing in order to find their personal definition of “strong,” whatever that means for them. 

This is about as helpful as saying, "Eat whatever and be the way you want, whatever that means to you." No shit. But then don't say that and then pretend like this wasn't a previous caution by the same author, Eating enough won’t prevent every case of training-overload/OTS."

Social media and, apparently, running magazines are terrible places to look for guidance on diet and training. I mentioned this in my last post. Many of the ones trying to appear ever so fun-loving while doling out advice are often just publicizing an underlying and unhealthy fixation on food and body. It is not helpful at all. It's contradictory that Trail Runner links to a more sensible article on diet within this failed attempt at professionalism. It makes me angry. Why publish something so off the mark when there are clearly better writers for the job? It's potentially dangerous, too. People who struggle with eating and body image issues can be very sensitive and influenced by what others suggest, as can nearly anyone on the Internet. As a blog post, it's a different story, but presenting articles as if they are written by people who know what they are talking about when they clearly don't is careless. 

It gets worse, too. In the passage below, there's no clear explanation about why cholesterol can be higher in those who have or have had eating disorders. And this incorrectly implies that it's fine for everyone to have a shitty diet as long as you eat enough. This is flat-out dangerous. How many is "many" when it comes to athletes who eat what they love, and do they record their dietary intake for the author, their coach? How does one know they eat what they love and don't also eat what they know they should for optimal performance? I'm assuming the author's observations don't count as an actual study, so why bring anything up as if it's fact anyway? 

For a variety of reasons including genetics, hormone levels, exercise patterns, and the way the body absorbs fats and nutrients while in a state of starvation or the binge-purge cycle, people with either anorexia or bulimia can, indeed, have high cholesterol. So can anybody else. And diet can be a very important factor when it comes to cholesterol levels whether or not you run a lot. It's not accurate to suggest that runners and athletes can eat anything they want and have low cholesterol.

My co-coach Megan and I have seen thousands of pages of blood work for athletes over the years. Whenever a high cholesterol reading comes back, we ask for the athlete to talk to the doctor. And the most common time we see that flag for athletes has nothing to do with cheeseburgers–in fact, many of the athletes eating whatever they love have the most optimal blood work of all. Instead, those high readings are often for athletes with a history of eating disorders

Lastly, a few friends pointed out this gem from the same Trail Runner article: Every physical accomplishment starts as a dream. But the biggest, longest-term dream can only become a reality because of a satisfied stomach.

No. Dreams don't become reality because of a satisfied stomach. That's like saying I won Pikes (my big dream) because I drank enough fluid. Absolutely, one needs adequate nutrition in order to achieve one's goals, but fueling the body isn't the reason a dream becomes reality. Who the fuck edits these pieces? 

Wednesday, September 21, 2022

Running Magazines And Diet Culture

The last blog post I wrote started one way and veered in a completely different direction than I had intended. I had one subject in mind initially and, instead, switched course to focus on something else. Kill off your little darlings is good advice I didn't follow. My first topic had nothing to do with running, but it's something that has been gnawing at me for a while now. It actually ties back to what I mentioned, that certain people in a given group where I live are presenting themselves as something they're not. I'm not quite sure how to tackle the subject matter yet, so I'll have to save it for another post. 

Recently, I've spent some time criticizing running publications. In fact, the other day I called out Women's Running on Twitter for once again promoting weight loss by restricting food intake after just telling readers to eat intuitively. Don't worry about calories! It's not that weight loss is necessarily a bad thing; it's that these types of articles don't offer any guidelines or cautions about who "should" and who should not be losing weight, and there's no sensible suggestion to speak to your doctor about a weight-loss plan before considering one. These types of rags will promote nearly anything to get more readership, I mean money. 

Women's Running pretends to be concerned about the health and mental health of female athletes, but the reality is that its writers contradict themselves all the time. For example, despite using someone coached by a man as a standard of health after continually pushing the idea that women make better coaches for female athletes, which hasn't actually been proven, the publication's overall stance seems to be that we need more female coaches in order for women to be successful and remain safe and healthy. Note that being a good role model in this case is not the same thing as being an effective coach. Forget all the examples of successful, healthy female athletes coached by men or any cases of abusive female coaches. I've mentioned this before. Women are no better. 

Being a good coach isn't related to sex. Both men and women can be good coaches for female athletes, and both can be terrible at their jobs. On social media, writers associated with Women's Running have spent a lot of time addressing the topic of male coaches who create unhealthy environments that potentially encourage women to have eating disorders, but then they push garbage about weight loss without any disclaimers or cautions. In the same breath, they suggest being plus-sized isn't unhealthy and then suggest weight-loss tips. What does it say when they promote dieting (trigger warning because of all the numbers) and restricting intake after claiming being heavier is healthy?

Women have always had to walk a fine line in order to be accepted in society. Whether it's their weight, self-expression, or overall beliefs, any extreme quickly draws scorn, and scorn often comes anyway, even to those who appear to fall in line. This isn't a suggestion that women should be beyond reproach, though. Women cause harm, too, and those who are liars, abusive, grifters, careless, or manipulative should be called out. 

The Believe in Me film that was released on Amazon Prime recently addresses toxic environments that some athletes have endured. Alison Wade, founder of Fast Women, when she discovered that it was a female coach who was in charge at TCU when allegations of an unhealthy environment for runners there arose responded by immediately holding men responsible for any misconduct perpetuated by a woman. People who blame others for causing eating disorders don't understand the complexity of the illness, but blaming a man for an unhealthy situation a woman created is shameful. Toxic environments can contribute to the development of the disorders, but it takes more than stressors in the environment for someone to end up with one. If a female coach is contributing to an unhealthy setting, though,  by all means, hold her accountable. 



Trail Runner is no better when it comes to the mixed messages they send around weight and diet, though more and more, they have avoided directly suggesting runners lose weight. Still, writers there have told us that excess weight is a disadvantage in running and have offered suggestions on how to lose those pounds, only to be followed by advice on ignoring the scale with no trigger warning about numbers mentioned in the form of BMI, even after mentioning how flawed using BMI as a guideline can be. Try to keep up with that! There was also an attempt to address body image issues in runners that misses the mark by linking to what's supposed to be an article listing the many causes of body image issues and, instead, lands the reader on an article with a focus on eating behavior in adolescents. 

The one time David Roche could mention something extreme regarding the risks of losing too much weight, he forgets all his previous hyperbolic chatter and simply suggests it could be bad, with no mention that disorders associated with body image dissatisfaction can actually lead to death. He also mentions tummy rolls and looking in the mirror without mentioning body dysmorphia, a separate disorder that has some overlap with eating disorders. Just like telling an anorexic person to eat isn't very helpful, neither is telling someone who has a more serious dislike of her body to just love it. Healing from this kind of body dissatisfaction takes more work than faking it until you make it, though it's not a terrible idea to incorporate some positive thinking in any recovery plan. What's more important than engaging in tactics that focus on the symptoms only, is understanding why these unpleasant feelings and an abnormal focus on the body have emerged. 

Then there's an article about eating disorders that suggests those who struggle can just eat and implies that those suffering would want to get well because otherwise they won't run as well. I will say this until I'm blue in the face: at its core, disordered eating is not about looks or gaining success. I understand the good intentions behind these types of articles, but this kind of advice is about as effective as telling someone addicted to smoking that they might get cancer and to just stop with the cigarettes already. While the article in the above link is better than many others relating to eating disorders, it still misses the point in a bad way about both why people struggle and the path to recovery by focusing on the symptoms instead of the deeper issues and the complexity of these illnesses. I appreciate that the author at least suggests to those who might have eating issues to seek help. 

And lastly, imagine how the "NO BODY TALK" crowd, those who insist that nobody should ever comment on a woman's body, would react if the adjectives used in this article were applied specifically to women. And why is nobody upset that this perpetuates the supposed myth that elite runners at the top are always lean? Doesn't the article start out by saying exactly that, and isn't body composition a taboo topic? It seems pretty obvious that individuals who write running-related articles that point to what other people do and eat as a general guideline are rarely registered dietitians and probably shouldn't be giving out dietary advice to anyone. 

Ultimately, running magazines are no better than any general fitness magazine trying to lure readers. Their target audience is anyone who will be attracted by a flashy headline. Deep down, their editors believe that weight loss is a topic that will draw in an audience, and it doesn't matter how susceptible their reader base might be to disordered eating. Careless advice can actually be dangerous when it comes to addressing anyone who's prone to developing an eating disorder. It's highly unlikely anything will change, though. Readers will still be bombarded by weight-loss suggestions, followed by encouraging articles that tell us to fuel up and eat what we want. 

Thursday, September 15, 2022

When Advice Is Worse Than None At All

Boulder is a place that attracts a surprising number of fakes. The types of imposters here in Boulder are ones who cling hard to a label and boast about who they are but, in reality and probably without realizing it, show they are the opposite of whatever identity they claim to be. The yoga community is rife with people who like to look down on others, despite the philosophy of the practice in which they engage including teachings related to detachment, self-awareness, and spiritual knowledge, traits that, in theory, lead people to become better versions of themselves, not ones who prompt judgment and hubris. Here, yogis like to flaunt their fancy apparel and the fact that they attended Burning Man more than they focus on any spiritual advancements. 

People who genuinely engage in the practice of yoga, on the other hand, are the opposite. They don't have to flaunt anything or use any kind of signaling, virtue or otherwise, to be admired. Being adored is not their goal. Their activity becomes part of who they are and isn't seen as good or bad. It just is. It's the same as if they didn't engage in the practice, because who they are is more important than what they do, how they dress, or how they look. They don't have to advertise what they do to anyone in order to feel content in the world.

It's easy to forget some simple rules of life -- you don't have to put on an act in order to be appreciated, and contentment isn't found outside yourself -- with the mess that occurs on social media, everyone screaming for attention. One of the best yoga teachers I ever had was overweight according to standard American weight charts, smoked, rode a motorcycle, and played in a rock band. He never wore flashy clothes and didn't have to adhere to any American stereotypes around the discipline; he was just really good at yoga and a top-notch instructor. He's a model for what it means to be authentic.

I view the running community at large the same way I look at the yoga community here in Boulder. Within the sizeable group, there are pockets of individuals who do good, sometimes really good things. They are inspirational and out to become the best version of themselves. These are people who create inclusive communities or foundations, or are skilled at what they do, or are simply kind and thoughtful. Most of these types are athletes or coaches, or people who want to do good in the world and limit their time on social media.

When it comes to running, Addy Bracy and also the Roots Running crew set a great example. Then there are a few who can balance a hearty dose of social media with a life away from the computer. Sage Canaday comes to mind. His social media content is informative, but he has fun with it and doesn't take himself too seriously. In sharp and disappointing contrast are the many self-appointed experts who like to offer bite-sized bits of imagined wisdom without really saying much. The ones who make up this last group are primarily writers, fans of the sport, and influencers. 

Whether it's on social media or in a published article, people in this last group love to pretend the content they are sharing is fresh and new, but it's almost always information that has been presented before, usually without reference. Condensing complex ideas into pithy little sayings is rarely helpful, and using hyperbole to the point of absurdity is equally unnecessary and uninteresting. Stephen King cautions against writing past your ability, yet so few are willing to take his advice. They think using as many adjectives as possible is the way to go, even if the modifiers are used incorrectly or make readers cringe. Don't fake being a virtuoso if you can't play the scales. Instead, work on your technique and try to enjoy the process. That's what I do. 

Many errors could be easily corrected in published material if a qualified editor would step in, but running magazines seem to have a shortage of competent editors, Runner's World being the occasional exception, and anything by Alex Hutchinson being the consistent exception. Really, though, it's not fully the responsibility of the writer to offer up a perfect final piece. It’s unfortunate that anything goes these days. 

Some of the more bizarre life and training takes I have seen online and in publications recently include the following:

1) A coach claimed that rest is different for everyone. He suggested that for some it’s a day off, but for others it’s a 15-mile run. A few of us corrected him on Twitter, saying that 15 miles, even at the most leisurely pace, isn’t even a recovery day since anything that long is going to take a toll on your body. It can be an “easy” day for some but definitely not a rest or recovery day, even if it might seem like a piece of cake to very fit individuals. Rest is rest and means just that. “Active rest” means engaging in low-intensity activity for a limited duration and allowing your body to recover, not breaking it down further. 

2) On Twitter, a well-known athlete announced that there’s no such thing as overtraining, only under-fueling or not getting enough rest. My response to that is: bullshit. Overtraining is doing more than your body can safely manage at any given point. You can eat and sleep well and still do more than you are physically or emotionally able to handle and land in doing too much territory. Sure, in the big picture, most training issues can be resolved by getting adequate nutrition and rest, but we are complex beings. Any kind of maladaptation to stressors can lead to overtraining syndrome, so it's more complicated than a hasty one-liner designed to generate lots of likes on social media can convey.  

3) One of the more shocking declarations I saw was from an account called Anorexia Myths on Twitter, in which the poster suggested that all anorexic thoughts center around food and implied that eating food will fix the problem, which couldn't be further from the truth. This mother of two anorexic children is taking a symptom of the illness and calling it the cause. Eating disorders are complex, and recovery doesn't come down to "eat a sandwich!" This kind of take diminishes individuals who struggle and suggests that eating disorders are a choice when, in fact, they are not. In her attempt to debunk myths around the illness, she's actually perpetuating them. 

4) It's hard to imagine that there were two articles, one in Women's Running and the other in Trail Runner, that focused on strength training by suggesting individuals simply lift heavy shit or do some body-weight exercises now and then. This bright idea was promoted by a coach and writer on Twitter as well. A more interesting and realistic approach would be to discuss muscle activation, strength specificity, and structural strengthening, but that's not as appealing to writers who want to attract the attention of the general masses on social media. It takes too much thought and is too narrowly focused on runners to get into why and how athletes might benefit from an actual lifting or strength program. Just lift shit is easier to convey, isn't it? 

Instead of bad advice in running magazines, here's a link to someone who knows how to assist athletes with individualized strength programs: KPPerformance

5) In the same vein as "just lift shit" is a recent article in Women's Running with the groundbreaking message: Just move a little. Women's Running and other running publications are now in the habit of publishing what looks more and more like blog content than actual articles, which could be interesting if the authors thought a little bit about their target audience and didn't present everything as if either the world is ending or everything is idyllic. Seriously, writers go from You can be all you want to be! to You'll get slow and need to avoid snacks, and that will be dark as hell when you... go through puberty or go through menopause or go through a pandemic or get old, or get injured, etc.

If you're writing for a running as opposed to a fitness magazine, the "Here are a bunch of exercises anyone can do. Fuckit if they relate to running or not" approach isn't best. If a reader searches hard enough, she might find a helpful concept -- that people should exercise for their health, even if they're not going to race -- in these types of overly general articles, but most are lacking so much in depth that the sentiment is nearly lost. People benefit from information that's to the point, not from overly vague concepts. 

If the topic is transitioning from being a competitive runner to being a jogger, discuss the psychological aspects as well as the reasons why some might need or simply choose to make the switch and how the change can affect a runner. Claiming something is depressing without explaining why or getting into how to address it isn't helpful. 

Those of us who have raced, even if it's not at an elite level, are likely to have difficulty with identity as shifts in training volume and intensity occur, forced or not. Imagine how I have felt the last year or so not being able to walk at times, but even I have adapted. Kara Goucher, in a brief update in February this year, brought up the difficulty of being faced with a life-altering condition as a runner who identifies as such. Her short post resonates with more readers than many so-called articles because she allows herself to be vulnerable and lets people know that she's embracing the unknown in her situation. She takes each day as it comes, acknowledges her fears, and does what her body and mind will allow. 

Even though we are creatures that no longer hunt and, as adults, rarely play, our bodies and souls still crave movement and a challenge. As a species, we do better if we are active, but when we can no longer hit high mileage or intensity goals, there are ways to satisfy the inner longing to engage in exercise, even if it's no longer all that vigorous. 

There is a way to transition to cross training or jogging or walking, whatever activity your body can manage, and create beneficial physical and psychological challenges while still being gentle with ourselves in order to reduce the risk of injury. If life pulls you in a different direction, it doesn't mean you have to say, "fuck it!" and let go completely. And if you do, there's nothing really wrong with that, either, as long as you're making some effort to maintain health, however you and your doctor define that. Sometimes a complete break is not just fine but necessary. Exercise is something you can always return to.

A terrible message and one that's likely to scare individuals into not trying at all is that starting an exercise program is difficult and unpleasant. I see this over and over again. On some level, this may be true that starting or starting over may be difficult. Any change can be hard, but a new beginning is also exciting and rewarding, especially after a forced break. Yes, fatigue might hit you hard initially, but you can measure progress fairly quickly. 

Besides, training doesn't have to be done in extremes. Life doesn't come down to either working toward race goals or sitting on the couch. There are plenty of options between the two. 

Even without structured training, you can still run or bike time trials, jump in fun runs, race for charity, do relay-type races with teammates, race for the sheer pleasure of it, or map out an adventure run for the heck of it. There's no rule that says you can't hire a coach, either. It's fine to receive guidance even if you have no racing goals. 

What's very much lacking in the articles I see in most running magazines around change and reduced activity, especially in older athletes, is the mental and emotional aspect of running and how deeply former athletes are affected by not being able to engage in the sport they love. 

In an interview I did with Suzy Favor, we discussed depression and how not running at a high level after spending years training hard can affect a runner's mental health. Simply saying "my identity was once a runner and now I jog" doesn't go into how to most effectively manage any upheaval that can occur when transitioning or being forced into a less athletic role. 

Not one running-related article of this type mentioned processing strong emotions that might come up and even grieving the loss of your former self. For some of us, losing the ability to race or train hard is like losing a best friend, and every time we go out and can't reach our potential, the sadness is there, lingering in the background. It's not easy and can take a long time and a lot of work to accept where you are and stop looking back. I still struggle with it. For Suzy, therapy was helpful. 

6) The last topic I'll cover is that of a coach and writer who basically suggested to his audience that a good approach to training is to do what a great athlete (who's probably doping and has a team working with him) does. If he doesn't lift weights, drop the barbell! This is some of the worst advice anyone can give. 

Copying a professional athlete is an approach that's not individualized, and how someone else achieves success might not work for you. For example, if you're an athlete with some muscle imbalances, lifting might help prevent injury while avoiding strength work because someone said a certain pro skips it could increase the chances of getting hurt. Lifting can help increase overall strength including supporting muscles, which also helps prevent injury. "You do you," not "You do someone else" (you know what I mean) is the best advice here. 

I'm really glad to see that Sage Canaday started a coaching program. I think he will offer athletes some great advice based on his experience, knowledge, and his ability to have fun. Also, he seems to have assembled a great team to assist him. 

I don't have an editor, so I'm sure this doesn't read as a brilliant article. Still, I hope it inspires some thought or offers some guidance to readers. 

Thursday, June 30, 2022

While The Sky Falls

It feels strange to write after such a long period of mental paralysis, writer's block that extended past assembling words into coherent sentences and bled into everything but basic mechanical daily activities, work, a little exercise, eating, shitting when not stopped up by Percocet, too many hours of streaming services distractions, and some reading here and there. In other words, I have not been productive outside of work, at all. I'm even behind on listening to podcasts because that somehow takes more effort than watching Netflix. 

After back-to-back surgeries (#13 & #14 total for both feet) on my left foot and after almost a year of not really running and several months of no jogging at all, I'm moving a little bit outdoors again, sort of. I can't bring myself to call whatever I'm doing running or even jogging because it's so lopsided, but I'm wobbling along the streets at an average of about 12-minute miles. That's as terrible as it sounds, but it's also on hilly courses. Still, even moving downhill doesn't make that pace much faster, and I'm limited to about 10-20 minutes before my body feels like it's breaking. I suppose that's better than nothing, but it's not great. I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry, but one thing is very clear; I am no longer a runner. I'm glad I had a moment in the sun, so to speak. At least I can look back and admire the runner I used to be, even if I wasn't the perfect example of health at the time. It's not like I am now, either. 

It also feels weird to be writing when there's so much going on in the world, mostly not-so-great and even catastrophic events both in the United States and around the world. It seems a little selfish to focus on me or, more specifically, my foot, but writing often allows me to process my feelings, and the need to do so hasn't stopped because of world events. Hopefully, my words can have some kind of positive impact on at least someone or encourage some deeper thoughts in general.

Sometimes I read what's published, either a novel or an article in a running magazine, and I remind myself that I have got to work on being kinder to myself. That should be a lesson for everyone no matter what, unless you're a serial killer, but I'm so quick to criticize every little thing about myself and the things I do. It's like living with a dictator and someone slightly more rational and optimistic in my brain, a constant argument in my head over how terrible I am versus how it's really not that bad. That's where the OCD comes in, I think. If I complete these arbitrary tasks, no matter how sloppily or unnecessary, everything won't be as awful and my mind can finally relax a little, for a short time anyway. 

My mental health aside, what I've noticed recently is that there is a growing number of individuals who are biased in the medical field, either against women or those who have or have had eating disorders or both. I understand that individual bias isn't the same as systemic bias, but both are a problem. The issues I have faced in the last year started when I went to several practitioners because of continued foot pain and sciatic problems that developed, probably because of all the limping. An MRI showed some of what was going on but not everything. After surgery #13, I was still feeling discomfort, so my doctor suggested another surgery to remove more of a particular nerve he felt was the culprit. Unfortunately, it was a long wait before he could perform the operation, so I got a second opinion (the second surgeon agreed with the first that surgery was my best option), saw a PT or two, and got some acupuncture as well. 

Out of the six or so professionals I saw, the two surgeons agreed it was a physical issue, but two, a PT and a PA, insisted I was "creating pain" or it was somehow psychosomatic. I walked out on one PT before treatment and after he insisted I was creating my pain. I had to ask, if he believed this, then why he wouldn't go into psychology instead of continuing in his field? I was there to get treatment on my physical body, not get my head shrunk. This seems to be more common in Boulder and elsewhere where individuals like to think everything comes down to mind over matter. Well, as powerful as the mind can be, and just like prayer doesn't appear to do anything to prevent mass shootings, sometimes there are physical issues that can't be overcome by simply thinking them away. 

I almost cheered when my doctor, after the last surgery, showed me the huge neuroma he found and cut out. The stabbing sensation wasn't in my head after all, and yeah, I get that when we hurt, it's usually because our nerves send signals to our brains to tell us something is amiss. I also understand that there's an emotional component to pain. That doesn't give anyone the right to discount what a patient is experiencing. 

The other issue I have faced is one that is more widespread, especially for those who are overweight or in the throes of mental illness, and women tend to be more discounted than men. Our pain is more often misdiagnosed, and we are less likely to receive proper medical care overall. It always surprises me when this kind of bias comes from a female doctor, though. I've mentioned how, years ago, one female doctor told me that my medical problem was hormonal when, in fact, I was suffering from viral meningitis and nearly died because she blew me off. More recently, I had an encounter with a doctor who was completely condescending and arrogant and took one look at my medical history and determined that my current issue (sciatica due to limping so badly for over a year) is a bone issue that was caused by my anorexia...40 years ago. Without any evidence that this is bone-related, none, she has insisted that my bones are weak and has treated me like shit. I finally asked that my care be transferred to someone else. 

The thing is, when you're already suffering, it makes it even more difficult to stand up and be an advocate for yourself. Encounters with flippant doctors make it easier to think about giving in to the demons that plague the heads of so many of us who are hurting these days. I basically told the doctor mentioned above that I was cutting off the conversation, and while I'm glad I was able to take care of myself at that moment, I'm not happy I didn't go one step further and really let her know how obnoxious and mean she was being for the second time. I'm not sure if the situation warranted a "fuck you," but I should have at least made it more clear why I was hanging up the phone and transferring my care. I'm not sure my follow-up email was enough to drive home the point of just how awful she was being. 

In other news, David Roche, someone I've never met and never interacted with, ever, joined Erin Strout Citius Magazine, and Chris Chavez in blocking me on social media. Kudos to Women's Running and Fast Women for not blocking me for the awful sin of retweeting some blog posts by Kevin Beck, just like Eric Schranz of Ultrarunner Podcast has done countless times before. It's important to be inclusive unless you don't like someone. In that case, make sure you practice exclusion and cut off any means of communication. That seems like the best approach for "professional" journalists, no? But everyone has to live with their actions, good, bad, and mean-spirited as well. Somehow, these days you're seen as more of a villain for pointing out bad behavior than you are for committing the bad behavior (lying, stirring the pot, hypocrisy, mocking fat kids, etc.) 

I’m keeping this short, not because I don’t have more to say but because with depression comes a lot of brain fog, and I’ve already pushed through a massive amount of murky gunk just to get this far.

Tuesday, March 22, 2022

We've Gone Too Far

Since I've already addressed the issue of body talk in a previous post, I'll try not to repeat myself too much, but it seems that writers and fans of sports have gone too far with madly condemning individuals who mean no harm. Yes, it would be nice if everyone would shut the fuck up about appearance, but to suggest comments about body composition are primarily mean-spirited or harmful or directed only at women is incorrect. Humans are mostly visual and social creatures. Those who can't see use other senses to create a mental picture of the world around them. No matter who you are, you have a way to take in your surroundings that includes perceiving others. It’s part of our nature to be aware of appearance on some level, and it's a basic understanding that how someone looks to another person is subjective. 

When it comes to the media, male athletes have been under the microscope for years, and talk about how they look continues today. In many cases, how journalists and sportscasters describe male athletes is borderline abusive. Ever hear of a guy named "big" Andy "the Viking" Fordham? How about William "the refrigerator" Perry, Tyrone “Muggsy” Curtis Bogues, Iain Dowie, Roy "Shrimp" Worters, Charles "the Round Mound of Rebound" Barkley, or Nikolai Valuev, the "Russian Giant"? Even though few people in the media were kind to these individuals when it came to describing their appearance, comments about the size and looks of men rarely cause a stir, and the list of derogatory nicknames for them is endless. 

Back in the 80s, the commentary on American figure skater Brian Boitano seemed to focus on how much taller he was than the other skaters, especially in comparison to Scott Hamilton, whom they referred to as "especially small" or "short," yet nobody complained about it then or now. The occasional comment about size was never the main focus; the athlete's phenomenal skating was. Negative and neutral comments occur so often when describing male athletes that we don't really pay attention, even when talk of American male distance runners turns to how much bigger they are compared to the "bird-like" runners in some African countries. Nobody said shit when someone at Podium Runner referred to Galen Rupp as "The reed-thin, clean cut [sic], baby-faced Rupp" or when Runner's World talked about how thin and pale the guy is, but if anyone comments on the appearance of a female athlete, holy hell, someone's head must roll. 

Recently, in an article in Outside Online, Christine Yu complained about a New York Times newsletter that landed in her inbox in which Mathew Futterman, a journalist previously called out after writing about female athletes, committed the heinous crime of suggesting an Olympic athlete looked like "a sprite." Often, these types of articles, tweets, or public comments condemning others who dare discuss body composition or size of female athletes end up being the spark in deciding whom the self-righteous should bully or cancel next. In this particular case, the New York Times responded to one blog post on the topic with the following statement: 

"We aim in our sports coverage to cover male and female athletes accurately, equally and fairly. We believe sometimes their physiques are relevant to their performance. In this case, our description of cross country skier Jessie Diggins’s noticeably different physical attributes in contrast to others in her sport were an important and relevant detail."

In her article, Yu ponders who decides what the norm is when it comes to how an athlete's body should look, but Futterman's article praising the young skier was pointing to the differences he perceived in body type, not claiming one or the other was necessarily ideal for the sport. In the end, Diggins is incredibly intelligent when it comes to protecting her recovery from an eating disorder and takes the right steps to make sure she's not affected by what others say by not reading comments made about her. It's more other people who were offended on her behalf, though she did make a statement when asked about Futterman's comment by saying, “To be honest, I don’t read things written about me and I think that’s a very, very healthy thing. But it’s unfortunate with Rule 40 that you can’t see the invisible headgear sponsor that is there at all times for me.” The logo on her headgear is that of the Emily Program, a company that raises awareness about eating disorders and recovery.

I understand how someone like Jessie Diggins, who suffered from an eating disorder, might be more sensitive to comments about size and think those in the media should be aware of how certain comments can come across, but I also understand that it’s common for people with the same mental illness that I also struggled with to internalize neutral comments or even compliments in a negative way. I used to assume anyone who told me I looked good, strong, or healthy actually meant, "You look fat." If anyone said I look thin, it also made me uncomfortable, but it's not on others to fix my unhealthy response to those trying to be observant, honest or, in some cases, kind. It took a lot of work before I could tolerate hearing any comments about my looks or size and not react in an unhealthy way. That's what recovery takes, though, because there will always be triggers in the world. It's important to know that there's an enormous difference between actual negative, hurtful comments and descriptive ones, but those of us with eating and body issues have to be prepared to deal with either without resorting to self-harm. 

The running community seems to be all about learning how to improve our internal dialogue, except when it comes to female athletes. In that case, it's everyone else who must change to accommodate our fragile state. The media must walk on eggshells, and with one misstep, certain observers are just waiting to pounce and complain if the perceived insult is directed at a woman. In a perfect world, nobody would say anything anyone else considers offensive, but to suggest this only happens to women or is somehow worse when it does is misleading. 

Yu continues her complaint by suggesting that Futterman's comments below undermine Diggins's achievement and insults a large swath of women, "both those who have 'massive shoulders and thighs' and those who don't."

“In a sport that has so many women with massive shoulders and thighs, Diggins looks like a sprite in her racing suit...And it’s not clear exactly where she gets her power.”

The author of the Outside article seems to be suggesting that certain women have massive shoulders and thighs, but we're not supposed to say anything about it, and don't ever say a female athlete is lean, small, or tiny. For the record, something similar has been said about Roger Federer being smaller than his opponents, but nobody complained or made a fuss. It's a double standard. "Body talk" is off-limits when it comes to announcers commenting on women's sports, but they can say or write pretty much anything in reference to a man. I don't think that suggesting someone's shoulders and thighs are "massive" is the best way to describe anyone's body, but how does this or comparing the different-sized bodies in a race undermine the winner's achievement? It seems the more the conversation steers toward dictating what others can and can't say, the more it takes away from the sport. In fact, with these complaints, notice how the conversation was steered away from Diggins's racing and toward her body instead. 

In the article, Yu claims that "In 2021, a study in the British Journal of Sports Medicine found that comments about an athlete’s body and diet, even seemingly innocuous ones, can lay the foundation for disordered eating and eating disorders," but the study that consisted of "29 current and former female NCAA DI female distance runners" focused on the dynamic between coach and athlete, not comments in general. In fact, the conclusion states, "Sport body image ideals and the power dynamic between coach and athlete may contribute to female athlete’s risk of disordered eating and body image disturbance." Yu may be correct in her assumption about comments about body ideals in sports in general, but she’s misrepresenting what the study addresses. We are not privy to the kinds of comments the coaches made to the 29 runners or whether the findings apply outside of the coach-athlete dynamic.

The solution isn't to complain about something that will probably never change or to stubbornly cling to black and white thinking by saying all body talk relating to female athletes should be banned. People have opinions and have the right to express them, so demanding a shutdown on free speech isn't the answer. What would be more beneficial is to teach those who struggle with self-image how to deal with or ignore comments they interpret as harmful or negative. Diggins has the right approach when she ignores comments she believes will be upsetting. I have so much respect for her as an athlete and a human being. 

The reality is that social media does far more damage than any article that mentions how a female athlete looks. How others talk about themselves, publicly treat their bodies, and how they relate to food (constantly joking about eating too much or having to work off what they eat or drink) can have a profoundly negative effect on others. Quite often, the same people who like to point this out, don't show any sign of reducing their time spent on sites like Instagram, Twitter, TikTok, and Facebook, as if not being susceptible teenagers themselves protects them and others from the detrimental comparisons that a constant flood of filtered, doctored, and edited images and online content causes. 

 

Sunday, January 30, 2022

More on Loss

I've dropped the ball on my writing. Actually, I've dropped the ball on quite a lot in my life lately. I'm not sure where the time goes, but it keeps passing. When I started this post almost two months ago, I had some idea of where it was going. Now, I'm in some kind of daze and don't seem to care about much. I'm numb. I'm struggling to do anything but watch whatever series I feel compelled to binge, the Sopranos in record time being the most recent achievement in my life.

In general, this blog isn't what I intended it to be, a place where people could get help and support relating to eating disorders. Initially, things were heading that direction. It seems like more of an emotional dumping ground than anything that benefits others at this point. I used to say that it helped me process, but lately, writing feels like one more chore, a frustrating method of trying to form the ideas and thoughts in my messed-up head into something more interesting or at least more clear. 

Now that the initial shock of Di's passing has morphed into depression and maybe even some acceptance, two different stages of grief that never come in any kind of precise order, I'm reminded of all the encounters we had, all the collaborations we participated in, and the good memories that make me miss her more. Knowing that someone who shared so many similar life experiences is gone makes me feel the loss more deeply. Needless to say, her passing has affected me profoundly. And right on the heels of her death, several other people I know left this world, not by choice. Even though I experience joy on occasion, usually when I'm with someone I consider my best friend and his dog, my overall mood has been incredibly dark lately, and it's easy to isolate and get lost in whatever mindless distraction is available. 

Not long ago, someone on social media criticized a blog post written by the friend I just mentioned because, despite the piece being a very touching write-up, a tribute to his deceased friend that most felt was very nice, the critic didn't like how the author focused on his personal experiences and brought attention to himself. People process grief and loss in all kinds of ways. Nobody is forced to read about someone else's personal experiences relating to loss. I look at complaints like that and wonder how miserable a person you have to be to publicly bitch about the way someone else grieves. If you're that fussy, maybe avoid the Internet, restaurants, and anything that requires public interaction altogether, or you can read about a person's grieving process and actually keep your unfavorable thoughts to yourself. Imagine that. 

I just think that when it comes to sorrow and loss, maybe cut the one in pain some fucking slack. Regarding this post, if sharing my memories is going to piss you off, you should probably avoid reading further, but I have more to share than just memories in this post. 

Diane and I met when I was in high school. She reached out to my mom and arranged a meeting between the two of us. At the time, in the middle of my compulsive training and competing, I wasn't open to sage advice. We went for tea at a restaurant, an activity we did quite a few times later, and she cautioned me that I was heading down a dangerous path, one she had also traveled. Since I was denial or unwilling to change, I shot down any ideas about how bad things could get with overtraining and eating disorders. Many years after that, Di would be the one to help me through the worst of my illness. She pretty much saved my life, even after I politely rejected her offers of help initially. When I finally did reach out, she was right there.

When I think of how supportive Di was, I don't just think of myself. She had so much to give to other people, and give she did. No matter how bad things got in her world, she always had a way of uplifting others. Recently, not long before she passed, she responded to a card I sent her. I knew she was struggling and wanted to be of some support if I could. Despite whatever pain she was in, her beautiful reply was focused on love and appreciation. She was always like that, incredibly supportive, caring, and thoughtful. When we would get together to do interviews on the radio or to catch up, she often brought a little gift -- angel cards, a heart-shaped gemstone, or some other thoughtful trinket -- for everyone involved. Technology wasn't her thing, so she made the most of time spent in real life. 

One of the reasons why I had such a hard time doing the podcast I mentioned earlier is because of my experiences with Di and others like her. Whenever we collaborated on a radio show, podcast, or speaking event, she was always a grounding force. It was never about her showing off or trying to be right; it was about sharing ideas and uplifting others. At times when I was nervous or having trouble finding my voice or even if she was on the same page and simply liked the topic I was diving into, she would give me the thumbs-up signal, a nod of the head, or a knowing smile, like I was on the right path and could relax and breathe. She had my back, even if we didn't agree on every single issue, and it's a wonderful experience to feel supported. 

I could go into some additional personal anecdotes, little moments with Di that made me smile or laugh or feel a sense of being at peace, but I think I will save them for myself. 

On a more unsavory note, when someone I know included a link to a tweet in his blog post, I discovered I was blocked by another running "journalist," one I've had zero interactions with online or otherwise. I'm not going to name names because it's pathetic, another reminder that journalistic integrity is dead and most individuals would rather live in their own echo chamber than risk having any kind of interaction with anyone they don't agree with. 

In contrast to those who prefer censorship and use methods to shut down potential criticism and dialogue, I recently discovered an ultra runner on social media who, despite making it pretty clear that she belongs to the opposite political party as I, allows everyone their voice, even those of us who disagree with her. She never stoops to calling people names and is never mean about voicing her opinion. She doesn't say or suggest that those she disagrees with "fuck off and have a nice day." It's refreshing to see, and I've found that we actually agree on quite a lot, even though we don't see eye-to-eye on some big issues. I have far more respect for her than the cowards who have blocked me. This is my childhood all over again, being excluded from the popular crowd, but this time I don't give a shit. I would rather not have anything to do with liars, excessive self-promoters, and people who stir the shit and then get pissed off if anyone reacts. Don't call yourself a journalist if you refuse to even hear an opposing side, though. You're not. 

Because I'm all of a sudden in a foul mood despite having a lovely slice of chocolate mousse cake this evening, I'll go ahead and address Lindsay Crouse's most recent opinion piece on being overly attached to exercise gadgets. The biggest issue I have with this, aside from wondering how cushy someone's life must be if "rock bottom" is checking a smartwatch while at a nice dinner, is that she so casually and easily drops in a suggestion that weight loss is a health benefit. The paragraph is below with my added emphasis. 

"But does this constant monitoring of our vital signs truly yield better health? There’s no clear answer yet. One study found that people trying to lose weight who used wearable technology to help actually lost less weight than their watch-free counterparts. A review in the American Journal of Medicine found “little indication that wearable devices provide a benefit for health outcomes.” Another issue is that the measuring abilities of wearables are imperfect for some metrics."

She's probably not even aware she did this because she's more concerned with the retweets and likes she will get than accurate content or the truth. I'm assuming suggesting this wasn't her intention considering her continual cheering on the health at every size movement, but she doesn't seem to care about subtle messages in her writing, as long as people are praising her on social media. And while she likes to point her finger and call anyone who expresses an opinion contrary to what she believes obsessed, like she did regarding those who had the temerity to voice an opinion about trans athletes competing, she suddenly claims she was obsessed with measuring her fitness levels, right after telling us how she languished and didn't run throughout the pandemic. That's a pretty quick 180. 

While the overall message that several podcasters recently shared before Crouse came out with her take (coincidence?) is a good one, that gadgets can become an unhealthy distraction, these products can also be useful. They have their place. In fact, smartwatches, heart rate monitors, and other exercise accessories can help athletes who have a tendency to override body signals and push too hard, and they can reveal when something's off, a possible underlying illness or extreme fatigue. If you are the type to get obsessive about numbers, set some rules around when or how often you use the gadget or don't get one at all, but don't pretend these types of products are bad for everyone. Sometimes it's impossible to fully read your body no matter how grounded you are, especially if you're more of an emotional individual and not as intuitive as Crouse seems to think everyone can or should be. Having some parameters by using technology can take some of the guesswork out of training, and that's not a bad thing.

I was going to address the whole Rogan/Spotify issue, but I don't think I can do better than what Matt Taibbi said regarding a similar issue. 

Shit. This is shitty writing, but after such a long absence, it's all I've got. I should go back to reviewing cheese. It's less depressing. 

Wednesday, October 27, 2021

Body Talk

With the article by Ken Goe that recently came out about the alleged (I'm assuming it actually happened) body-shaming that took place within the University of Oregon track and field program, many individuals want to share their own experiences or comment on the matter, even if it means potentially triggering others.  

I can't wrap my head around the fact that some of the same individuals who are adamant that nobody should ever talk about a woman's body are careless when it comes to posting images of themselves with captions that describe their perceived flaws. I know Kara Goucher means well and I generally like and respect her, but, regarding a recent post, she's ignoring concerns about sending the wrong message. The bigger message, that looking a certain way doesn't have to dictate what a person can achieve, is important, but that's not what she initially said. And if you're at all sensitive to potential stressors on social media, this is exactly the kind of content that can be problematic. But fuck anyone who's too sensitive, right?

What Kara said was, "If you look closely, you will see I have skin hanging over the side of my shorts, there is cellulite on my butt and there are no rock hard abs on my stomach." She goes on to say how fast she ran despite all this and also complains about how focused everyone is on looks, after suggesting everyone look closely at her body. A good point coupled with potentially triggering content will never sit well with me or probably anyone else who has or has had an eating disorder. As one commenter suggested, how do you think seeing an image of a very fit and lean runner with a caption about skin hanging over her shorts and cellulite, real or imagined, makes normal observers feel? This did not sit well with me, either, and I should trust that my initial reaction of shock is shared with at least a few others. 

There was a way to word the caption and avoid upsetting anyone. Kara could have mentioned that she's a product of our society or struggled with her body image or that her body was so scrutinized by coaches and fans of the sport that she began to have self-doubt if she didn't look a certain way. Instead, she made a statement about cellulite and skin rolls when she appears visibly lean and extremely fit to anyone on the outside, and it comes off as not well thought out, though the majority of individuals seem to have gotten the point or cheered her on anyway. 

In a world of black and white thinking, one in which everyone claims to be right, we have lost all nuance and, therefore, the ability to have meaningful dialogue. This is thanks, in big part, to social media. The way people react to anyone even hinting at expressing a different opinion is extreme. Remembering how people associated with Oiselle treated anyone who expressed a different view years ago, I hesitated to reply to Kara's post but did anyway, saying that I appreciated the comment of someone who pointed out that the post could be triggering. I then tried to clarify what I assume is the deeper meaning.

Rare is the individual who can sit back and say, "I see your point." Instead, defensive responses -- I'm right. You're wrong! -- are encouraged and celebrated, and that almost always leads to a pile on. It's no longer about trying to find answers, it's about proving you're on the right team, even if it means lying or triggering or offending others. If you express an opinion that's contrary to the majority, be ready for some blowback. In this case, it turns out there was no need for me to worry, as my comment was quickly buried by the thousands of heart emoticons others posted in response to the original post.  

Regarding the article, some are so determined to show that they condemn coaches who are body-shaming athletes, they're denying science in the process, just flat out making up shit or ignoring facts. Even though I agree with those who claim that the system in place by coach Robert Johnson is flawed, I don't agree that you have to avoid reality in order to prove it. For example, it's true that a lower BMI can aid runners if you just look at physiology and nothing else. There's no reason to say otherwise. It just is, and it's not a judgment about anyone.  

A lower BMI generally leads to an increased VO2 Max. Some people refuse to acknowledge this, even though a greater VO2 Max usually contributes to better performance in athletics. An argument against bullying athletes to lose weight can be made, though, when you simply accept that damaging athletes emotionally is bad, period, and it shouldn't be done. Really, fuck that coach. But there's no need to pretend that anyone at any size at all can run competitive elite times or that the studies showing a correlation between VO2 Max and BMI are wrong. You can accept the results of these studies while pointing out that there's more to performance than BMI and VO2 Max levels and how the body is able to use and transport oxygen. Performance really doesn't come down to physiology alone, especially regarding weight and BMI. That's only one aspect of competition, but it is something to consider. The question that needs to be addressed is how to build programs that foster healthy athletes while still allowing them to be successful in sport. That kind of program should never include body-shaming but doesn’t have to ignore numbers completely. 

The DEXA scans use at the University of Oregon measure more than body fat. It's unfortunate that a coach would focus more on BMI and end up mistreating athletes while letting important feedback like bone density, which is also measured by the same scans, take the back seat. 

The article states:

Johnson contends his scientific approach largely removes human bias from judgments about athletes and allows the UO coaching staff to design workouts precisely tailored to each athlete’s needs.

“Track is nothing but numbers,” he says. “A good mathematician probably could be a good track coach.”

But in this statement, he removes important variables. Humans are complex, emotional beings, not computers or machines you can simply program to run a certain way, well, most of them anyway. The point is that if the mental stress of maintaining a certain BMI or a certain weight is extreme, it won't help an athlete run faster, nor will the physical stress of potentially not getting the right nutrients during formative years. Proper nutrition is especially important for young women who are menstruating, going through puberty, or experiencing growth changes that often require an increase in caloric intake in order for the one going through these experiences to remain healthy. 

I think most rational individuals will agree that a healthy approach to training younger athletes is to allow individuals some leeway. Numbers can be used as an effective tool for feedback, but who's to say what BMI is optimal for each individual? Two women who are the same height might run faster and be healthier overall at different weights and at different body fat percentages. Though personal observation is never the same as an actual study, I can't help but think about my time at BYU. Our cross country team had four runners near the top, all of whom could run close to the same time over a 5k course, but all were different body types and weights. That being said, the variations between us weren't extreme. None of us is 7-feet tall, for example. 

Coaches, both male and female, who are abusive are prevalent in the running community. It is and has been a widespread problem that's just beginning to be more formally addressed. I'm not sure how to respond to the additional information in the article, such as the bit about how OU has a "cozy relationship with Nike, which underwrites the funding for USA Track & Field and sponsors a high percentage of professional track athletes." I'm more concerned that an athlete was told by a nutritionist that she should consider lowering her body fat to about 13% from 16%. Aside from the fact that track programs need registered dietitians, not nutritionists who don't have the same qualifications, it's just absurd to think that this was a point of focus for the coaching staff instead of overall health, both physical and mental. You just can’t run as well if you're under too much additional stress. Running is hard enough as it is. 

Melody Fairchild had probably one of the most thoughtful and sensible responses I have read on the matter. She's someone who is working to make changes in the sport. Instead of complaining about it, like many of us do, she is taking active steps to improve the sport by setting an example as a coach and mentor. The world needs more Melody Fairchilds. She is such a positive light and provides hope when the world can feel so dark.   


Saturday, October 23, 2021

Injuries And Mental Health

Now it's my turn to struggle. 

The health care system in the United States doesn't completely suck all the time, just most of the time. Though some people in the field can be difficult to work with, there are also individual doctors and healthcare workers who can be nice or even helpful. I'm not referring to ER docs or anyone helping COVID patients. This relates to issues in the medical field in big, broad, general terms. The problem is all the bullshit a patient has to wade through in order to see anyone and not knowing if whom you're allowed to see is any good. Even when you find good doctors, scheduling is a catch-22. You can't make one appointment or get treatment without first having to schedule a different appointment, the appointment before the appointment, and since both appointments are booked at least a month out, waiting for months at a time in order to have anything even accessed is the norm these days. 

Before every visit to the doctor, therapist, or surgeon, you must fill out large piles of paperwork or sell your first-born child to the devil, which makes getting anything done difficult, especially for those of us who are childless and plan on staying that way. Even when you finally do get to see an actual person after moving mountains to get through the office doors, the result is often a shrug of the shoulders accompanied by an announcement that their department doesn't deal with your type of issue. Basically, nothing can be done. Cheer up, bitch

This spring, I was able to see my podiatrist after a long wait. He suggested surgery, something we discussed previously, but said that I could consider a different procedure if I wanted, one that looked somewhat promising. I mentioned to the office manager that I didn't want to lose the potential surgery date I was initially offered in June, three weeks from the time of my appointment, the one I waited about a month to get, but also wanted to consider the other procedure. She reassured me that the doctor always has openings for surgery and that, given how long I had been dealing with the issue (years), I shouldn't worry. She could squeeze me in if the other procedure I wanted to try first didn't work. 

So I did try it, and what a disaster that was, from the additional wait time, a month to get my foot looked at and another couple of weeks for the actual procedure that was far more painful and far less effective than I anticipated, to the conflicting messages I received about how things would go, it was all a giant mess. Plus, it was horrifying to see my foot expand like a blowfish, even with some warning shortly before the doctor administered the six shots with two vials of liquid each. How is it possible for one body part absorb that much fluid? Lastly, the constant nagging about payment when the billing office couldn't even bother to send an actual invoice, just a short and snippy email demanding PAY US MONEY NOW!!! was annoying. 

Shortly after I realized that donating about $1,000 to individuals who couldn't fix the problem was a mistake, I called my doctor to schedule the surgery, but he couldn't see me for another two months. In the meantime, I got a second opinion from a specialist in Denver who was excellent but couldn't consider doing any work on me because of my insurance. At that point, I called my doctor's office a second time and let the office manager know that I was requesting a surgery date, however, a month later when I finally was able to see him, the scheduling office let me know that he suddenly had no time. They said that he wouldn't be able to do the surgery until over a month later. During all these months my limp worsened, and in the week after seeing him, I developed a new, far more debilitating injury that has left me unable to walk. One thing leads to another, dominoes. At this point, I'm shuffling around as best I can, but I'm unbelievably disappointed in… no, angry at the way patients are treated.

When an injury is coming on, the desperation is intense. How often I've thought, "Oh no! I'll never be able to run again! How will I survive without running?" I hate this fear, and no matter how many times I realize that it's like jumping into a pool or a murky lake, tremendous anxiety followed by acceptance, I still freak out. It won’t kill me, even if the entire process is uncomfortable and depressing and the murky water seems to drag me down deeper and deeper before a release allows me to swim to the surface. I struggle. Every fucking time I fight it. It is survivable, though. Patience.

In sharp contrast to being ignored and cast aside by western medicine, alternative medicine more often than not provides almost immediate (within days) treatment. In this field, you will find far more compassionate and caring individuals if you look in the right places, however, there are a lot of quacks and scammers out there. Still, there are also plenty of individuals who actually want or feel driven to help others and who take extra time to do so. Sometimes it takes a team to keep a person off the ledge, and simply feeling heard can be an effective form of therapy, even if the physical issues linger stubbornly. And sometimes there's a little magic that happens, a tiny glimmer of hope with thoughts of a future with at least some painless moments. 

As most active individuals can imagine, I'm hurting more than physically and have experienced some of the deepest lows I can remember in a long time. The water pulled me under. I'm drowning, all while trying to remind myself that taking myself too seriously isn't helpful. As I get older, it seems the highs in life have tapered off as the valleys grow. I can't shake this feeling of being selfish, wrapped up in my own pain. It's difficult to be in the world and not want to curl up into a ball and avoid everyone. The frantic feeling of wanting to do something drastic has subsided a little in recent days, but for some of us or possibly many of us, ending things permanently will always beckon, sometimes softly and at other times more intrusively. Considering that option without necessarily having a plan to follow through is normal, even for people who don't struggle with mental health issues, suffer from clinical depression, or have chronic pain. Some of us just look at our "should I stay or should I go now" options more frequently and thoroughly. 

So often, I think how silly my thoughts can be when there are others who have endured far worse. Why am I so afraid to let go? Physical pain combined with emotional suffering isn't easy to navigate, though. I'm trying to ease up on myself for my reactions and force the dictator voice in my head into a corner. It's only partly working. Pain is such a strange symptom, and the way pain is perceived is even more bizarre. It's complicated, and in a weird way, pain is in your head because the brain is what interprets these kinds of sensations. That's not the same thing as saying "It's in your head," of course.

After all these years of no longer being a competitive runner and dropping out of the running scene, for the most part, I still get caught up in my identity as an athlete. It's even more difficult now because I can't throw myself into other activities as long as I'm hurting when I try to walk. I have short bouts of hope followed by overwhelming worry and grief that this pain may never go away completely. Everything I do outside of running or really jogging, aside from writing, which I haven't really been doing much of and don't feel like I excel at, involves being able to move, volunteering in a vet clinic, working, and helping my mom, etc. I'm doing as much as I can, but sometimes the shooting pain causes me to wince or even yelp, and favoring one side is wrecking the opposite side of my body, something the medical field doesn't seem to give a shit about. They treat one issue and one issue only. It's a challenge to get around and do normal everyday activities, and if I think too hard about it, I want to quit. This is not how I want my life to be, but neither is a life of burying myself in my own compulsions. 

When I was getting physical therapy or other types of treatments previously, many years ago, it was with the idea that I would be running and racing again. I could justify the expense, time, and effort (healing takes work) by thinking that I would do something memorable with running. Those days are over, so it's harder to feel deserving of treatment or surgery if I'm not going to be extraordinary in something. The truth and what mentors keep trying to remind me is that life is more about who you are than what you do, but, damn, my soul aches when I can't run. Then again, the battle with OCD is there, so running doesn't always serve me well. When I'm in a routine or fall into a compulsive rut, I panic at the thought of not moving outside. What would I do if I couldn't run? When I'm injured and have to force myself to stop fighting it, I go from thinking I just want to be out of pain to wishing I could just walk without pain to knowing that my real desire is to run again. Good or bad, running is an addictive sport. When treated in a certain way, it's like an abusive lover with all its ups and downs, but my god does it feel good sometimes. Other people have a different kind of relationship with their sport. 

Thinking about recovery from an eating disorder perspective, getting better from an illness or injury doesn't necessarily mean you have to go on to place in the Olympics. Despite the many heroic journeys shown in the media recently, the majority of us don't go on to become world-class, nor should we have to in order to be relevant and appreciated or feel deserving. What I'm having trouble with most in this injury cycle is an inability to redirect my attention elsewhere, because if I can't walk without pain, I can't really engage in the things I love to do. I say "love" meaning the things I feel compelled to do or the things I find rewarding. In that sense, I love my job. I love volunteering. I even love running, but in a "How to Be Perfectly Unhappy" kind of way. 

Like many people on the Internet, I can sit behind a computer screen and dictate what others "should" do in times of injury, relax, trust that things will get better, redirect attention elsewhere, go easy on yourself physically and mentally, and reach out for help, but my brain gets a little foggy and my thoughts a little frantic when I'm wrestling with what to do. I go back and forth, searching for a cure and handing out money to potential healers as part of that process followed by an intense desire to give up. It took me longer than I want to admit to write this, but I'm hoping it will be cathartic to put some words together since being productive is such a challenge at the moment. The only more positive experience I have had recently is spending time outside either collecting fruit from our trees or cutting down dead or dying branches with an extendable chainsaw. Who knew how satisfying that could be?

And today I walked from my car to work with a tad less pain. Do I dare become optimistic? Not after the walk back, but perhaps there's still a possibility for some magic to occur. Shit.