Friday, November 5, 2010
Smile for the camera!
Monday, September 27, 2010
There's no WE in RUNNING


Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Death while distance running
Due to the recent death of a 27-year-old runner at this year's Rock 'n Roll Half Marathon, thereby raising the death toll of this race to three runners in five years, the paper felt the need to "investigate" the suspect activity of running, to find out if it is really the healthy activity everyone claims it to be, or if it is a murderer in disguise. "Surely, with a headline like Fitness and Fatalities, running must be wrought with danger! Too risky," I declared, as I hurried to the garbage to throw out my running shoes. Minutes later, though, having actually read the article, I sheepishly retrieved the discarded shoes from the trash, brushed them off and apologized. "I'm so sorry, old friends," I soothingly whispered. "It's just that the article looked so scary! And if they made it a headline, well, then, I thought it must be true! Can't you see how I might have been misled?"
While my shoes didn't want to hear it at the time, even they would admit that the media in general can be a bit misleading, both by its headlines and by what it considers to be "news". I mean, in light of this country's obesity problems, does the writer of this article really think it prudent to link running with death, even if she sort of (in a very nebulous, round-about way) clears it up toward the end? I can not think of a better way to motivate people to start working out than by hinting around that in doing so they may just be asking for an early demise. Oh, and don't think you can avoid the big D (death, not divorce) by biking or swimming: the death rate for triathletes is actually HIGHER than it is for marathoners--1.5 people per 100,000 as opposed to 0.8 per every 100,000. Hmm, you cautiously think, that really doesn't sound like too big of a risk. Well, it isn't, as the INSIDE headline (page 9) lets the good reader know: "Rate of deaths quite small".
Seriously, folks, is this news? I think we can all agree on the fact that running, in fact, is not harmful in the "it will kill you" way. If you are sensible in your approach to running (i.e. if you do not one day decide to get off your couch, put on your old 1984 hiking boots and attempt to run 26.2 miles), it can be a very safe, rewarding, and healthy activity. We hear about unexpected deaths in every faucet of life--the accountant who doubles over dead at his desk, the soccer mom who suddenly dies on the sidelines, and yes, the runner whose as-yet-undetected heart abnormality causes him to perish during a highly visible race. These things are tragic, but they happen. We should not let chance events like these prevent us from going to work, attending our son's soccer game, or running a race for which we've been training for months.
While I think this article is silly and I shake my head at the Pilot not only for running it, but for putting it on the front page, I think it is indicative of the issue I have with media today. Whether due to declining readership, owner interest, or their own creative needs, newspapers and TV stations seem interested in something other than reporting the news. In an effort to snag readers and watchers, they feel the need to make up news stories that have the most appeal to their audience--human interest stories that make us feel good, shock and awe stories that scare us into inactivity. They do not report, they create.
Is this what we want--to be entertained by these media outlets? Shouldn't we want to be informed? As a citizen with voting rights, I want to be educated so that I can make decisions on things that matter to me and to my friends and family. I can read books if I want to be entertained, and I can listen to talk shows if I want a spin put on things. When it comes to the news, however, just give me the facts, please. And for the sake of my running shoes, no more articles on the dangers of running, okay?
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Il bel far niente
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Get 'er done
Early on in my run I began meditating on that old proverb: "Do not put off until tomorrow what can be done today." While I was pleased as punch that I had actually followed the saying, I wondered what motivated Jesus to instruct his disciples to do this. Now, I know it's probably unwise for one with as limited amount of wisdom as I have to meddle in the mind of the Master, but I attempted to answer the question of why. Why should we do things as they come up, rather than wait?
A few answers came to mind: first, crossing off a task from our to-do list clears mental space. While motherhood has done many wonderful things for me, it certainly hasn't helped with my ability to multi-task. The day of a mother is comprised of so many tiny to-dos that it's tough to remember them all, let alone do them. All too often I recall some mundane task that needs to be taken care of in the kitchen, walk into the kitchen to do it, only to see that the floor needs sweeping. So I sweep it and completely forget about whatever it was I originally entered the room to do. Jesus knows about the all-too-limited nature of our minds. Therefore, maybe he's doing us a favor by recommending that we just do it (sorry, Nike).
Secondly, you never know what the future holds. Sure, I could easily have put off my run until tomorrow, but what if I woke up and it was raining? If that was the case, chances are good that I wouldn't have got the run in at all. Intuitively we know this when we tell our spouses "I love you" every morning; it may seem a little perfunctory, but somewhere in the recesses of our mind we know that anything could happen that day, for better or, God forbid, for worse. So, we seize hold of the moment by offering them that hug, that peck on the lips, that "I love you." Or we should. For you never know.
Finally, we should do things now because Jesus says so, he is our King, and we need to listen to him. The King is not one to bargain with. Consider the knights of old: back then, there was no "Hey King, I really like what you had to say about taking care of that nasty dragon business on the coast, and I plan on getting to it at some point, but I'm just not feeling it right now. Kind of tired, you know? That, and my wife is getting on my case for always being gone. So, if it's all the same to you, I think I'll just go home today, get some rest, and maybe look into the situation next week. Sound good?" All the king would have had to do at that point would be to give a nod and--poof!--the knight would be no more. The appropriate response is: "Yes, King. I'll do that, King. Right away, King. Thank you, King." Jesus, the king of the universe, is no exception. We should obey his mandates, and obey them today.