Runner dies at London Marathon Options

[JoggerK]

I see a runner died at London:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england...don/6583677.stm

[JoggerK]

More info from http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007180872,00.html :

The 22-year-old who collapsed and died after running the London Marathon was named last night as David Rogers. David â€â€� a fitness instructor who completed the race in an impressive 3hr 50min â€â€� collapsed after he crossed the finish line and had to be rushed to hospital. He died there yesterday morning as organisers faced fury after admitting they ran out of water at some places during London’s hottest-ever marathon. But David, from Milton Keynes, Bucks, collapsed due to hyponatraemia. The condition, a lack of sodium in his body, can be caused by drinking too much water.

Its unfortunate as the weather was hot and the race organisers were boasting of how much water there was out there - see http://www.iaaf.org/news/Kind=2/newsId=38412.html:

The race organisers had taken special precautions, laying on 100,000 drinks bottles around the route to avoid the necessity of abandoning the mass race as had been necessary in Rotterdam a week earlier. "People have got more chance of drowning than of dehydrating,"� said race director Dave Bedford, apparently trying to reassure people.

more here:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article...ater/article.do

[thomo]

I read the same thing about London Marathon organisers having the water/ hydration situation under control.

The issue is ensuring people drink and as a back of the backer hoping there is water when I pass the water stations. That is why it is important to have a great and experienced water captain and staff.

Charities manning water stations good for the charity but they MUST have experiernced staff and know what to do in all situations. C2S I have never missed out on water when doing 55+ mins or 100+ minutes.

What rankles with me is that press releases from people connected with an 'event" or "media" always seem to have/get/claim access to person's medical records. They then with appears great authority state what the person died of.

Our medico CoolRunners or others may wish to explain or expand if a definite medical diagnosis can be formed in all cases.

The bottom line it is a tragedy and other my sympathy to the gentleman's family and friends.

[Colin]

Thomo,

There has been specific research done on this at major ultras. It (Noakes study) found that 9 out of 10 people admitted to medical care for 'dehydration' and treated as such, were in fact over hydrated.

Noakes adds that there are very few documented cases of runners dieing specifically from 'dehydration'- that is sort of a catch all. More cases in retrospect are due to hyponatraemia, caused by over hydration.

This is more prevalent at slower paces, slower than say 3:30 for the marathon because these runners have more time to drink, stop at drink stations etc. London probably compensated for the weather , but runners have to dtrink only as much as they need, which is easy to say when one still has many km's to go.
A factor that is not usually taken into account is that you have a reserve of water, especially if you really carbo loaded well because of bonded water, and this doesn't need to be replaced.

At the recent Two Oceans, because I was going slower than normal too, there were so many stations ( station number 34 was the last one at 55km), I hardly drank in the last ten k's (except to boost sugars with coke or powerade) and could not drink more than a sip of the powerade handed to me at the finish- I was bloated.

Have a look at the front runners, they hardly take more than a sip at every station yet are generating more heat than the back markers.

The problem for medicos is that most runners are just absolutely exhausted as you would be from running a hard marathon and an assessment on the spot has to be made. They are assumed to be dehydrated and put on drip as first course.

Research on this is continuing, and medicos will eventually have other strategies.

But be careful of drinking too much just as you are about drinking too little.

[Fats]

I wish race organisers would stop using the cliché: "Don't wait until you're thirsty to drink". You hear it all the time, but it is quite dangerous advice to give to nervous runners.

Noakes makes a very convincing case to drink ad libitum (according to your thirst) in all distance running events.

[thomo]

Over drinking and under drinking are more likely to occur to non runners, just my thoughts.

Maybe stars or athletes in other fields who are not use to running. But who are competitive or over competitive in their fields don't read their body signs as well as the experienced runner be it where they may be field wise.

As runners we (I) have probaly done both (under and over drank) and recognise the signs more so then the non-runner.

Went for an hour run today for part of my now non secret training. Didn't take or have a drink.

However I ensured that I had enough to drink before setting out. Also know where I can grab a drink alone the way if needed.

I agree Colin about the drip in the arm if someone collapses (had not had that myself though) routine response. I have seen it happen it in triathlons and hear about it in big running races (that a team was on standby, etc)

Every now and then we hear about training yourself to not drink (it has been on this site). I tried that 25 years ago. I would rather drink than the alternate. But as said to be mindful of too much or too less.

thomo

[djc42]

Fats/Colin, I couldn't agree more ; the overemphasis of race organisers on hydration really annoys me. Also, current research (Noakes et al) is quite clear - you need electrolytes and not just water to re-hydrate - so if you're going to make a big deal about it, supply contestants with electrolyte drinks as well, not just water. I'm staggered that in London only water was available ( unless I'm very much mistaken ) ...

[Morley]

You have got to be kiding. 21c is like running in a desert! Makes you relalse how lucky we are in Oz.

[laotze]

Temperature 23.5 degrees. C/F Gold Coast every year. Or Oxfam Mebourne this year.

Three hours fifty minutes impressive? For a 22 year old ?

He didn't weigh 200 kilograms, did he?

This post has been edited by awiseman: Apr 26 2007, 11:56 AM

[clanrunner]

I'm staggered that in London only water was available ( unless I'm very much mistaken ) ...

You are much mistaken. Lucozade Sport drink stops were every 3 or so miles from about 5 miles onward. They were at different places to the water stops, which were every mile from 3-25 inclusive.

When I did the New York City marathon they gave energy gels at about 18 miles. As I was jogging it and taking quite a while, it was much appreciated.

[Colin]

Makes you relalse how lucky we are in Oz.

Though they have the big marathons at a warm part of the year , 21 to 25 is in fact very mild compared to Australia. I don't think you could say with a serious face that London or Rotterdam is a hotter place.

GCM would be hotter than that even in winter and Sydney (late sept this yr) and melb (Oct) could be anything from 16-30.

And its the humidity that you have to factor in too, i.e. the apparent temp.

The unseasonal 30 deg recently at Cape Town was like 20 at SMC. It was like a breeze- well there was a 40km/h wind blowing. A few years ago (2001) the temp at Sydney was around 30 deg (late Oct) and a well known runner around these traps suffered the indignity of a rectal thermometer.

This post has been edited by Colin: Apr 25 2007, 10:44 PM

[yeti]

Temperature 23.5 degrees. C/F Gold Coast every year. Or Oxfam Mebourne this year.

21 degrees according to the original article. But the key problem was, like in Rotterdam and other races the week before, that the weather had only warmed up very recently so most people weren't prepared for the warm conditions. Remember, this is spring in the northern hemisphere!

Four hours fifty minutes impressive? For a 22 year old ?

Source for the 4:50? I remember reading 3:50, Edit: see Kevins post above.

He didn't weigh 200 kilograms, did he?

Well, given that the article I read said the guy was a fitness instructor that would be rather unlikely.
But anyway, I think it would be wrong to blame the fatality only the conditions. AFAIK the long term statistics are that about 1 in 100.000 people running a marathon will die in it. This means that if you have 35k+ people running in London the probablility of a death in the race is non-negligible, no matter what conditions.

Yeti

This post has been edited by yeti: Apr 25 2007, 11:15 PM

[G.T.]

i think it is a real shame the way media grabs stuff like this and blows them out of proprtion .yes i feel for the family and hate hearing of any tragedy in the running world but with around 25 -30 ,000 running it ,i think organisers were probably lucky and am not really sure if they cood have done it any better
i think wat catches the locals out is ,,it is a long dark cold winter here so you wood be training in the cold most of the time and then when it warms up a little u are suddenly not used to it ,
if it was at the end of summer i think it wood be a different story
how bout the media tell us bout every single individual that died in london on that day ,not just one big story of a runner in a big charity event
how bout some headlines telling us bout the good work the money raised from this event will do
how bout some headlines on old people dying in there homes cause they cant afford there gas bills cause every thing is so dear here
nuff ranting mate

[JoggerK]

I think the key lessons are:
1) You CAN have too much water - don't drink like a fish
2) It's ok to run past an aid station.

yes, YOU

[caleb]

...and dont go to London

[vat]

Temperature 23.5 degrees. C/F Gold Coast every year. Or Oxfam Mebourne this year.

Four hours fifty minutes impressive? For a 22 year old ?

He didn't weigh 200 kilograms, did he?

Depends on your perspective, I guess. If you're a chain-smoking, alcoholic overweight news reporter, it's probably impressive.

[Crackers]

I was fortunate enough to run the London Marathon a few years ago. On that occasion it was also a nice sunny day. I think the temp "peaked" at around 17C. But I was amazed to hear many complaints at the finish about how hot it was out there. To me they were perfect conditions. I guess it is about acclimatisation. As someone stated earlier, most training for London is done in the coldest part of the year ie Jan/Feb. I know I personally ran a few times in the snow and on many occasions in temps of less than 5C. Having said that, I think the winter just gone was just about the warmest on record in the UK.

As for availability of water and electrolytes, London was superb. Both water and Lucozade was available at regular intervals. The water came in small plastic bottles with the lids removed. Lucozade was in the plastic screw top pouches. So in either case you could grab it on your way through and hang onto it. No slopping around trying to get a sip out of a plastic or paper cup.

I see that this tragedy has now been diagnosed as a case of over hydration. Maybe there was too much water available. Goes to show the importance of knowing your own body and getting the hydration routine right.

Personally, I make sure that I am properly hydrated BEFORE the race. I then take no water in the first 10 kms, and have a drink every 5kms after that. On a long training run I start sipping after around 40 minutes, then every 15 minutes. Works ok for me.

[Bristol City FC]

Its always a tragedy when someone dies in an event. I think its a bit much to lay blame on the victim as some posters seem to have done. Yes, I read the time was 3:50 not 4:50 awiseman, and whether its impressive or not is relative to the runner's level of fitness/training, not individuals perceptions, which may seem based on their own abilities. I think it was a bit insensitive to make the 200k crack, and tragedies like this should make us all a bit more aware of potential dangers in running.
Also, G.T. its totally irrelevant how many people died in London that day, the item was 'news' because he died as a result of taking part in the event, a huge annual event that gets big coverage, whether people die or not, and of course its big news. what do you expect, people just drop like flies and no mentions made of it?
Regarding the weather, 23c in Spring in UK is hot, - again just because thats only a warm day in OZ, does'nt belittle how that tempature affects people who are not used to it, its no different to me walking around in a Tee shirt in the OZ winter, thinking what babies aussies are wrapped up in fur coats in 20c complaining how cold it is. Go to the UK in the winter in 0c or minusC and run in a Tee shirt and shorts like I used to and many people do, and see how you cope.

I think we should just sympathise with the poor guy's family who must be going through hell, and let it serve as a reminder of the dangers you can face when running in the heat.

[PodRunner]

The most interesting part of Noakes on hydration is that you SHOULD way 2-3kg's less at the end of a marathon. The approx. 300g of stored glucose/energy the body burns is held in the body by around 2 litres of water. Hence, as this energy is used up, you can sweat off around 2 litres of no longer required body fluid with no ill-effect.
The body will then replenish this fluid and glucose store over the next week after the event and your body weight will return to normalish.

i.e: If you weigh the same at the end of your marathon as at the start, you are over-hydrated.

[laotze]

21 degrees according to the original article. But the key problem was, like in Rotterdam and other races the week before, that the weather had only warmed up very recently so most people weren't prepared for the warm conditions. Remember, this is spring in the northern hemisphere!
Source for the 4:50? I remember reading 3:50, Edit: see Kevins post above.
Well, given that the article I read said the guy was a fitness instructor that would be rather unlikely.
But anyway, I think it would be wrong to blame the fatality only the conditions. AFAIK the long term statistics are that about 1 in 100.000 people running a marathon will die in it. This means that if you have 35k+ people running in London the probablility of a death in the race is non-negligible, no matter what conditions.

Yeti

Apologies; I should have said 3.50, not 4.50. Still not a particularly impressive time in my opinion.

And, I admit the 200kg comment was inappropriate here. This chap was clearly in reasonably good physical shape. The point I was making was that even fit healthy people can die in marathons.

It is always a particularly painful tragedy when a young person dies, no matter what the cause, and he and his loving family and friends have my sympathy.

However, I hope no-one thought I was blaming the victim, or anyone at all really. Things like this happen. Sometimes others can learn a little from them, sometimes it all remains a mystery.

At my age, the notion of dying suddenly during or after a marathon has a lot more appeal than stagnating in ever decreasing mental and physical health. I would be sorry for those who had to deal with my corpse, if I were to drop dead publicly, however.

I'm not sure that this chap's death was 'Big News'. It was news, certainly, and particularly noteworthy in the running community, but I suspect a large proportion of the British public would not even have noticed it being reported.

Had he been the victim of a terrorist attack it would be a different story.

I'm sorry, but I am coming to understand that in some ways I am an insensitive SOB.

I'll see if I can exercise more self censorship in future.

This post has been edited by awiseman: Apr 26 2007, 12:14 PM

[Bristol City FC]

I'll see if I can exercise more self censorship in future.

dont do that, otherwise it lessens the chance of some good debates!!!

[Jason M]

It is interesting to see that if someone dies during or just after an endurance event such as the marathon, it is often assumed that it was the exercise that has caused the death. I haven't yet read anything that has elaborated on the cause the 22yo's death in the London Marathon. Is someone able enlighten me?

Most documented cases of death during endurance events have been in people with a pre-existing medical condition, that was complicated by the exercise. Virually all people who die suddenly during exercise have a serious disease which is usually cardiac. Probably the most famous death of a marathoner, was Jim Fixx in 1984. There is evidence that he had chest tightness (a sign of myocardial infarct "heart attack") for two days prior to the race. An autopsy found evidence of a recent heart attack, and extensive narrowing of his coronary arteries, 80% occlusion in one artery.

Funny how people are discussing the race conditions as if it is the likely cause of his death. Until and if we know his medical history and official cause of death, I don't think we should make assumptions.

[lostboy]

Depends on your perspective, I guess. If you're a chain-smoking, alcoholic overweight news reporter, it's probably impressive.

Bingo! 1 out of 4
(Just quietly, I would have been more than happy with that 3.50 time...even @ 22yo)

[vat]

It is interesting to see that if someone dies during or just after an endurance event such as the marathon, it is often assumed that it was the exercise that has caused the death. I haven't yet read anything that has elaborated on the cause the 22yo's death in the London Marathon. Is someone able enlighten me?

I believe the cause has been tentatively suggested as hyponatremia, hence the discussion about excessive fluid levels. I found the news article associated with the thread bizarre - it quietly slips in that the cause of death was hyponatremia, caused by drinking too much water, and then goes on about the heat, how runners were desperate to get water, and pointing the finger at organisers for not supplying enough water. Uh, guys?

Poor bloke - he's cruised along, thinking he's doing the right thing by his body, ends up killing himself by it. You can only hope organisers take the opportunity to do some education about appropriate water intake in endurance events.

[Colin]

The most interesting part of Noakes on hydration is that you SHOULD way 2-3kg's less at the end of a marathon. The approx. 300g of stored glucose/energy the body burns is held in the body by around 2 litres of water.

Sorry to be too pedantic Pod, but I think its more like 600g average carbo then plus twice that in water for a total of about 2kg (roughly). It does make a difference when working out your energy and hydration storage.

cheers

[running_lady]

Apologies; I should have said 3.50, not 4.50. Still not a particularly impressive time in my opinion.

Not an impressive time in your opinion ?

Do you really think he actually felt well ? I mean come on he got over the finishing line and collapsed, how long do you think he felt ill for ? I mean he was actually dying.

I ran on Sunday and it was not very good conditons at all, it was my 6th Marathon and I would say the toughest too , time were down so much in the heat .

Irrelevant of time this man died and it must have took some guts and determination to get through the finish line feeling like he did.

I was in tears ealier reading the messages on his just giving web page in paticular the ones from his family who could not wait to meet him at the finish...

R.I.P. Dave Rogers

http://www.justgiving.com/drogers

[Jason M]

Since a lot of this thread is on Hyponatraemia (or Exercise Associated Hyponatraemia) I thought I might add some excerpts from the the review I did on this topic in early 2006 for Paramedics. I also have a background in Human Movement and have suffered Exercise Associated Hyponatraemia during a Half Ironmna race, so I have a big interest in this topic.

SOME BACKGROUND
"Exercise associated hyponatremia was first described by Noakes in 1985. It is a condition of low serum sodium concentration during and after prolonged exercise (usually classified as greater than three hours) with potentially life threatening results. While originally met with sceptism, the condition has grown in acceptance and recognition. It is now considered one of the major medical complications associated with prolonged endurance exercise. The history of advice and culture in the athletic community provides an important context in understanding the development of the condition. Initial studies of the effects the of dehydration were ignored or misinterpreted, and a culture of limiting fluid intake was paramount in the formative years of modern ultradistance running. More recently the advice has changed to drinking large volumes of water and other fluids. Along with this advice, there appears to be an associated increase in exercise associated hyponatremia.

Over one hundred and fifty-four (154) cases of exercise hyponatremia have been reported in the medical literature. Eight fatalities from exercise associated hyponatremia has been reported in marathon runners and Army recruits in the previous eight years. All deaths have occurred in the United States. Over the same time period the incidence of exercise associated hyponatremia has substantially increased in the United States, whereas the incidence has reduced in South Africa and New Zealand where it was once prevalent. The reasoning behind these differences begs for scientific scrutiny."


THE CAUSE
"The pathophysiology of exercise associated hyponatremia is still a matter of debate. Of the possible mechanisms proposed above, excessive fluid intake causing a dilutional hyponatremia appears to be the principle cause particularly in cases of severe hyponatremia. However, it seems likely that no one mechanism will explain all cases. In the setting of exercise, hyponatremia is considered an acute condition, developing over hours rather than a period of days. A reduction or inadequate diuresis during exercise appears likely to contribute to the condition. While the exact mechanism is still not clear, the literature supports the hypothesis SIADH as the major cause or reduced and delayed diuresis. During exercise additional factors including high rates sodium losses in sweat or low fluid losses in sweat, inappropriate hormonal responses, or pre-existing illness may increase the probability that hyponatremia will develop in athletes who ingest large fluid volumes during prolonged exercise."


CONCLUSIONS
"Exercise associated hyponatremia is a serious medical condition related to prolonged exercise. The principle cause appears to be an excessive intake of hypotonic fluid resulting in a dilutional expansion of extra cellular fluid lowering the serum sodium concentration. Further factors may also complicate the condition or predispose certain people to developing hyponatremia. These include an inappropriate secretion of anti-diuretic hormone resulting in reduced diuresis, and a failure to mobilise sodium from osmotically inactive sodium stores or inappropriate osmotic inactivation of circulating sodium. Prevention of developing exercise hyponatremia by avoiding a self induced fluid overload, with the advice of optimising fluid intake, rather than maximising intake has been demonstrated to outweigh any health risks associated with dehydration. Current treatment of severe hyponatremia involves restricting both oral and intravenous fluids in hyperhydrated patients, administration of a loop diuretic if there is a delayed spontaneous diuresis, and supplementation of exogenous sodium by intravenous administration of a hypertonic saline solution."


I'll be happy to elaborate on anything that isn't clear.

[laotze]

Do you really think he actually felt well ? I mean come on he got over the finishing line and collapsed, how long do you think he felt ill for ? I mean he was actually dying.

I ran on Sunday and it was not very good conditons at all, it was my 6th Marathon and I would say the toughest too , time were down so much in the heat .

Irrelevant of time this man died and it must have took some guts and determination to get through the finish line feeling like he did.

In keeping with my developing reputation for insensitivity, Im happy to repeat that the time which was reported as 'impressive' was not really, for a fit 22 year old. Without using my own modest performances as any bench mark, there are top marathoners running 2.05s, and many marathon runners who would not consider themselves elite athletes, who run sub three hours, not just at 22, but at 60 plus. (personally, I reckon sub three hours is elite enough, but that's another debate)

A three hour fifty marathon is run at a reasonably comfortable pace.

We don't know whether he felt pain or felt unwell as he ran. He may have felt terrific which is why he kept going.

I suspect that few runners finish a marathon without feeling a fair bit of pain and discomfort.

Like Jason M I would like to see the autopsy/coroners enquiry results before being satisfied about the cause of death.

By the way, I am sorry he died, as I am sorry anyone dies before having lived a reasonable life. And those close to him have my sympathy.

This post has been edited by awiseman: Apr 27 2007, 10:03 AM

[Bristol City FC]

Nah, I think that's pretty clear Jason.

[FakePlasticTrees]

In keeping with my developing reputation for insensitivity, Im happy to repeat that the time which was reported as 'impressive' was not really, for a fit 22 year old.

I'd have to agree. I ran my first marathon in 3:56 and I wasn't very impressed. For a fitness instructor of 22 years of age an impressive time would have been an hour quicker. For the record I'm also sorry that he died.

[thomo]

I'd have to agree. I ran my first marathon in 3:56 and I wasn't very impressed. For a fitness instructor of 22 years of age an impressive time would have been an hour quicker. For the record I'm also sorry that he died.

I am glad you showed some compassion.

However FTP, he was a "Fitness Instructer". Was he a runner? I don't know myself.

Relevance. He could be a weights fitness instructer.

If he was a swimming coach would you expect he would be close to world record in swimming. I do not.

It is not reasonable to assume a "sporting coach" is a athlete capable of impressive or solid performances in a field they may or may not participate in.

My daughters gymnastics coach is a swimmer. I wouldn't ask him to show me his gymnastic routine. But, boy he is a great gymnastics coach.

C2S would have the greatest number of "sports people" particiapting outside their chosen sport.

Debate of performance standards are relevant in cases where people don't die I would surmise.

[laotze]

I am glad you showed some compassion.

However FTP, he was a "Fitness Instructer". Was he a runner? I don't know myself.

In one report he was said to be 'super fit'. His parents were reported as seeing him cross the bridge and he waved and jumped in the air.

Being a fitness trainer, I'd expect he had trained for the event, whether it was his first or not. Again his parents are reported as saying “He was labouring a bit, but only like everyone else at that stage.�

There is nothing in reports I have seen to suggest he was distressed or otherwise showing signs of illness before he finished.

I noticed also that it was reported that there have been nine deaths in the London marathon, since 1991.

This post has been edited by awiseman: Apr 27 2007, 11:24 AM

[FakePlasticTrees]

I am glad you showed some compassion.

...

Debate of performance standards are relevant in cases where people don't die I would surmise.

By commenting on the 3:50 being reported as "impressive", I'm passing comment on two things. The main area is the reporting of 3:50 as being an impressive run when it's almost twice as long as the world record. Realistically it's not that impressive.

The second bit being that it was run by a 22 year old fitness instructor. That made me assume that he would be fairly fit, however you are right he may not have been as good a runner as he was a fitness instructor.

So to my own personal definition of impressive is if I can do it then it's not that impressive. Excepting those circumstances where I impress myself with my own abilities. And yes I would prefer to be having this discussion of performance standards about him, with him having survived.

[Derwood]

9 people dying in 26 years with maybe 750,000 people completing the event over that time. I would have thought it is thus safer to be running the marathon than sitting at home on ones arse watching it on the tele.

On any given day in a popualtion of 30,000 someone is going to bite the big one. It's sad but we all face a similar fate one day. Just one of those circle of life things that we learned from the Lion King.

If you want to risk your life in sport, try climbing K2, where the death rate is about 1 death for every 6 sucessful summitteers. Everest is around 10 to one.

BTW my one and only marathon was a 3.54. It was impressive, but sadly only for the 60 year old grandmother of 8 that I ran the last 5k with.....but she just couldn't match it with me when I gave her the stare with 100ms to go and out-kicked her.....

[Bristol City FC]

FPT says:

So to my own personal definition of impressive is if I can do it then it's not that impressive.

I agree.

This post has been edited by Bristol City FC: Apr 27 2007, 01:11 PM

[PodRunner]

Sorry to be too pedantic Pod, but I think its more like 600g average carbo then plus twice that in water for a total of about 2kg (roughly). It does make a difference when working out your energy and hydration storage.

cheers

That's totally OK Colin. Lent my Noakes to a patient, so pulled the amounts from my memory bank!

Think it's an important point though, as for years trainers were telling athletes to drink enough to keep their weight constant.

Now, GET BACK TO WORK! ALL OF YOU!

This post has been edited by PodRunner: Apr 27 2007, 01:51 PM

[laotze]

So to my own personal definition of impressive is if I can do it then it's not that impressive. Excepting those circumstances where I impress myself with my own abilities. And yes I would prefer to be having this discussion of performance standards about him, with him having survived.

FPT says:
I agree.

I think that whether a performance is impressive can be both subjective and objective. I have a good idea of what I am capable of, and subjectively if I reach that level or exceed it, I feel myself that it is sort of impressive. It certainly makes me feel pretty good about it.

Comparatively, unless I narrow down the category quite a bit - male, 55-60, 82 kilos, 180 cm, slightly hung-over, my performances are rarely impressive against an appropriate standard.

When I consider the performance of others I tend to apply the same sort of criteria, objectively.

So I'm impressed with a 200 kg guy who covers a marathon distance in under ten hours, or at all. And I'm impressed with a 23 year old woman who scoots over 55 kilometres in just over 5 hours. I'm impressed with the 85 year old who completed the 24 hour race at Coburg. I'm impressed with guys like Fats at six foot, and DrJH on the track and with the training he did, and I'm impressed with kids who set age records at any distance, and with other kids who get out and have a real go when they are not genetically typed for running.

I guess I should say finally, that I am impressed with everyone who finishes a marathon, because contrary to other CR opinions, it is a very demanding challenge for most who attempt it for the first few times at least.

For an unfortunate young man who in a sense killed himself doing it, in retrospect his effort was impressive, although his time may not have been.

[Bristol City FC]

You might have mis-read my post awiseman;........ I was just agreeing with FPT in that if he can do it, then its not that impressive'. (I was'nt referring to the poor departed,...just FPT!!!! )

This post has been edited by Bristol City FC: Apr 27 2007, 02:23 PM

[FakePlasticTrees]

For an unfortunate young man who in a sense killed himself doing it, in retrospect his effort was impressive, although his time may not have been.

Yes potentially, but to be a pedant the quote was "...race in an impressive 3hr 50min". So the emphasis on the impressiveness was related to the time rather than the completion of the event.

BCFC, you'd be amazed at some of the things I can do, whilst they may not be impressive to me anymore they may be to others.

[laotze]

You might have mis-read my post awiseman;........ I was just agreeing with FPT in that if he can do it, then its not that impressive'. (I was'nt referring to the poor departed,...just FPT!!!! )

Yes potentially, but to be a pedant the quote was "...race in an impressive 3hr 50min". So the emphasis on the impressiveness was related to the time rather than the completion of the event.

BCFC, you'd be amazed at some of the things I can do, whilst they may not be impressive to me anymore they may be to others.

I got the drift. I think it is pretty impressive how incisively CRs can split hairs - is that a potential olympic sport?

But staying on topic is not that impressive, is it?

It must be just about time this thread was laid to rest.

[running_lady]

I got the drift. I think it is pretty impressive how incisively CRs can split hairs - is that a potential olympic sport?

But staying on topic is not that impressive, is it?

It must be just about time this thread was laid to rest.

Just got up this morning 6.15 and see the debate is still going on about his time , Like I said before I think it is irrelevant really and so insensitive in my opinion.

It does worry me a little though about drinking too much in races as although I had heard of this conditon before from ravers I never really had come across it in running at all and never even gave it a thought.

I know though I found the race really hard on Sunday and I think a lot of that was down to the heat, we had not been training in that heat and to be honest it was a bit of a shock and quite freak weather for the time of year.

It is also true that a lot of emphasis is on drinking more in the hot weather too when racing.

I have always when running races just took a couple of sips then threw cup/bottle away and been fine.

[Mister G]

A few years ago Ironman NZ actually reduced the number of aid stations on the course, after several people had been carted off to hospital the previous year with hyponatremia.

Apparently the thought that people don't HAVE to drink at every aid station didn't occur to anyone...

[ingrid]

Im sorry but I will have to jump in to this discussion here. I can't believe that there is a debate going on here over whether his time was "impressive".
A first marathon, will always be testing as most have never run the full 42km ever before!
Maybe its not the right place to write this on a site dedicated for runners, but I think it's impressive to finish a marathon, and under 4 hours even better.
Also being 22 doesn't automatically equate to finishing in a fast elite time. Actually, I find that the more experience ie: age you have can often be to your advantage.
Maybe Im taking this a bit personally, as my first marathon at 23 was 3.51, and I was pretty happy with that!

[Cordalba kid]

Cordalbe Kid , april 28th,
In reply to this letter I am hestitant to provise advice to a runner only that they should consult with a Physician before undergoing such a demanding race.
My personal belief as a person who loves to run and is 62 years young that we should always race with a heart rate monitor . At my age I run with a heart rate monitor and never exceed 75% of maximum heart rate. I don't at all reccomend this, it is only my interpretation of being cautious.
I treat running (or in my case shuffling) like golf. I try and get the lowest beats per kilometre consistent with something that will help in exercise . As an example my distance is 3.5 kilometres with an average heart rate of 119 bpm and an average heart consumption of 950 beats per kilometre.
Time is somewhere under 30 minutes.If my hearbeat exceeds a set rate I walk and when it steadies down I shuffle again. IN my case I allow it to go to 126 and then walk until it gets to 109.I use a spreadsheet to gather data
I can understand a younger person being competetive and being very conscious about time but it should not be the only thing. The previous writer has written a very good article about that and I am only presenting a different way to enjoy running in the hope it may help others.
Happy Running
The Kid.



I think that whether a performance is impressive can be both subjective and objective. I have a good idea of what I am capable of, and subjectively if I reach that level or exceed it, I feel myself that it is sort of impressive. It certainly makes me feel pretty good about it.

Comparatively, unless I narrow down the category quite a bit - male, 55-60, 82 kilos, 180 cm, slightly hung-over, my performances are rarely impressive against an appropriate standard.

When I consider the performance of others I tend to apply the same sort of criteria, objectively.

So I'm impressed with a 200 kg guy who covers a marathon distance in under ten hours, or at all. And I'm impressed with a 23 year old woman who scoots over 55 kilometres in just over 5 hours. I'm impressed with the 85 year old who completed the 24 hour race at Coburg. I'm impressed with guys like Fats at six foot, and DrJH on the track and with the training he did, and I'm impressed with kids who set age records at any distance, and with other kids who get out and have a real go when they are not genetically typed for running.

I guess I should say finally, that I am impressed with everyone who finishes a marathon, because contrary to other CR opinions, it is a very demanding challenge for most who attempt it for the first few times at least.

For an unfortunate young man who in a sense killed himself doing it, in retrospect his effort was impressive, although his time may not have been.
[/quote]

[JoggerK]

I deleted all the posts about rude word filters, asterisks and english soccer - the thread had a serious point and re-reading it felt a bit like desecration.

[thomo]

I deleted all the posts about rude word filters, asterisks and english soccer - the thread had a serious point and re-reading it felt a bit like desecration.

Thanks Kevin.

I was gobsmacked that the posters didn't check themselves and delete their own posts.

[laotze]

Im sorry but I will have to jump in to this discussion here. I can't believe that there is a debate going on here over whether his time was "impressive".
A first marathon, will always be testing as most have never run the full 42km ever before!
Maybe its not the right place to write this on a site dedicated for runners, but I think it's impressive to finish a marathon, and under 4 hours even better.
Also being 22 doesn't automatically equate to finishing in a fast elite time. Actually, I find that the more experience ie: age you have can often be to your advantage.
Maybe Im taking this a bit personally, as my first marathon at 23 was 3.51, and I was pretty happy with that!

Ingrid

like I said above, whether a performance is impressive can be subjective or objective. In your case, I think your first marathon time was impressive. Taking into account that you are a woman, and women's marathon times are not as fast on average as men.

My first marathon time was 4.18, and that was at age 32 in 1979. That was definitely not impressive.

Lasty year at Melbourne I ran 3.22. You can do the sums and decide for yourself whether that was impressive, mildly impressive, or not impressive at all. I was pretty happy with it, but not completely satisfied.

David Rogers, the chap who died, was 22, a fitness instructor, and described as 'super fit'. As mentioned above, I expect he had trained well for it. On that basis, I still think it was exaggerated reporting to state his time as 'impressive'.

Finally, having given much thought to this, and considered what has been written above about hypernatraemia, I don't think that is what David this chap died of. I suspect that the autopsy will reveal an underlying undiagnosed heart condition. Either way, I acknowledge that his time is immaterial.

[laotze]

deleted

This post has been edited by awiseman: Apr 28 2007, 08:27 PM

[Twopennys]

I've kept coming back to this thread in the hope that I may actually learn something. If any good at all can come from this tragedy (and I hope is family can take some mild solace from this) it is that we all have the opportunity to find out a little more about an extremely serious condition that as runners we stand more chance of seeing (or suffering) than the average Joe.

Jason M thanks for your post on hyponatraemia - I do have a few questions if you or others qualified can answer?

Prevention

Jason continually referred to "fluid" intake - is this all fluid whilst exercising or just water?

Are isotonic sports drinks better to use because of the sodium content or is this irrelevant?

Will taking salt tablets for events greater than 3 hours reduce the risk?

Is it about total volume or injestion rate eg is it better to take a bottle or camelbak and take a mouthful when thirsty than guzzle the same amount all in one go at an aid station?

Early Warning Signs

I've read that the condition presents in a similar way to dehydration - how can a first aider (or sufferer) tell the difference eg will the person still be sweating?

Can you wiggle their belly and hear water slosh (believe it or not this is a serious question)?

Treatment

What can a lay person rendering first aid do to assist?

Are their common diuretics that might be easily accessible (or be available at aid stations) that would help the situation?

Do you keep the person still or keep them moving?

What else can a first aider do?

Final question - if you are unsure if the person is dehydrated or has had too much juice which is the lesser of the two evils and which one do you treat ie which one will the person die of most quickly before professional help gets there?

Be grateful if any of our learned docs out there want to have a stab.

Cheers, 2P

This post has been edited by Twopennys: Apr 28 2007, 02:21 PM

[JoggerK]

2P - now we are getting onto the good stuff.
The key is keeping fluids and electrolytes at the "right balance" which could vary a bit for each person.
So taking in electrolyte drinks as opposed to pure water does help
drinking 6 gallons of gatorade though would still be too much.
"salt tablets" vary - so the suceed capsules as an example are formulated to be similar to blood plasma and therefore keep the right balance. gatorade / powerade have some electrolytes but not necessarily the right balance, but better than nothing.

As for symptoms, I understand that signs of dehrdration/lack of electrolytes are similar to hypontranemia so its hard for a non-expert to tell. Good examples are swelling of fingers, "nobody home" etc

Assume hypontranemic victims could have "sloshing guts" ?

If you have been drinking a lot and show symptoms, presumaby not drinking more is the right course, as unlikely to dehydrate if drinking a lot ?

I am not an expert but have been around the block a few times.
Its always a hot topic on the usa-ultralist so that's where I got most info.