Exercise: Is Less More?

OK. I finished my five-mile run early this am. I generally do this five days a week. And it takes me about an hour each day from start to finish. Am I exercising too much for my own good?

Maybe.

I’ve been doing this now for more than 30 years. And like most nonprofessional runners, I started one day long ago by huffing and puffing trying to make my way around the block. Then a year or so later I found myself crossing the finish line at the Columbus Marathon.

The theory was always to push as much as possible. Add miles and time spent on the concrete or treadmill progressively. And I have the log books to prove it.

But an article in the NYT — “Phys Ed: Moderation as the Exercise Sweet Spot” — advances the idea that when it comes to the health benefits you get from exercise, moderation is key. And less might just be more.

For people who exercise but fret that they really should be working out more, new studies may be soothing. The amount of exercise needed to improve health and longevity, this new science shows, is modest, and more is not necessarily better.

That is the message of the newest and perhaps most compelling of the studies, which was presented on Saturday at the annual meeting of the American College of Sports Medicine in San Francisco. For it, researchers at the University of South Carolina Arnold School of Public Health and other institutions combed through the health records of 52,656 American adults who’d undergone physicals between 1971 and 2002 as part of the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study at the Cooper Institute in Dallas. Each participant completed physical testing and activity questionnaires and returned for at least one follow-up visit.

The researchers found that about 27 percent of the participants reported regularly running, although in wildly varying amounts and paces.

The scientists then checked death reports.

Over the course of the study, 2,984 of the participants died. But the incidence was much lower among the group that ran. Those participants had, on average, a 19 percent lower risk of dying from any cause than non-runners.

Notably, in closely parsing the participants’ self-reported activities, the researchers found that running in moderation provided the most benefits. Those who ran 1 to 20 miles per week at an average pace of about 10 or 11 minutes per mile — in other words, jogging — reduced their risk of dying during the study more effectively than those who didn’t run, those (admittedly few) who ran more than 20 miles a week, and those who typically ran at a pace swifter than seven miles an hour.

“These data certainly support the idea that more running is not needed to produce extra health and mortality benefits,” said Dr. Carl J. Lavie, medical director of cardiac rehabilitation and prevention at the Ochsner Medical Center in New Orleans and an author of the study. “If anything,” he continued, “it appears that less running is associated with the best protection from mortality risk. More is not better, and actually, more could be worse.”

Oh, mama. Something else to fret about.

Regardless, any amount of walking, running, swimming, biking and so on seems to me to go in the plus column.

And if more people exercised even moderately instead of regularly downing a keg of Coke and a trailer full of popcorn at the movies, we might all be better off.

Running and Life Lessons

OK. I’ll admit it. I didn’t know that today is celebrated as National Running Day. And it didn’t appear that the Talking Heads on CNN and Fox News had much interest in heralding the day. As I chased the treadmill belt this early a.m., I couldn’t escape the chatter about Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker surviving (CNN’s view of the world) or winning a great victory (Fox News) in the state’s recall election yesterday. [Big waste of time and money. IMO]

I should have run outside, hitting the concrete on what really was another glorious morning here in NE Ohio.

And then I could have concentrated on a story that teaches some valuable lessons way beyond the political intrigue and posturing in Wisconsin, Inside the Beltway and elsewhere these days.

At a track meet in Columbus, Ohio, Saturday one runner stopped and helped another make it to the finish line. Here’s from The Daily Mail:

A high school runner competing in the 3200-metre race is receiving national attention, not for winning or a feat of athleticism, but for an extraordinary act of kindness after she helped a struggling competitor finish the race.

Meghan Vogel, a 17-year-old junior at West Liberty Salem High School in western Ohio, is now being praised for her sportsmanship, and has had to deal with an overwhelming response to the now-famous photograph.

She said she appreciates the accolades but said today that she is a bit overwhelmed by the praise that has been pouring in since Saturday’s track meet in Columbus.

The 17-year-old was in last place in the 3,200-meter run as she caught up to Arlington High School sophomore Arden McMath, whose body was giving out.Instead of zipping past Ms McMath to avoid the last-place finish, Ms Vogel draped the runner’s arm around her shoulders, half-dragging and half-carrying her about 30 metres to the finish line.

Wow. In an era when pro football teams are trying to figure out how to most effectively maim opponents–and when our elected leaders are interested primarily only in their own reelection–stopping to help someone seems almost quaint.

Wonder what made Megan do it?

“It’s an honour and very humbling,” Ms Vogel told the Associated Press in a telephone interview from her West Liberty home. ‘I just thought I was doing the right thing, and I think others would have done the same.’

Not a bad life lesson.

Lessons from the Pittsburgh Marathon

Well, I had a great time in Pittsburgh over the weekend, completing the half marathon in the City of Bridges on a very hot, humid day. And it’s still a thrill for me to be able to participate in an event like that — and make my way to the finish line still running. But it ain’t getting any easier. And something tells me that the advancing time on the clock is running in sync with the passing of the years.

Here are some random thoughts that crossed my mind during the run:

* The Pittsburgh Marathon like most big venue events [Cleveland and Akron among them] has become an important generator of dollars for the local economy. Given that this was a weekend in early May, it was hard to get a hotel reservation and the restaurants in the downtown were jammed.

* The sports expos have become a moveable Wal-Mart, where you can buy everything from T-shirts to home gutter guards.

* No matter how hard you train and prepare for a half marathon or marathon, the weather conditions on the day of the run can make all the difference. Yesterday it was hot (high ’70s), humid and sunny — with shade along the course harder to find than a Cleveland Browns jersey in The Steel City. The hot conditions caused a number of runners [with a record number transported to the hospital] to make an unscheduled and unwelcome stop at one of the medical facilities. And at one point during the morning medical officials feared that they might be facing an emergency. Fortunately, that didn’t happen. [But for those running in Cleveland May 20, if it’s hot: drink plenty of fluids and don’t be afraid to slow down, or walk.]

* Running as I do at 5:30 a.m., either on a treadmill or on the concrete in nearly complete darkness, doesn’t prepare you to run with the sun fully awake. Next time I do this, I’m going to do some training runs at a time when I might actually see some normal people in the light of day.

* One of the biggest changes in long-distance running over the years has been the increasing number of older runners and women. I’m told that more than half of those running the half marathon yesterday were women. Good.

* And probably the biggest lesson for me was that age 64 is really not the new 40. But hey. I’m still enjoying running and having the opportunity to participate in an event like the Pittsburgh Marathon.

 

 

Pittsburgh Marathon: One More Time

Well, I’m heading to the City of Champions this weekend to run the half marathon on Sunday. And I’m looking forward to the 13.1-mile self-directed tour of the city. I enjoy the crowds, noise and excitement.

I’m also thankful that I still have a good shot at doing this — and I guess just getting to the starting line is somewhat of an accomplishment given that two years ago I figured my long-distance running days were over because of a mutant nerve in my left foot.

The mutant nerve is still there. I’m reminded of it every time my foot hits the concrete. But hey. There are worse things. I could be locked in a room and be forced to watch repeats of the GOP debates. Just sayin’.

And I guess the long runs are a modest attempt to delay the realities of getting older — even as the runs become at more difficult and the times noticeably slower. [Note to self: No point wearing your running watch. It just adds unnecessary weight without serving any useful purpose.]

As a post-60 runner, I’m not alone. Here’s from the NYT:

Masters runners and, in particular, those 60 and older are the fastest-growing group in the sport, according to most statistics. A recent study of the New York City Marathon from 1980 to 2009, for example, found that “the percent of finishers younger than 40 years significantly decreased, while the percent of masters runners significantly increased for both males and females,” said Romuald Lepers, a professor of sports sciences at the University of Burgundy in France who, with his colleague Thomas Cattagni, conducted the study.

So I’ll be out there Sunday morning among the thousands of other runners for at least one more time.

And at around mile five we go past the Shamrock Inn on the North Side where my friend and college roommate Tom Kollar and I used to spend Sunday mornings years ago drinking beer and reviewing strategy prior to heading to Three Rivers Stadium (now defunct) for the Steelers game.

I’ll try to avoid the temptation to make a quick detour to the bar.

Holiday Eating: Fighting the Battle of the Bulge

Good grief. Will this long national nightmare currently being played out in Iowa ever be over? I spent 60 minutes chasing the treadmill belt this early a.m. and what I found out from the Talking Heads on CNN and Fox News was that Newt was down, Paul was up, and Santorum is climbing fast. And Romney, who most conservatives don’t like, will most likely win the GOP presidential nomination anyway.

As Michael Barone opines in the WSJ, “As Iowa Goes, So Goes Iowa.”

Anyway, I’ve got bigger fish to fry. As we near the end of the year, my running log shows that I’ve hit the concrete or treadmill belt for about 1,400 miles. Still, I’m gaining weight — which I attribute in part to a mutant thyroid and a fondness for Jameson over ice. And like many others, this time of the year is particularly challenging.

I’m a big believer in exercise. But I’m not so sure exercise along wins the battle of the bulge. Here’s from the NYT, “Curbing Holiday Weight Gain With Exercise“:

The next few months, filled with holiday feasting, represent a dire threat to most people’s waistlines. Even those of us who normally eat a wholesome diet can find ourselves gorging on fatty, high-calorie foods and gaining the annual Christmas inner tube. But several new studies promote a simple and effective response: Run or walk from the buffet. Even if you’ve already overindulged, the studies suggest, exercise can lessen or reverse the unwelcome consequences.

For the studies, Paul T. Williams, a staff scientist in the life sciences division at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, enlisted the help of more than 100,000 runners and, for a second study published last week in the journal Obesity, almost 40,000 walkers. He had each group fill out extensive questionnaires that asked about their running or walking history, including when they’d begun running more than 12 miles a week or walking at least half a mile most days of the week, as well as, for the runners, their current mileage, best race times, numbers of recent marathons, and so on. The questionnaire also asked about current and previous body weight: how much they had weighed when they started exercising, what they weighed now, their waist size and height. Finally, the volunteers were asked about eating habits, and specifically, how much red meat (beef, pork and lamb) they consumed each week and how many servings of fruit they ate each day.

“We used servings of meat and fruit as markers of the overall quality or type of the diet,” Dr. Williams says. People who frequently eat meat and rarely have fruit are more likely, over all, to be eating a fattier, higher-calorie and potentially less healthy diet, he says.

Certainly, in his new research, they weighed more. Among both the runners and walkers he studied, whether male or female and whatever their age, those who ate more meat and fewer servings of fruit tended to have a higher body mass index, an indicator of overall body fat, than those who ate less meat and more fruit. They had also gained significantly more weight over the years.

Unless they exercised diligently. The more someone walked or, even more strikingly, the more they ran, the less likely they were to have gained large amounts of weight, even if they ate what the study politely calls a “high-risk diet.” Runners who ticked off about five miles a day stayed relatively lean over the years, even if they regularly consumed a meaty and presumably high-fat diet. Most still had gained some pounds, according to their running and weight histories, but less than would have been expected, given their eating habits.

“Usually, B.M.I. and waist circumference increase if you eat more meat and less fruit,” Dr. Williams says. But his data indicate that exercise reduces this effect. The more miles run, the less a person is likely to be affected by questionable dietary choices or by what Dr. Williams calls “lapses, like those that happen during the holidays.”

These are hardly the first studies, of course, to suggest that exercise can help to control weight or reduce the depredations of an imperfect diet. A 15-year study of more than 30,000 middle-aged women by Harvard researchers found that while virtually all of the women gained weight over the years, those who walked about an hour a day gained the least, averaging less than five added pounds over the 15 years. The study did not examine eating patterns, though.

An interesting animal study published this year looked directly at the effects of exercise on rats eating a high-fat diet, however. The rats were given free access to fatty foods for 12 weeks, by which time they all had become rotund and developed metabolic syndrome, a constellation of unhealthy conditions that includes insulin resistance, poor cholesterol levels and high blood pressure. Then the researchers divided the animals into several groups, with some remaining on the high-fat diet but running every day, while others were switched to a standard kibble, and still others changed nothing. This new program also lasted 12 weeks.

By the end of that time, the rats that ran had managed to “reverse almost all the atherosclerotic risk factors linked to obesity,” the researchers found, even though they remained on the high-fat diet. They also had stopped gaining weight. The rats that had been switched to a standard diet but didn’t run improved their metabolic profiles, too, but not as much as the running rats. The researchers speculate that exercise activates certain metabolic pathways that undo the damage of a high-fat diet, even if that diet continues.

Dr. Williams suspects that similar mechanisms are at work in human exercisers, and that the effects are commensurately greater the more a person exercises. “It’s well established that endurance training enhances the body’s ability to burn fat” from foods, he says, so serious runners can incinerate the fat marbling a serving of beef before it is stored as flab around the waist. Which means that, if you work out dutifully, you should “get through the holidays without too many regrets,” he says.

Oh, well. I guess it could be worse. I could be chasing after voters in Iowa, munching on corn dogs and fried chicken.

Wonder how Ron Paul stays so thin doing that month after month?

 

 

Running and Aging: Many Seniors Still Have What It Takes

OK. I know there are big fish in the skillet these days: persistently high unemployment, the inability of the administration and Congress to accomplish anything, and reports that Iran is planning to assassinate foreign leaders here in the USA among them. And it looks like the NYC cops and public officials are running out of patience with the Occupy Wall Street folks. So watch for a media driven confrontation and protestors being hauled away in leg irons sometime soon.

But heck. We’re sliding into the weekend. So why not opine on something positive and inspiring?

Several of my friends are heading to Columbus this weekend to join some 17,000 other runners in the marathon or half marathon. Good for them. And good luck.

And I hate to admit this because I’ve concluded that my marathon running days are over, but many of the participants in Columbus and in New York in early November and in similar races will be my age or older. Good for them. And good luck.

Here’s from the NYT, “You’re Only as Old as You Run“:

A few years ago researchers at the German Sports University Cologne took a close look at the finishing times of 400,000 marathon and half-marathon runners between the ages of 20 and 79. They found no relevant differences in the finishing times of people between the ages of 20 and 50. The times for runners between 50 and 69 slowed only by 2.6 to 4.4 percent per decade. “Older athletes are able to maintain a high degree of physiological plasticity late into life,” the researchers wrote.

That might explain in part why the running world is growing, and growing older. The number of runners who finished marathons in the United States, where 7 of the world’s 15 largest races took place last year, increased to 507,000 in 2010 from 25,000 in 1976, according to RunningUSA , an organization that promotes the industry.

In 1980, the median age for a marathon runner was 34 for men and 31 for women. By last year, the age had risen to 40 for men and 35 for women. People over 40 now comprise 46 percent of finishers, up from 26 percent in 1980.

A year ago, following an extended vacation in Budapest and other locations in Europe, I figured my ability to keep running was pretty much kaput. The lliotibial band in my left leg was more rigid plastic than rubber. And every time I took a stride whether on concrete, crushed limestone or on the treadmill belt, I experienced the sensation of having a marble in my foot. Turns out it’s a degenerative nerve that ain’t getting any better.

But I’m still at it. I checked my running log last weekend and I’ve already topped 1,000 miles for the year — as we enter early fall. I had a great time running the half marathon in Pittsburgh in May, and I’ve already registered for 2012.

And who knows. Maybe next year I’ll head to Columbus in early October.

No point letting all the other old folks have all the fun.

 

 

Running and New Year’s Resolutions

Well, I never make New Year’s resolutions. Why set yourself up for disappointment so early in the year? But here are two things I’m planning on for 2011.

I’m planning on the new year being every bit as good — maybe better — than 2010. And I sure enjoyed this year, especially the six weeks Mary and I spent during August and September visiting Jessica and Gyorgyi in Budapest and Szeged — and then traveling to Italy, Austria and Slovenia, with a stop in Germany one day for lunch. Hey, maybe quasi-retirement isn’t so bad after all.

And I plan to continue running next year, although I’ve accepted the fact that my long-distance running days are over because of a nagging nerve problem in my left foot that makes it seem like I have a pebble in my shoe that I can’t get rid of. Put a pebble in your shoe and try running — or walking — five miles or so on concrete and you’ll get an idea of what I’m talking about. Sheesh.

I won’t tally up the miles in my log book until New Year’s Day. But I expect I’ll be around 800 for the year — disappointing since it will be only the second year in the last 25 or so when I didn’t run for a thousand or more miles. But not bad considering I didn’t run a inch during the six weeks we were in Europe.

But I learned during those weeks in Europe how much I missed being out on the concrete early a.m. — and it really came home to me while on a flight  from Budapest to Italy when I happened to be sitting next to a young woman athlete who had just competed in an international triathlon in Budapest. Listening to her talk about the experience, her love of training and competing, and her zest for life made me reconsider my decision to trade the running shoes and the concrete for the elliptical trainer.

And it made me think that I may be quasi-retired in the work world, but I have no intention of retiring from the things I really like or want to do these days or in the days to come.

Hey, what is it that Nike says: “Just Do It.”

And I am — pebble and all.

So I am looking forward to 2011.

Happy New Year!

And thank you for taking the time to visit here to read the daily musings of a pajama-clad citizen journalist.

I’ll be back in 2011.

Summer Vacations and Blog Posts

Well, I’ve pretty much taken a long summer vacation from posting anything on this blog. And that’s if you figure that summer somehow starts here in NE Ohio in February or March. Sigh.

Anyway, I last opined about LeBron James and how he was managing the news. You know — the decision. Ah, gee. That turned out well. Not. Hard to believe that LeBron could have handled that more unprofessionally. And hey.  I didn’t really care whether he stayed or left — save for the angst that it caused many here and elsewhere who did care.

So what have I been doing? Well, truth be told, not much. I like that expression: truth be told. Wonder how often it actually surfaces in the real world of politics, business and so on these days. I digress.

Mostly I’ve managed to embellish my months-old funk driven primarily by my inability to hit the concrete daily at 5 a.m. for my five-mile running tour of the neighborhood. The nerve problem in my foot just isn’t getting any better — and chasing the belt on the treadmill might elevate the heart rate but it sure doesn’t do much to raise the level of endorphins. Go figure.

So why not just do something else: walk, bike, swim, circle the earth on the elliptical? No good, or even remotely rational, answer to that other than I want to run. And apparently I’m not the only one that faces this kind of a dilemma — although some have greater success in resolving the issue.

Gina Kolata, writing in The New York Times — “When Repeat Injuries Can’t Dim an Athlete’s Passion” — looks at why it is often difficult for someone to give up a sport they enjoy, even in the face of injury or common sense. Here’s from the article:

At least one expert, recommended by the American College of Sports Medicine for this column, would say we stubborn athletes have a psychological problem.

Our behavior, said the expert, Dr. Jon L. Schriner, an osteopath at the Michigan Center for Athletic Medicine, is “compulsive”: we let our egos get in the way, persisting beyond all reason.

But another expert recommended by the college, David B. Coppel, a clinical and sports psychologist at the University of Washington, has another perspective. There are several reasons some people find it hard to switch sports, he told me. Often, their friends do that sport, too; it is how these people identify themselves, part of their social life. And then there is another, more elusive factor.

“There is something about the experience — be it figure skating or running or cycling — that really produces a pleasurable experience,” Dr. Coppel said. “That connection is probably not only at a psychological level but probably also something physiological that potentially makes it harder for these people to transition to other sports.”

A psychological problem? Compulsive? Say what?

Oh well. There is most likely some truth being told there, and like many, I’m going to have to take a hard look at sports alternatives as one way to get back to my normal routines, which includes posting more regularly here.

I’ll consider that tonight during Happy Hour — as the first double Jameson splashes over the ice.

Oops. What’s this article — also in The New York Times — “Why Getting Old Means Drinking Less“? Here’s from the article:

If you feel like you can’t drink the way you used to, you’re not alone. An aging body is more sensitive to alcohol than a younger one.

The National Institutes of Health’s Senior Health Web site today issued new warnings about alcohol and aging, reminding people 65 and older that even a few drinks can hit them harder than in their youth.

The reason is that older people metabolize alcohol more slowly, and they also have less water in their bodies. The result is that an adult who consumes just a few glasses of wine will have a higher percentage of alcohol in his or her blood than a younger person drinking the same thing. That’s why you may start feeling tipsy sooner after consuming alcohol, even if your drinking habits are the same as always.

Meh.

Running, Exercise and Health Care Reform

Well, today is off to a great start. I managed to get outside and hit the concrete at 5 a.m. for my five-mile running tour of the neighborhood. And that’s the first time for me running outside since late January. I’ll admit it. I miss the quiet, the ability to mull things over in my little brain, and the endorphin rush that builds on heart-pounding activity and fresh air.

Saying that, I recognize that I’ve reached the age where I have to make some changes to a routine that has been pretty compulsive set for 30 years. I worry now about slipping and falling — even in good weather. It’s increasingly difficult to get all the body parts working in frigid conditions. And I have a chronic foot injury that ain’t going away. So the reality is that I’m going to be spending more time indoors, chasing the belt on the treadmill and grinding away on the elliptical.

Does that really matter?

Well, in two words: yes and no.

Gina Kolata addressed this issue in her NYT Personal Best column, “Winter Training: Faster and Safer Indoors?“:

The sad answer, exercise researchers say, is that you really cannot get the same training effect with indoor substitutes. That’s not to say that indoor training is useless, but rather that it has real limitations, with differences that sometimes are subtle, but significant.

“I think most athletes know that,” said Peter R. Cavanagh, an exercise researcher at the University of Washington in Seattle. “That’s why they are out there in all seasons.”

The most obvious difference with indoor exercise is a lack of wind resistance, Dr. Cavanagh said.

So for those training for a marathon, you might find the transition from the flat surface of the treadmill to Heartbreak Hill a little difficult.

Still, there comes a point where even the elite athletes have to consider an alternative to being outdoors in potentially dangerous weather. From Kolata’s article:

Other athletes say that there comes a point when an indoor alternative is better than a workout in cold, icy weather. That’s what drove Brian Sell to buy a treadmill.

Mr. Sell, an elite marathoner who ran in the 2008 Beijing Olympics, trains in Rochester, Mich. He bought a treadmill four years ago, after he had fallen a few times on icy roads, injuring himself so badly he could not train at all while he healed.

“I probably fall at least once a year here in Michigan,” he said. “My injuries ranged from a bruised hip to a pulled groin. That time it took three weeks to get back. I said, ‘If I was doing this on the treadmill, I wouldn’t have missed three weeks of training.’ ”

Mr. Sell continued, “If it’s really icy out or if it’s negative 10 degrees and you are doing an easy six-miler, it probably makes a lot more sense to do it on a treadmill than to risk hurting anything.”

Mr. Sell — all I can say is woot. I’ve been fretting over this for a month and you’ve made me feel like less of a wimp. Oops. I digress.

Anyway, I read that NYT article about indoor training  last week and thought about it this morning as I pushed off on the concrete. For most of us, in the long run, does it really matter how we exercise? Nope. The key is to just keep moving — and as I get older, I’m convinced that is more and more important. Do something. Do it consistently. And hey, so something that you enjoy — for as long as you can.

And as evidence, consider this article in the NYT by Jane Brody, “Even More Reasons to Get a Move on“:

In a commentary on the new studies, published Jan. 25 in The Archives of Internal Medicine, two geriatricians, Dr. Marco Pahor of the University of Florida and Dr. Jeff Williamson of Winston-Salem, N.C., pointed to “the power of higher levels of physical activity to aid in the prevention of late-life disability owing to either cognitive impairment or physical impairment, separately or together.”

“Physical inactivity,” they wrote, “is one of the strongest predictors of unsuccessful aging for older adults and is perhaps the root cause of many unnecessary and premature admissions to long-term care.”

They noted that it had long been “well established that higher quantities of physical activity have beneficial effects on numerous age-related conditions such as osteoarthritis, falls and hip fracture, cardiovascular disease, respiratory diseases, cancer, diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis, low fitness and obesity, and decreased functional capacity.”

Prez O and members of Congress appear to be nearing the finish line on some form of health care reform. And I’ll admit that I would be hard pressed to opine with any certainty on what the latest proposal(s) contain — despite the millions of words that have been written and spoken on the subject.

So I wonder if the reform measures take into account the benefits of exercise — and what effect keeping people out of the health care system could have on costs, access, treatment and so on.

If they don’t, we’re missing an opportunity. Exercise, whether indoor or out, matters to all of us.

Are We Really Becoming Digital Zombies?

Decisions. Decisions. At 5 a.m. this morning I had a decision to make. I could run outside in the cold drizzle of a dark NE Ohio mid-December morning. Or I could head to the fitness center and chase the belt on the treadmill while soaking in the sights and sounds of the morning TV shows. I hit the concrete.

And one reason is that I treasure the time alone and off the grid. I relish not being plugged into audio and video, not tethered to my BlackBerry, and not squirming over the most recent e-mail that demands my immediate attention and reply. It’s both exhilarating and calming to be enveloped in silence. I expect many don’t agree.

Before embarking on my self-propelled tour of the neighborhood, I read an interesting Washington Post online article by Adrian Higgins, “We can’t see the forest for the T-Mobiles.”  Here’s from the article:

Technology has drawn us into our interconnected webs, in the office, on the street, on the park bench, to the point that we exist virtually everywhere except in the physical world. Robert Harrison, a professor of Italian literature at Stanford University, laments that when students pass through the school’s visually stimulating campus, iPhones, BlackBerrys and all the evolving devices and apps draw them into their blinkered personal realms. “Most of the groves, courtyards, gardens, fountains, artworks, open spaces and architectural complexes have disappeared behind a cloaking device, it would seem,” he writes in his book “Gardens: An Essay on the Human Condition.”

This retreat from the natural world is most evident in the young, but it is not a generational phenomenon, he argues. Instead, the ubiquity of the computer is changing the very essence of the human animal. We are in the midst of a historical change in “our mode of vision,” he says, “which is bound up with our mode of being.”

And then Higgins opines: “We have become digital zombies.”

Ouch. But you know what — she has a point. I don’t get out in the real world all that much these days, but when I do — in a restaurant or at the airport — it’s striking how many people are engaged not with each other, but with their magic phones texting, e-mailing, surfing the Web, talking and so on.

And that must be true virtually everywhere — at home, work, on vacation and among all age groups.

A recent NYT article by Nick Bilton says that “the average American consumes about 34 gigabytes of data and information each day.” (Note to self: No wonder it is so difficult for any organization to communicate effectively — on just about any subject to anyone. Go figure.)  Here’s from the article:

According to calculations in the report (by researchers at the University of California, San Diego), that daily information diet includes about 100,000 words, both those read in print and on the Web as well as those heard on television and the radio. By comparison, Tolstoy’s “War and Peace” contains about 460,000 words.

The researchers, who built their work on previous studies of information consumption, found that Americans take in data through various channels, including the television, radio, the Web, text messages and video games. Most of this time is spent in front of screens watching TV-related content, averaging nearly five hours of daily consumption.

Second is radio, which the average American listens to for about 2.2 hours a day. The computer comes in third, at just under two hours a day. Video games take up about an hour, and reading takes up 36 minutes.

Most of these experiences happen simultaneously, like talking on the phone while checking e-mail, or instant messaging while watching TV.

I’m going to stick to running — unplugged — for as long as I can.

Even a digital zombie like me deserves a safe haven. You deserve one too.