Well I mean its not terrible pain, I've been doing these classes twice a week for 6 months and just the last month or so I can feel my back ache after about 10 min or so on the treadmill.

I haven't taken an orange theory class yet. But I would guess there is a lot of random clicking going on. My guess its the rowing combined with some other stuff that's causing lower back pain.

Running for most is probably good for your back. Tall and relaxed is good form, which Is the opposite of sitting, staring at the computer. I am also part of running forums and Facebook groups, never seen a hit for running and lower back pain. Running problems are always Achilles, shin splints, knee, and hip (ITB band).

For cross training I like minimalist running shoes, like Merrell. Cross trainers are too bulky. And road running shoes are not only bulky but too soft.

I never have any back issues with free-weights or rowing, the back problems seem to come after about 5-10 minutes on the treadmill. We usually spend 20~ minutes of every hour class running.

But my current game plan is just to stretch/foam-roll more often at home in my hips/knees/hip-flexors/legs and get a new pair of shoes(possibly my old worn out shoes are causing the back issues?).

I just looked up orange theory. It's like CrossFit but more rowing and running. I guess a lot of their workouts are based on the afterburn.

One problem. The only research that has shown the afterburn is significant, was lifting weights. And not some orange theory bodyweight bullshiet. It was squats and cleans at 75% 1RM with short rest.

So, pass on orange theory. Workouts seem tough, sustainability probably weak. I need to go to one though. I want to retire and open up a gym, so need to scout the competition. They are doing something to keep growing so fast. And I don't think it's solving obesity and making exercise a habit for life. But I could be wrong. One way to find out is by how many ripped people they are producing. If it's all skinnyfats and fatties, then yeah they quit and keep paying without showing up.

Are there any hotties at your orange theory classes? What if you compare to a yoga class? I've seen plenty of hotties in yoga classes.

Yea the average class consists of 2/3 being 20-35 yr old females, but personally I just wanted to try something different for a while, this gym is a 2min walk from where I live, I have enjoyed it so far.

I'm not expecting mass gains, or to be an elite athlete, just to be in reasonable shape, i'm 32 6'4'' 195 now leaning towards the skinny-fat category as you mentioned earlier.

But back to the original question, do you think it matters what type of shoes I were to get? From reading a bit on reddit, most people mention that your average cross trainer is ok for free-weights but not running (where my back problems come from). Perhaps I should just switch shoes for running and non-running?

My girlfriend got me cross trainers. I couldn't imagine running in them. They are great for squatting and deadlifting, though.

A lot of the orange theory lifting is fancy play crap. Deadlift to row for 15 reps. Squat to hammer curl for 15 reps. Jump squats. Etc etc.

CrossFit actually has heavy squats and deadlifts. That's why the cross trainer was invented.

I personally would go with Merrell or Vibrams, for real cross training. You might like Nike free.

But since your lifting is mostly fake, any running shoe should mostly be fine. If you want to nit it up, don't get much padding. For example, vapoflys have a carbon plate with a whole bunch of rubbery padding that bounces back off the floor. It feels like running on a pogo stick. That would be the worst shoe possible for lifting.

They want to unify it across the board obviously but they don't have the data yet apparently.

Nah, just "Why open yourself up to more appeals than you have to?"

https://deadspin.com/the-only-point-...s-i-1825546141

I think there should be 1 division. Men and women included. And all contestants are allowed to take whatever drugs they want. Free for all baby!

I haven't posted ITT in six months and am still #2 poster. WIM.

Hey there,

After a long time to sit and reflect, I just wanted to briefly come back to this.

I don’t think we were ever on the same page about this. I can appreciate if you would prefer to limit the discussion to finding an objective definition for abuse, but for me, the discussion is broader than that.

I was discussing the abusive impact on people, not whether it fits an objective definition we can apply that’s distinct from whether those actions actually hurt anyone. The people who "get to decide" how someone's actions affect them are the people affected and no one else.

I’m perfectly fine saying “harmful” impact if you prefer.

It’s of course up to each person whether a person’s actions having a harmful impact, including their own, is something they want to grapple with. Or if it’s something that means nothing to them, or they blame the person they harmed for overreacting, or they say yeah you're hurt but I don't think your feelings are justified so that harm means nothing to me…you know.

We can discuss why someone was hurt and whether their explanation holds up, but to say they weren't hurt is to live in denial.

In my view, no one is inherently responsible for another person’s feelings, but the circumstances when (if ever) a person chooses to take responsibility for the IMPACT of their actions, particularly how their actions impact the people they purport to care about, speaks volumes to their character.

For me, I look beyond my intent and grapple with the impact of my choices. It isn't enough for me to be a good person who never intends to hurt anyone. Sometimes the hardest thing to look at is the harmful impact of my choices despite my best intentions.

I don’t claim this is easy to parse. There are situations where I would not accept responsibility for how I affected someone. For example, calling out racist behavior with a racist impact pretty much always offends the people doing those things, because most people define racism as hateful, and very few people are racist because they INTEND harm, so of course they reject the label and are are offended to have their racist behavior called out as racist. Do I take responsibility for offending them? Is that something to avoid? No. Absolutely not. But I’d hope I retain the capacity at least for compassion and grace toward them.

Well that's a lot of thoughts, and admittedly, not all of them are in response to you or anyone else. I've just been thinking a lot about the topic in general. I am the sort who unfortunately has an overdeveloped sense of responsibility, and I will take responsibility for things I had nothing to do with. So I don't have any ill will toward anyone who is grappling with the same questions and has different answers. We all have to decide for ourselves how to find a balance between what is right and healthy to take responsibility for VS what we just have to let go of.

Anyway, aside from one last post in my log, this is my last post here. I like a lot of people in H&F, but this is not the right community for me. I sometimes fit in, but I don't belong here. Brene Brown says that the opposite of belonging isn't rejection, it's fitting in. I finally understand the difference.

But more than that, 2+2 in general is not the right community for me. The site owners and administrators are not just harmful but unquestionably abusive, and the people who are fine enabling them are just as dangerous. Bigotry is often civil, but standing up against it often isn't, and they want civility at the cost of kindness. I’m not comfortable knowing any further posts from me will contribute even a fraction of a cent of ad revenue to 2+2's pockets.

Obviously it's up to each person to decide where the line is. I still drive a car, I still occasionally eat at Chick-fil-A. So I get it if even people who agree with me decide it's fine to keep posting here. The rest, agree to disagree. You're still my bros and bro-ettes.

I’m grateful more than you know to everyone who helped me make it this far. If we're not already connected beyond 2+2 and you want to stay in touch, send me a PM. I'll come back sometime and check. To the rest of you, thank you, and good luck.

Best of luck fakeb. Keep at it.

I don't understand so forgive me. Even last time we met up in real life, I didn't understand much of what you were saying.

I am into health and fitness. Being happy. And trying to save some money for retirement.

Everything else doesn't make sense to me. I try to empathize and I just don't see it. But I think about you sometimes and I hope everything turns out fantastic for you. Don't turn into a dadbod, I will come looking for you in Colorado.

Best of luck Bustorhymes

2+2 leadership is definitely deplorable and I have no problems not...giving them revenue.

The new exiled politics forum might be an alternative, even for H&F-related stuff, in the future if you're so inclined. Kelhus obviously not included.

http://exiledpolitics.freeforums.net/

(2+2 admins condone links to the new forum so shouldn't be an issue, and our own dear leader posts there himself!)

Best of luck Busto, your unique perspective will be missed by me at least.

AB posts there?

+1 to missing fakeb's contributions here.

Have seen worse agendas.

Now a noble heart is breaking holding his nose as he jumps in the water. Good night, sweet prince. May hosts of angels sing you to sleep.

He's not dying my dude!

Soulman,
We are all dying. Except for maybe our kids if they run good. Or bad. DUCY?

So let's get back to 2p2 owners are bigots? Que? I don't wander outside of h&f and the #floorbeer edf thread for the most part. Oh and STTF and MSNL 2005-2007 or something. Fun community at that time imo. Now? Eh. What else are you gonna do tho. Just write K all day? K.

I love the memory of poker.

+1 to enjoying/missing busto’s posts. I only lurked your log for the past week or so (was bumped after no posts for a while) but I got a lot out of reading it, and it’s clear that your posting brought out great & thoughtful posts from other H&F folks.

Good luck

Mason is a Republican and posted some Milton Friedman videos. Matt Sklansky dissolved the Politics forum because he disapproved of the ethos of uniformity, exclusivity, and intolerance in the name of diversity, inclusivity and tolerance. David Sklansky had the temerity to suggest that it might be counterproductive to label people racists who were likely motivated by other factors, among many other intolerable thought crimes.

If you can't see the intense bigotry of such actions, it is probably time to turn in your woke card.

K.

Kelhus,

I'm glad that we agree that we need to exile these kinda weird fascists.

All part of the politics drama in ATF/in the ex-politics forum. Cliffs: Mat decided to tone police and shut down the forum because one of the users called Huckabee fat and ugly. Then backtracked and said he didn't want the politics forum anyway, go away. Then backtracked again and said ok, but only if the guy I like (who is k in my book too for the record) can be a mod and all the ultra deplorables are let back in (not k).

#coolstarry