Long Distance Running vs. Interval Training: A Review of the Literature

If you were given 50% odds that you would suffer an injury using a certain exercise, would you still use that exercise? That is the likelihood of injury associated with recreational long-distance running. Yet, many people still choose long slow distance running as their primary form of aerobic conditioning. It is undeniable that long distance running has profound cardiovascular health benefits; however, it also comes with a heightened risk of musculoskeletal injury. One study identified a 37-56% chance of sustaining a running related injury in recreational runners who consistently trained for distances greater than 3,000 meters (8). Essentially, 1 in 2 recreational runners who train for long distances will suffer some type of injury. This number is staggering, and it makes you wonder why so many people still use this method for improving aerobic capacity.

The popularity of long distance running can be linked back to the 60’s when jogging was introduced to the U.S. as an effective form of aerobic exercise (4). Below is an interesting video that goes more in depth on the history of jogging and how it gained world-wide popularity:

The high incidence of injury associated with long distance running makes you question the application of it as a training tool. Pair this with the growing evidence that high intensity interval training (HIIT) has been shown to be just as effective if not more; it is hard to justify using long slow distance running as a training modality. It is indisputable that aerobic capacity is beneficial for health and important for athletic performance; however, the idea that steady state exercise, such as long distance running or jogging, is the optimal way to train the aerobic system is outdated. In fact, aside from how inefficient long distance running can be, there is also a large risk of injury associated with it.

In my opinion, there are two big downsides to long distance running. The first major downside being the high likelihood of injury associated with it. It is no wonder there are high injury rates with long distance running when you consider the nature of it. On average, running an 8-minute mile exposes you to about 700 ground contacts per foot (10). Seeing as most people who partake in long distance running typically run more than one mile, you can do the math on how many ground contacts they may experience. Many people who also run these long distances enter their training with little preparation and haven’t built up the required level of fitness to withstand the high volume of forces experienced during long distance running. When you add to this the fact that each ground contact puts a considerable amount of force and strain on the muscles and tendons of the lower leg, you can see how stressful long distance running can be on the body. Interestingly enough, the forces exerted on the muscles and tendons of the lower leg don’t seem to exponentially increase as you progress from a slow jog to a fast run and eventually to a sprint (12). In fact, the forces seem to level off as you approach sprinting speeds, with the difference in forces between a fast run and sprint being much smaller than between a slow run and a fast run (12). All of this is backed up by research looking at the injury rates in runners. As mentioned before, the injury rates in recreational runners who train consistently range from 37% to 56% (8). It has also been shown through research that high mileage and faster performances are both predictors of injury in long distance runners (5). One study found that running greater than 40 miles per week was a reliable predictor of injury in long distance runners (5). That same study also claimed that individual biomechanics may play a role in injury rates and that some people may not be built to handle running long distances well (5). It is no surprise that the majority of injuries associated with long distance running are with the knee, lower leg, foot, and thigh (5). Anecdotally, anyone who knows a runner has probably heard them complain about their shin splints and, unsurprisingly, tibial stress syndrome (more commonly known as shin splints) along with Achilles tendinopathy, tibial stress fractures and calf strains/tears seem to be the most common injuries in runners (5). Many people choose running as a way to get fit but seeing how stressful long distance running can be on the body, this is not a good strategy. Diane Lee, a Canadian physical therapist, states that, “you can’t run to get fit, you need to be fit to run.” There is no clearer evidence of this than the injury rates associated with long distance running. Preventing these types of injuries may even be a challenge in individuals that already have a good training base. One review found that there was not much evidence to support the effectiveness of stretching and/or conditioning as preventative measures for reducing the likelihood of lower limb injuries in runners (15). They concluded that the evidence for interventions to reduce lower limb pain and injury after intense running was weak (15). All of this points to the fact that picking up long distance running as a way to get in shape may be a bad idea. There is no guarantee that you will get injured if you do it, but the history of injuries associated with long distance running make you question its necessity. Obviously aerobic conditioning is important, but many people assume the only way to train this energy system is through long slow steady state exercise, with long distance running being a popular form. But this is not the case.

You can’t run to get fit, you need to be fit to run! - Diane Lee

HIIT is a form of conditioning that utilizes near maximal or maximal efforts to stimulate an aerobic and anaerobic training effect. Unlike long distance running or other steady state exercise, HIIT uses non-continuous exercise with a set work period and a set rest period. For example, a typical HIIT protocol might include a 30-second high intensity shuttle run followed by a 60 second rest period for 6 rounds. There is a lot of room to get creative with how you set up your intervals, but the main components of HIIT are that the work periods should be performed at a near-maximal level of effort and there should be slightly incomplete rest between reps or sets.

I’ve identified five factors that, in my opinion, make HIIT a superior form of conditioning than long distance and steady state “cardio”:

1) Time efficiency

In my opinion, the time saved using HIIT over long distance running is its biggest selling point. It has been shown that as few as 6 sessions of HIIT over the course of two weeks, for a total of about 15 minutes of highly intense work, can change multiple metabolic markers associated with improved performance in aerobic-based exercise (13). This is remarkable when considering that most people who use long distance running spend much more than 15 minutes running over 2 weeks of training. Other studies have looked directly at the differences in aerobic conditioning between HIIT and steady state exercise. Gabala et. al. (2006), found that 20 minutes of interval training (30 seconds of work with 4 minutes of rest) was just as effective as 90-120 minutes of steady state exercise in terms of their respective effect on oxygen utilization (7). Both training protocols resulted in improvements in aerobic capacity, but the steady state group trained for 4.5-6 hours per week versus only 1 hour per week in the interval group (7). Clearly the interval training was more efficient in producing the desired training effects. Other research confirms the findings of the previously mentioned study. Kelly et. al. (2018), looked at the difference between traditional steady state endurance running versus a short interval training approach (11). The study was run over the course of 2 weeks with 3 sessions per week. Subjects were split into one of two groups. The first group was an endurance group that used 50 minutes of continuous treadmill running at a moderate intensity as their training intervention. The second group used 3 sets of 3x110yd runs with 20 seconds of rest between reps and 5 minutes of rest between sets. The intervals also included multi-directional movement with subjects being required to sprint and backpedal as well as change direction. Both groups showed improvements in certain markers of aerobic capacity; however, the interval group showed greater improvements in a number of areas including high-intensity endurance capacity (11). That last point is crucial. With a smaller amount of total work done, the interval group proved to be just as effective, if not more, at improving aerobic endurance and higher intensity endurance exercise. Using a training protocol that is more time-efficient will allow you to spend the extra time training other things or focusing your efforts on recovery. On top of this, you have a much lower risk of injury just for the simple fact that you are engaged in the activity for less time, which leads me to the next major benefit of HIIT.

2) Reduced risk of injury with greater health benefits

We have already gone through extensive detail as to the injury risks associated with long distance running. A lot of these risks are due to the highly repetitive nature of running for hours on end. This risk is reduced with HIIT as you are exposed to much fewer foot contacts in 20 minutes of HIIT versus 1 hour of steady state running. This is not to say that sprinting or high intensity exercise doesn’t come with any injury risk, but whatever risk that exists is much lower than that of long distance running.

One of the other reasons people choose long distance running is for its proven benefits on cardiovascular health. This is one of the biggest benefits of steady state exercise; however, HIIT has these same benefits and more. There is evidence that HIIT could possibly help prevent the onset of cardiovascular disease (13). On top of this, it has also been shown to reduce the risk factors associate with metabolic syndrome (a number of conditions including heart disease and diabetes) as well as optimizing one’s ability to meet the demands of daily life (8,13). This has lots of health implications for the general population, not just athletes. Studies have confirmed that HIIT can be beneficial for a wide range of age and ability levels, including seniors (6,9). That being said, some adjustments and considerations might need to be made for elderly individuals and people at higher risk for heart disease. This will be discussed in more detail later.

Another reason many people pick-up long-distance running is to lose weight or lose fat more specifically. While this may be possible using long distance running, HIIT has been shown to be more effective for losing weight (6,13). Furthermore, if you are overweight your risk of injury is even greater when running. The extra weight will only increase the forces through your lower extremities during exercise. It would be wise to use an endurance activity that doesn’t require a high amount of weight bearing volume.

3) Aerobic AND anaerobic training effect

One additional benefit of HIIT is that you can improve anaerobic conditioning on top of aerobic conditioning. Anaerobic metabolism refers to the processes our body uses to create energy for muscles to use that don’t require oxygen. This is the energy system that is most important during shorter but more intense efforts (sprints/continuous efforts under 60-90 seconds long). Since most sports include stop and go action with short bursts of energy needed, anaerobic conditioning is hugely important. Unlike HIIT, moderate intensity aerobic training such as long distance running, does not improve anaerobic performance (14). HIIT has been shown to be able to improve both anaerobic and aerobic conditioning, offering a better training stimulus than long distance running when it comes to training for sport (14). Furthermore, based off how you set up your intervals and rest times, you can adjust HIIT to target a greater aerobic or anaerobic demand. One study compared the effects of 3 different shuttle run training methods on aerobic and anaerobic performance with athletes (2). There was a short interval group that ran intervals of 10 seconds with 10 seconds of rest; a long interval group that ran continuous shuttles for 4 minutes at a time; and a continuous group that ran the same shuttle continuously for 35 minutes at a steady state. The study found that the two interval groups improved both aerobic and anaerobic performance with the length of the interval dictating which adaptation was greater (the shorter intervals had a larger impact on anaerobic performance and the longer intervals had a larger impact on aerobic performance) (2). That same study did not find a significant change in the aerobic performance within the group that did the continuous shuttle protocol (2). This may be attributed to the fact that the subjects in the study were all trained athletes and the continuous protocol may not have had a big enough training effect to cause further adaptation above their current state. Regardless, it is clear that HIIT has additional benefits to anaerobic performance that cannot be claimed by long distance running and steady state exercise.

4) Sport specific

Similar to the last point that was made, the nature of HIIT is much more comparable to what is actually required in sport. There are few, if any, sports outside of cross country or long distance track and field that require a sustained effort for a prolonged time at a steady state of exercise. Most sports require stop and go efforts with periods of high intensity followed by periods of lower intensity or rest. For example, in a typical NCAA basketball game, action is only sustained for about 30 seconds before a period of rest or lower intensity (3). Football has even shorter periods of actual work when compared to down time and baseball has even shorter periods of action than football. A shift in hockey is generally around 40 seconds long, followed by a period of rest. You can see how interval training mimics the actual requirements of sport better than long distance running or steady state exercise. Pair this with the fact that you can also work on skills like change of direction and multi-directional movement (backpedaling, shuffling, etc.) when using HIIT.

5) More engaging and challenging in a team or group setting

This last point may not be true for everyone; however, in my experience, people tend to find HIIT more engaging than steady state exercise. This has even been backed up by research showing that people claimed interval training to have a higher perceived level of enjoyment than continuous running (1). The higher perceived level of effort during bouts of exercise during HIIT my appeal to people that find long distance running boring and tedious. In a group setting, HIIT can also be a fun and competitive way to work on aerobic and anaerobic conditioning.

---

Before you start including HIIT in your training, there are a couple things to take into consideration. Just like with all exercise, there should be a progression of intensity and volume so that you are not just crushing yourself right off the bat. One of the goals with HIIT should be to build up the total volume of work slowly and gradually so as to prevent the likelihood of injury and over training. Now, both of these things are highly unlikely if you are smart with how you plan your training. If you already have a descent level of fitness, jumping straight into interval training, whether it be sprint intervals or circuit style training, won’t really be an issue. For people that are brand new to it or may have a low overall fitness level, here are a couple tips to get you started:

1) Start with slower and longer work intervals with longer rest

Using a work to rest ratio somewhere in the 1:2 or 1:4 realm seems to be a good place to start off for anyone who has never performed HIIT before. This means that if you were to do an interval consisting of a 1-minute run, the rest should be anywhere from 2 to 4 minutes long. Early on, the intervals should be at a lower intensity (still higher than a traditional long-distance run) so as to gradually build up. I try to keep intervals in the 15 second to 5-minute range. The longer the interval, the higher the intensity. As you go, you can shorten the interval time, increase the intensity, and shorten the rest intervals; however, make these changes gradually.

2) Try lower impact exercise first

This point rings true mostly for elderly and overweight individuals, however, it is not a bad piece of advice for anyone who has been living a sedentary lifestyle. Doing HIIT with exercise bikes, ellipticals, stair climbers, battle ropes, and circuit style workouts can be an effective way to introduce HIIT into your workouts. By avoiding the higher impacts associated with running, you can build some work capacity that will eventually allow your body to be able to handle the higher stresses of running.

3) Make small increases week to week

As mentioned in the first point, keep the increases in volume and intensity from week to week gradual. Only increase the intensity of the exercise or the volume of it and try to avoid increasing both at the same time. The general rule of thumb is to not increase volume or intensity by more than 10% week to week.

Now, there are a lot of people who enjoy long distance running, and this is perfectly fine. It is just important to understand the potential injury risks associated with it. For anyone who loves to run and doesn’t want to cut that out of their workouts, here are a couple of my recommendations to hopefully prevent any overuse injuries:

1) Lift weights!

When people think of long-distance runners, they don’t typically also think of weight training. Despite this, I think there are a handful of benefits that lifting weights can have when it comes to long distance running. Even if you are just running recreationally, mixing in some weight training can have an impact and hopefully keep you healthy. There is research showing the effectiveness of exercise and stretching interventions on injury reduction in runners to be weak (15). However, if you pair weight training with the following recommendations, I believe you will set yourself up to avoid overuse injuries. Weight training is important for building tissue (tendons, muscle, bones and other connective tissue) durability and resiliency. Your body adapts to the stresses of weight training by building tougher, thicker and more durable bones, muscles and tendons. This alone may help prevent injury as your body is capable of redistributing and handling a greater volume of force and load. Weight training can also be used to help eliminate any strength deficits that may be leading to poor running mechanics. For example, training the glutes and hamstrings in the weight room might allow for you to use them more effectively when running and take stress of the quads and knees. This is just one example, but many different areas of weakness that may be associated with injury in runners can be addressed in the weight room (i.e. foot and ankle strength, knee strength, pelvic control, etc.).

2) Give time to recover between workouts and keep total mileage to under 40 per week

There has been research to show high weekly mileage to be a predictor of lower extremity injury in runners, with one study identifying runners who log more than 40 miles in a week to be at a greater risk of injury (5). Because this may limit the total amount of volume you are able to train, you can try using some of the other means suggested in this article as additional aerobic training. The body needs time to recover and repair after exercise, so if you are running 10 miles every day you might not be allowing your body to fully recover from all the repetitive stress from the previous workout.

3) Take recovery seriously

This last point goes for any type of training that you do, but it bears repeating. When it comes to recovery, the two biggest factors with the largest impact are nutrition and sleep. Making sure these two areas of recovery are on point is critical to helping reduce your chance of injury. This means eating enough of the right foods, drinking enough water, and getting enough quality sleep to allow your body to repair itself between bouts of exercise.

---

Thank you for taking the time to read this! Please leave a comment or share this post if you found it at all helpful or interesting, I would love to hear your thoughts. You can follow me on Instagram @510strength or subscribe to my mailing list (here) to stay up to date with more content and information.

---

References

1) Bartlett, J.D., Close, G.L., MacLaren, D.P., Gregson, W., Drust, B. & Morton, J.P. (2011). High-

intensity interval running is perceived to be more enjoyable than moderate-intensity continuous exercise: Implications for exercise adherence. Journal of Sports Sciences, 29(6), 547-553

2) Cavar, M., Marsic, T., Corluka, M., Culjak, Z., Zovko, I.C., Muller, A., Tschakert, G. & Hofmann, P. (2019). Effects of 6 weeks of different high-intensity interval and moderate continuous training on aerobic and anaerobic performance. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 33(1), 44-56

3) Conte, D., Tessitore, A., Smiley, K., Thomas, C. & Favero, T.G. (2016). Performance profile of NCAA Division I men’s basketball games and training sessions. Biology of Sport, 33(2), 189-194

4) Edwards, P. (2015, August). When running for exercise was for weirdos. https://www.vox.com/2015/8/9/9115981/running-jogging-history

5) Gallo, R.A., Plakke, M. & Silvis M.L. (2012). Common leg injuries of long-distance runners: Anatomical and biomechanical approach. Sports Health, 4(8), 486-496

6) Garcia-Pinillos, F., Laredo-Aguilera, J.A., Munoz-Jimenez, M. & Latorre-Ramon, P.A. (2019). Effects of 12-week concurrent high-intensity interval strength and endurance training program on physical performance in healthy older people. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 33(5), 1445-1452

7) Gibala, M.J., Little, J.P., van Essen, M., Wilkin, G.P., Burgomaster, K.A., Safder, A., Raha, S. & Tarnopolsky, M.A. (2006). Short-term sprint interval versus traditional endurance training: Similar initial adaptations in human skeletal muscle and exercise performance. The Journal of Physiology, 15(575), 901-911

8) Greeley, S.J., Martinez, N. & Campbell, B.I. (2013). The impact of high-intensity interval training on metabolic syndrome. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 35(2), 63-65

9) Harrison, J.S. (2017). Interval training for the senior population. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 39(1), 81-84

10) Hoeger, W.W.K., Bond, L., Ransdell, L., Shimon, J.M. & Merugu, S. (2008). One-mile step count at walking and running speeds. ACSM’s Health & Fitness Journal, 12(1), 14-19

11) Kelly, D.T., Tobin, C., Egan, B., McCarren, A., O’Connor, P.L., McCaffrey, N. & Moyna, N.M. (2018). Comparison of sprint interval and endurance training in team sport athletes. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 22(11), 3051-3058

12) Schache, A.G., Dorn, T.W., Williams, G.P., Brown, N.A.T. & Pandy, M.G. (2014). Lower-limb muscular strategies for increasing running speed. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 44(10), 813-824

13) Schoenfeld, B. & Dawes, J. (2009). High-intensity interval training: Applications for general fitness training. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 31(6), 44-46

14) Tabata, I., Nishimura, K., Kouzaki, M., Hirai, Y., Ogita, F., Miyachi, M. & Yamamoto, K. (1996). Effects of moderate-intensity endurance and high-intensity intermittent training on anaerobic capacity and VO2max. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 28(10), 1327-1330

15) Yeung, S.S., Yeung, E.W. & Gillespie, L.D. (2011). Interventions for preventing lower limb soft-tissue running injuries. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 6(7)