11 comments

  • rezmason19 hours ago
    He succeeded! He arrived on Sunday.

    https://therunningchannel.com/deo-kato-completes-run-from-ca...

    Does anyone know how he ran from continental Europe to England?

  • cjbayliss1 day ago
    Having to deal with police four times a day on average on the part of the journey through Croatia is insane. I’d have given up and flown to the next country.
    • alwa23 hours ago
      It’s pretty wild, although if I were Mr. Kato I might be somewhat more grumpy about being jailed for 3 weeks in South Sudan, apparently on the authorities’ opinion that their immigration laws required ministry approval for his run [0].

      I have to say I don’t find myself too surprised that anybody non-local doing extreme-long-distance running through insular Croatian towns might arouse the interest of the local constabularies—and I imagine the runner being a Ugandan guy would be an especially surprising sight to people in Croatia (91% Croat, 3.2% Serb, officially recognize 22 other ethnic minorities, none of them from Africa) [1]. Which I suppose is the point he was trying to raise.

      What an astonishing extreme of human endeavor.

      [0] https://archive.is/4T13g [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Croatia#:~:t...

      • aprilthird202123 hours ago
        > I have to say I don’t find myself too surprised that anybody doing extreme-long-distance running through insular Croatian towns might arouse the interest of the local constabularies

        I don't live in Europe, but just help me out, why call the cops on a guy running down the road, in running gear, even if he's an ethnicity you rarely ever see?

        • lpapez14 hours ago
          Most of the comments here are missing the mark IMO.

          The primary reason why he got so much police harassment is because Croatia is a EU Schengen border country, the patrols here are much stricter than everywhere else, and the associated problems are much worse as well.

          I don't think it's entirely due to racism - if you were a border policeman, and you are tasked with bringing in people illegaly entering the country, what would you do seeing a person of color running on back roads near the border of an otherwise extremely ethnically homogenous country?

          For every case of someone who entered legally and got harassed, they probably bring in thousands of people which they are supposed to bring in (ie. entered ilegally).

          • jdietrich12 hours ago
            If you're travelling through sensitive border regions, attracting unwanted attention is unfortunately an occupational hazard.

            https://www.ndtv.com/offbeat/indy-nelson-man-who-visited-eve...

            https://www.pap.pl/en/news/pole-wrongly-sentenced-life-congo...

            • immibis10 hours ago
              [flagged]
              • dahart9 hours ago
                > Saying that you can’t come into Europe because you’re African is still racism.

                Are you suggesting no countries in the world should have any border control?

                You weren’t born here and don’t pay taxes here is pretty different from you’re African, right? So why do you say racism and not discrimination? Why do you say African and not non-European? Phrasing Europe’s border policy as racism against Africans is misleading and escalating, rather than edifying.

                Let’s fix that: Saying that you can’t come into Europe because you’re not a European resident is discrimination based on country of residency that could look like racial discrimination if you’re not careful.

                In as much as, ahem, some government policies actually are racist, it’s true that border policy does discriminate based on country of residence, but this is not necessarily racist. Europe is not necessarily discriminating against Africans, it’s discriminating all non-Europeans, including China, Russia, America, the Middle East, etc., right?

                When people say racism it is often (usually?) referring to beliefs about other races being inferior in some way, or hate for other races. Racism typically means prejudice and antagonism combined with discrimination. Discrimination on its own without judgement may be necessary, and doesn’t mean there is any animosity or value judgements being made based on someone’s race.

                • kmeisthax8 hours ago
                  To summarize / strawman, "Europe isn't racist, it's xenophobic, get it right!"

                  And to be clear, that's not wrong, but it's also a distinction without a difference. People will still feel discriminated against even if the source of that discrimination is different from what they named.

                  • dahart7 hours ago
                    All countries have border policy including yours, this isn’t about Europe, or about Africa. Why do you assume border policy is xenophobia, and not, say, logistics and resource and tax management? Why would you jump to a conclusion this has more to do with race than with money or stopping crime?
              • FredPret10 hours ago
                It’s not racist and you know that. They also would not want a white person without authorization.

                Also, in your border-free dreamworld, how far does this go? Can anyone / everyone in the world come live in your country? How about your city? How about your backyard?

                • jstanley9 hours ago
                  Country yes, city yes, backyard no.

                  People within a country can freely move between cities but can't freely use private backyards.

                  We're just saying it should be the same between countries as it is between cities.

                  • AuryGlenz8 hours ago
                    The end result of that is everyone moving to the rich countries with social safety nets, those countries then collapsing or removing those safety nets, and repeat until countries decide that was a terrible idea and we’re back to having borders except everything is a mess.

                    Countries aren’t geographic regions. They’re collections of people. If you magically swapped the populations of South Korea and Germany, those geographic countries would change overnight to be their demographic countries.

                    There’s absolutely nothing wrong with wanting your country to stay at least somewhat stable in its ideals, crime levels, particular problems, etc.

                    • jstanley7 hours ago
                      Just because a country has a social safety net for its citizens doesn't mean it has to provide one to any random person who comes to live there.
                      • em-bee4 hours ago
                        the point of a social safety net is to make sure people can afford a home and healthcare. excluding non-citizens from that, yet allowing them to stay here creates exactly the kind of situations that we do not want. and as soon as people get a job they also pay taxes, healthcare and social security, at which point it seems unfair to exclude them from those benefits. so i don't see a a way how this would even work. people living here either get a job, run a business or collect benefits. if they do neither, then how would they live? only independently wealthy people could do that without having some illegal income somewhere.

                        i am for the elimination of borders and free movement of everyone across the world, but that requires that we help raise the standard of living everywhere to remove the incentive for people to move just for economic reasons.

                    • immibis7 hours ago
                      > these countries then collapsing or removing those safety nets

                      How's that different from what's already happening with the borders in place?

                  • dragonwriter8 hours ago
                    > People within a country can freely move between cities

                    This is far from universally true, both because of legal direct constraints on internal migration and because of implicit controls which are the result of economic constraints (which are themselves part of the means by which societies are governed, whether or not they are overtly intended products of state policy.)

                  • FredPret9 hours ago
                    I’m saying it should be the same between countries as between back yards.

                    The same logic that justifies national government with tax-levying and rule-enforcing power also requires national borders. (ie, a group of people own this area together and will vote to determine what is done).

                    • immibis7 hours ago
                      They do those things at a local level too but you're still allowed to move between cities.
                  • lupusreal8 hours ago
                    In a world without borders, what's to prevent some wealthy Europeans from pooling their resources to buy up huge swaths of the Congo and doing colonialism, libertarian open borders style? Governments and borders are necessary.
                    • dragonwriter8 hours ago
                      Laws on land use that prevent “buying large swathes of land” from being equivalent to or enabling “doing colonialism”.

                      Open borders does not imply absence of laws.

                      • lupusreal7 hours ago
                        That is naive. The wealth disparity between nations is so great that if borders were done away with, people from wealthy nations would be able to trivially outspend people in poor countries. Once they own the land and the businesses, political power is theirs. Meanwhile the people from those poor countries might try to do the same in wealthy countries, but wouldn't have the resources for it. It would be katastroika on steroids.
                        • immibis5 hours ago
                          Then they can be removed in two steps. First, allow people to come and work to get wealthy so they can compete with other wealthy people. Second, allow wealthy people to spend money.
                • immibis7 hours ago
                  They do, in fact, allow people from majority-white countries to come without authorization.
                  • FredPret7 hours ago
                    The cause-and-effect here is “is your home country first-world / on a similar standard of living as us, and also not an enemy”.

                    So Japanese and South Koreans are probably more welcome than Russians, say.

                  • mantas6 hours ago
                    Some majority-white. As well as some non-white-majority.
          • aprilthird20219 hours ago
            How can it not be entirely due to racism, if race is the only factor determining whether you stop someone who is jogging on the street in jogging clothes and likely athletic supershoes?
            • wholinator28 hours ago
              Ya know, this is an incredibly interesting question. Because my instinct is to say that, if the patrols duty is simply to analyze anyone who stands out, and they do so in the proper channels without malice or harassment, then that would be the least racist possible scenario in which this occurs, some may say, not racist. But then even if the guard is kind and helpful, is the guideline "people who stand out must be questioned" racist itself? It sounds like yes. But then what justification do they have for that, is it genuinely that the vast majority of illegal crossings come from people who stand out? Or do most of them blend in, or is it just the stand outs that get caught, thus making it appear in data as if they're the problem and intensifying the patrols around them? Like the airplane problem.

              Then the hypothetical, what if it were true that the people attempting to harm your society singularly visually differed? Would that be racism, some strange "justified racism" or simply not racism? If you say, we are not prosecuting on race, but on propensity to crime. Well that starts to sound like some things I've heard in my country, which we believe is racist. Interesting questions.

              • johannes12343217 hours ago
                Well, the neighboring country to Croatia is Bosnia and Herzgovina. The ethnicy is similar and some from there also have motivation to enter illegally. Basing on race ignores those.

                Also turning it around: Is it right for somebody, like the runner, who legally entered to repeatedly be treated bad just because others who share skin color do bad?

                • em-bee3 hours ago
                  even better, the first check could have asked him for his route, and phone ahead to let their colleagues and especially the call centers know that he is coming. with a photo even. the reverse of a wanted poster. and if they had to deal with a lot of illegal immigrants in the area, the maybe could have asked him to wear something easily identifiable that someone else would not wear. maybe a number thing that's common for runners in a competition.

                  part of the problem is not only that he is checked, but how he is being treated during those checks.

                  i mean that's my experience in china. every interaction with authorities was extremely polite and friendly. even when it was an issue where i broke the law because i didn't register my new address in time. of course africans experience racism in china as well, so i can't say for sure that they would get the same treatment as me, but certainly not what this guy experienced in croatia.

                • 3 hours ago
                  undefined
        • em-bee22 hours ago
          exactly this, and add to that, the demographics are similar in all eastern european countries. so what's special about croatia? https://brilliantmaps.com/european-black-population-by-count...

          after reading the article i found the links to other articles on the guardian site linked to this: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2024/oct/10/p... "Croatian police accused of burning asylum seekers’ phones and passports". the problem seems to be more than just never having seen a black person.

          • grujicd18 hours ago
            > so what's special about croatia

            To add relevant context Croatia is at the edge of the Schengen zone. On the other side of the border are Serbia and Bosnia with less strict border controls and visa rules, so this is one of the roads for illegal immigrants to reach rich western countries. This and Hungarian borders are what's between them and their goals. Connect that with the fact that Croatia doesn't have non-white minorities, there were probably zero cases before this of black person wondering down the roads who was not an illegal migrant.

          • throw7384878817 hours ago
            Passport are also needed for deportation. I can not see any reason, why police would burn their documents. It creates a lot of extra paperwork and headaches.

            Destroying passports is a normal practice for illegal immigrants. It extends their stay in EU by several years. Most countries are considered safe, and it is hard to claim you are from Syria with Egyptian passport.

            • mr_toad3 hours ago
              The police aren’t burning passports because it’s procedure, or even legal. It makes it harder for asylum seekers to prove where they’re from.
        • poincaredisk22 hours ago
          I'm not from Croatia, but for context

          >ethnicity you rarely ever see?

          Rarely... I was 20 years old when I first saw a black person in real life. This was in a center of a big city, and it surprised me so much that I remember exactly where and when it was.

          Nowadays times have changed and it's not that rare in my country - at least in big cities. But I imagine a Croatian farmer seeing a black person - running! - and calling the police to investigate what the hell is going on.

          • aprilthird202121 hours ago
            > But I imagine a Croatian farmer seeing a black person - running! - and calling the police to investigate what the hell is going on.

            So is this common? I would not call the police immediately among seeing something odd or unusual that isn't threatening...

            • bombcar20 hours ago
              You wouldn't, but someone would. Cops get called all the time for out-of-the-ordinary things that you'd not even think of calling for.

              Power failures, parked cars, loose animals, strange kids, balloons, weather, etc.

              • dudeinjapan18 hours ago
                For a laugh I used to read the local paper which published a log of police calls, they were along the lines of "A dead racoon was reported on Oxbow Rd. When officers investigated they found it was a hat."
              • Symbiote16 hours ago
                Loose animals can be a danger to traffic, and the police should be called.

                I've done this when a horse had escaped from a field at the edge of a village.

            • briandear5 hours ago
              In Spain people call the cops for seemingly everything. I had a bunch of race motorcycles I was unloading at my house and some idiot neighbor called the cops because they thought I was running an illegal repair shop. I had to spend almost an hour proving that my four kids raced semi-professionally. Even had to show them their race licenses before they realized that I was telling the truth. I have found in many places in Europe people have a very hard time minding their own business — especially old ladies. For reference, I’m a white American. So some Croatians calling the cops after seeing a black dude doing a Forest Gump in the middle of nowhere would certainly attract the attention of the local busybodies.
            • jajko13 hours ago
              This is schengen area border country, dealing with tons of smuggled immigrants, most of which are coming from Africa. While having from 0 to next to 0 local population of same/similar ethnicities.

              First thing to many occur to especially older folks watching news is illegal immigrant running ie from busted police operation, not some epic runner. They definitely dont recognize running sportswear.

              • aprilthird20215 hours ago
                I mean, that is literally racism, the assumption about the man, based on his race, is that he is an illegal immigrant
                • grujicd2 hours ago
                  Which other assumption would be reasonable, considering Croatia's ethnic structure? You have to take local circumstances into account.
                  • aprilthird20212 hours ago
                    But all of racism is based upon the idea of "reasonable assumptions". You don't need to assume. By your logic, stats can inform assumptions about black people being up to some crime, Arabs being up to some terror plot, Indians committing some rape, etc. etc. But the whole point is that one person should not be tarred by the assumptions others make about their ethnicity.

                    Your question is a trick. If only statistics make something reasonable, then the only "reasonable" assumption is that he is a criminal. And all racist assumptions will be "reasonable". But the very idea that a person should be assumed about based on his ethnicity is not reasonable or morally right.

            • zxcvbnm6915 hours ago
              [dead]
        • llm_trw16 hours ago
          He's doing something weird hence the police calls.

          I'm from that part of the world and had the same thing happen when I went camping.

          The police officer asked if I lived in the west, then left me alone with a warning about bears and gypsies.

        • sjducb18 hours ago
          It’s racism. I’m guessing you’re from the US, the least racist country in the world.

          People see he’s a different race so they treat him badly because of it. No one is worried about being called racist.

          He was arrested several times a day for being black. No one in the whole chain of events viewed this as a problem.

          • wholinator28 hours ago
            Do you believe the US is the least racist country in the world or have i missed some sarcasm? I'm truly not trying to antagonize, just curious
            • 0xffff26 hours ago
              Who would you nominate? The US certainly has severe problems with racism, but everything I've ever read about other countries has led me to believe that this isn't actually a totally implausible claim.
            • sjducb5 hours ago
              Name a country that is less racist.
          • throw7384878817 hours ago
            [flagged]
            • sjducb16 hours ago
              South Africa is a very racist country. You’re not really replying to my comment please re read it.
              • throw7384878815 hours ago
                [flagged]
                • bigpeopleareold15 hours ago
                  I think you should look up what the history of jaywalking laws actually are. They were lobbied by the automobile industry in the early 20th century.
                • tmountain14 hours ago
                  People do run in the United States (tons of people). It is not a crime.
                  • devilbunny14 hours ago
                    I believe this is an example of a “joke”. Perhaps a “troll”. You may have heard of them.
      • canadianfella11 hours ago
        [dead]
      • tho24h23j423420 hours ago
        [flagged]
    • gerdesj1 day ago
      Thankfully our hero is made of sterner stuff than either you or me:

      "On other occasions, however, he almost packed it in. In Uganda, his one-man support crew resigned, leaving him without a support vehicle or help at a time when his funding for the run was almost exhausted. To compound matters, all routes ahead involved either conflict or extreme risk."

      • ptspts4 hours ago
        Why would someone start this long run without enough funding secured for the whole length?
        • em-bee3 hours ago
          maybe he was planning to get more funding along the way (by selling his story for example) or some expected funding fell through. for something like this you don't have to have all funding sorted out the day you start. i mean, it would probably help, but i don't think it's wrong to start and see how far you can get.
        • dyauspitr3 hours ago
          Why do you have a mortgage?
    • mastermedo20 hours ago
      This surprised me too. I am from Croatia, and while there is a fair bit of discrimination against anyone that's different in the country, I am very surprised about this magnitude of it. I'm curious about the route he took. Some road types are illegal to run along, and coincidentally the one going from south to north along the coast is illegal to be on for pedestrians to my knowledge. I wouldn't be surprised if any pedestrian was stopped on that road, it's dangerous to run where the speed limit is over 100 km/h.
      • Symbiote16 hours ago
        He grew up in Britain, and would easily understand the concept and the symbolic "no pedestrians" signs.

        Others comments mention a route map, but I can't find it.

      • aprilthird20219 hours ago
        I was surprised but apparently I was dumb, and people see a black person and think "criminal migrant" all the time and that it's somehow not racist to think that, lol. Very many comments in this thread saying exactly that.
    • hipadev231 day ago
      Why did you have so many issues in Croatia? Traffic police and ID checkpoints?
      • noman-land1 day ago
        "The police stopped me at least four times a day. Sometimes, I caught locals taking photos of me and reporting me to the police,” he said.
  • Thorrez19 hours ago
    Reminds me of Karl Bushby, who's walking from Chile to England. He made it to at least Kazakhstan so far.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Bushby

    • tasuki12 hours ago
      Apparently he swam over the Caspian Sea and made it to Azerbaijan.

      > The swim covering 179 miles (288 km) was achieved in 31 days as part of his global expedition on foot.

      With the help of Azerbaijan's coast guard and some swimmers. Wow!

    • ThinkingGuy10 hours ago
      See also: Paul Salopek, who's walking from Ethiopia to Patagonia, tracing the path of human migration out of Africa.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Salopek

      https://outofedenwalk.nationalgeographic.org/

    • beretguy17 hours ago
      > They were detained by Russian border troop officers while they were crossing the Russian border near the Chukotkan village of Uelen, for not entering Russia at a correct port of entry. They were threatened with being banned from Russia, which would stop the journey.

      You can always trust russia to be a pain in the neck, to put it mildly.

      • exe3417 hours ago
        I'm sure the US would just let anyone in at any point along their border...
        • anonzzzies17 hours ago
          if i have to believe musk, there is no issue at all doing that.
          • exe3415 hours ago
            concerning if true.
            • borski11 hours ago
              Luckily, it isn’t.
      • lionkor13 hours ago
        What a terrible take. Go outside and touch some grass, and then throw away your documents and try to walk across any border on the globe.
        • beretguy9 hours ago
          Just yesterday/past few days russia bombed Ukraine on a Christmas Day, downed Azerbaijan Airlines plane and cut power cables between Finland and Estonia. My take is good. Your turn to touch grass and stop defending fascists.
          • lionkor8 hours ago
            Check out the history of Papua, Mr. CIA ;)
          • briandear4 hours ago
            The Ukraine side has fascists of their own, see the Azov Battalion.

            Also recall, Ukraine suspended elections until after the war. While that’s following Ukrainian law, that still sounds pretty undemocratic to me. Ukraine possesses Lviv which was Polish since the 1400s. Crimea was Russian from the 1700s as a result of a war with the Ottomans — a war started by the Turkish because they were made that Russia was interfering with Polish internal affairs. Russia has a much stronger claim on Crimea than Ukraine, historically speaking.

            Lviv was stolen from Poland by a Soviet-Nazi agreement during World War II. If the Russians should leave eastern Ukraine, then certainly the Ukrainians should give Lviv back to Poland right?

            My point is that the Ukraine conflict isn’t as black and white as people make it out to be. This entire conflict is based on overlapping and often contradictory versions of history. Claiming it’s a battle against fascism is glossing over the realities.

            • seabird3 hours ago
              The grumbling about the Azov Battalion and martial law in Ukraine is deflection. Pretty much every nation has some amount of paramilitary nationalism, and it should surprise nobody that a country at total war is going to suspend civil liberties. The war in Ukraine has basically nothing to do with fascism and everything to do with Russian revanchism that NATO would never allow to go unopposed, and it's pretty clear what's in the best interest of Western Europe and the US in this situation. Letting a perennial bad actor walk all over you because there's a veneer of largely irrelevant historical legitimacy over what is pretty clearly a test to see what you'll let slide is just stupid.
            • aguaviva2 hours ago
              [dead]
    • pinkmuffinere6 hours ago
      Forgive my stupidity -- how is it possible to walk from the new world to the old? How does one walk over the oceans?
      • aendruk5 hours ago
        The linked article contains a map and written explanation.
  • llm_trw16 hours ago
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pippa_Bacca

    Running in the other direction seems to be somewhat more dangerous.

    • debugnik16 hours ago
      > Bacca's naked, strangled, and decomposing body was found in bushes

      > DNA testing suggested that Bacca was raped by multiple people, and not just Karataş.

      How sad. Looks to me like the dangerous part is doing so as a woman, not the direction.

      • tdiff14 hours ago
        Being a woman may expose you to extra risks, but it doesnt mean men are safe there.
        • debugnik8 hours ago
          Of course, I just meant that it seems to have been the main factor in her story, rather than the fact that she entered Turkey from Europe. I can't really draw any general conclusions out of a sample of two; well, one, because this runner apparently didn't cross Turkey, so not really a similar route.
      • llm_trw16 hours ago
        They made it fine when going through Europe.
        • debugnik14 hours ago
          You surely understand one travels through the same countries when doing the same route in either direction. That's not what we meant here.
          • llm_trw14 hours ago
            You surely realize that you stop traveling when dead? In which case direction matters.
    • aprilthird20219 hours ago
      These are not the same paths so direction is meaningless. This runner did not travel through Turkey
  • nadermx1 day ago
    A man went on a mission to raise awareness. I'd say he accomplished that.
    • endofreach19 hours ago
      Unfortunately some sites make it hard to get past the headline with their banners (and ads) for me. So i won't know what he ought to create awareness for.
      • kitd15 hours ago
        It's in the first paragraph of the linked article, and is expanded on further down.
        • endofreach9 hours ago
          Well obviously you didn't get it... anyway, thanks for the downvotes.
  • thruway51615 hours ago
    >>"Kato wanted his journey to draw attention to the earliest migration of humans from Africa and challenge the racist notion that people should “go back to where they come from”. Viewed as a whole, he said the run had underlined the positive aspects of migration and its potential to “create a more culturally connected and enriched global society”.

    This is an epic feat and gives me hope for humanity. My hats off to Mr Kato!

  • aprilthird20215 hours ago
    I would highly recommend looking at his Strava, he basically logs every day and the everyday kindness of strangers along his journey as well as the bad parts. We are humans, we are good and bad all mixed in one, and his run really reflects a depth of human experience, in my mind.

    https://strava.app.link/5KsFE3BoEPb

  • pkkkzip23 hours ago
    How many hours was he running everyday? This is an insane amount of running. I wonder if there is any health implications?
    • ordersofmag22 hours ago
      7700/516 = just under 15 miles a day or around 100 miles per week. Typical mileage for any elite distance runner or even a decent D1 college runner (and low for an elite marathoner). But they often do it in one or two continuous sessions, often with significant intensity. The task of just covering the mileage in a day (without trying to do it in one go or trying do any of it fast) is nothing particularly exceptional. Heck as a slow 50-something dude I did 100 miles weeks during Covid when I had some free time. Health effects: assuming you were biomechanically inclined to do okay with lots of running and built up to it over a long enough time to avoid the usual overuse injuries it would almost certainly just make you healthier.
      • parthdesai9 hours ago
        Only on HN you'll see a comment like this downplaying the achievement. With Endurance sport, it's the lack of rest days that make it exponentially harder, you really can't compare with what you've.
        • RandallBrown8 hours ago
          15 miles a day is pretty tame for any long distance runner. Even without rest days. You're going to be doing 15 miles in ~3 hours. That's plenty of rest time.

          I suspect this guy was actually running significantly more every day but also took some significant time off.

          Russ Cook, who also ran the length of Africa, ran a route that was 2000 miles longer, in about 5 less months. He covered on average about 28 miles per day.

          They're both very impressive accomplishments, but not as physically impressive as mentally, at least in my opinion.

          • parthdesai2 hours ago
            15 miles a day every day for about 1.75 years.

            Funny, you bring us Russ Cook, his body was literally breaking down. Again, 15 miles on average is tame for a long distance runner. It's starts to become exponentially harder when there are no rest days involved. Both of the achievements are nothing to scoff at.

        • gamblor9561 hour ago
          I had several friends who ran 15-20 miles/day 7 days a week pre- and through- COVID.

          At a slow enough pace (relative to the individual), 15-20 miles isn't a hard run for many distance runners. (For the BQers in the bunch, their recovery pace was faster than my race pace. However, their race paces would be considered recovery paces for professional marathoners.)

      • carabiner22 hours ago
        PCT thru hikers do about 18 miles per day over mountainous terrain with a 25 lb pack. They're moving at a slower walking speed though.
      • lemontrees18 hours ago
        [flagged]
    • afthonos23 hours ago
      He ran an average of 15 miles a day. That is absolutely within the normal levels of human endurance if you build up to it.
      • thehappypm22 hours ago
        I think that’s about the average of what a typical Appalachian Trail hiker does, which means that it is very well within the bounds of reality for a regularly able and very motivated person
      • aprilthird20215 hours ago
        Looking at his Strava he seems to be doing more like 20-30+ miles a day
    • bevan10 hours ago
      It is insane in today's world! But big mileage (barefoot, no less) is something we evolved for. Check out the great book Born to Run by Chris Macdougal which explores that concept.
      • gregwebs8 hours ago
        Micah True, a hero of Born to Run, died after the book was published at age 58 of heart failure while doing a 12 mile training run.
        • bevan6 hours ago
          Yes, that's explored in the sequel. He lives on in Urique, Mexico where his likeness is plastered everywhere and is the namesake for the big annual race in that town.
    • dyauspitr22 hours ago
      You can walk 3 miles an hour at a leisurely pace. That’s a 5 hour walk everyday or probably like a 3-4 hour run. Really not all that bad if you’re used to it.
    • pineaux18 hours ago
      For all the people reacting that this is not a lot. Don't forget he has had a lot of border troubles, police troubles, money troubles and support troubles. Including rest days, I would estimate his running days at somewhere around the 400. That would mean about 20 miles per running day. So 6 miles short of a marathon, each day.
    • andrewstuart19 hours ago
      Extreme exercise such as distance running damages the heart.

      https://youtu.be/Y6U728AZnV0

      • scott_w19 hours ago
        This is simply not true. Even research that suggests damage also suggests endurance athletes have better outcomes anyway: https://www.heart.org/en/news/2019/03/01/is-long-distance-ru...
        • gregwebs14 hours ago
          The article you linked doesn’t support the statement made about it. The evidence is mixed but shows worse overall outcomes for those overdoing it. Here’s a scientific publication that’s clearer that recommends 1-2 days off per week, and no more than 5 hours running per week.

          https://journals.lww.com/acsm-csmr/fulltext/2015/03000/exerc...

          • scott_w10 hours ago
            Quote from the article:

            > Recent research has raised alarms about the potential for plaque buildup and scarring in the heart in some long-distance runners. Yet other studies have suggested that when marathoners get heart disease, they may be able to weather it better than non-runners.

            All articles discuss scarring and physical signs but no clear link between exercise and worse life outcomes. The article you cited noted most issues resolve themselves within a few weeks after a race. There are literally 0 people exercising at “race intensity” day after day, which is completely different kettle of fish to your regular training run. Kato here certainly isn’t doing that.

            Given many professionals and amateurs run over 5 hours per week and easily break 5/6 miles at a time. A quick search will show strong runners regularly hit 6-8 hours per week.

            Cyclists will cover greater distances and times and, apart from Pantani (who was doped to the gills), you don’t see them dropping dead of heart attacks despite regularly covering 10-20 hours a week. Similar for triathletes.

            So no, the evidence really isn’t there that distance running causes heart disease.

            • gregwebs8 hours ago
              That's another incorrect summary. From the journal article there are multiple studies that have shown worse long-term outcomes from large amounts of exercise:

              > Other studies also have confirmed the long-term adverse effects on myocardial structure (18,27–30,32), including one study suggesting that the CAD event rate during 2-year follow-up was significantly higher in the athletes than that in controls

              > Recent studies have suggested that long distance runners may have increased levels of atherosclerosis and CAD (18,37). In a study 6 years ago, male marathon runners had paradoxically increased coronary artery calcification (CAC) as measured by computed tomography (CT) CAC scoring (21). A very recent study of men who completed at least one marathon yearly for 25 consecutive years (n = 50) compared with 23 sedentary controls demonstrated increased total plaque volume (P < 0.01), calcified plaque volume (P < 0.0001), and noncalcified plaque volume (P = 0.04) compared with those with EEE (Fig. 3) (37). Despite the fact that runners have better overall CAD risk profiles, these results underscore the potential for very heavy EEE to increase the severity of CAD through mechanisms largely independent of the traditional CAD risk factors.

              > Very high doses of running, however, were associated with trends of worse survival compared with either nonrunners or groups of low- and moderate-dose runners.

              > However, when dividing runners into quintiles of doses (miles·wk−1, running days per week, min·wk−1, and running speed), with the exception of speed (faster running always had a trend for better survival), quintile 1 (<6 miles·wk−1, 1 to 2 times per week, <51 min·wk−1) had similar mortality reductions as those in quintiles 2 to 4 and a trend to slightly greater benefit than those in quintile 5 (Fig. 4).

              There are other studies that have not shown long-term adverse events. The evidence isn't conclusive and most people need more exercise, not less. But it's prudent to caution committed runners about overdoing it with this information so they can make their own informed decision.

              • scott_w8 hours ago
                > There are other studies that have not shown long-term adverse events. The evidence isn't conclusive

                So after all that, you end up agreeing with me.

              • throwway1203858 hours ago
                It's entirely possible that the CAC response is evolved to have some protective factor for endurance running.
      • dahart6 hours ago
        Important quotes from that video: “You can exercise all day, it seems, if you keep it down.” And “let me be clear about this: there is no single step you can take in your life to ensure robust health and remarkable longevity than a habit of daily exercise.”

        FWIW, there are some more recent studies that flatly contradict this claim [1] [2], so YMMV with a TED talk. My father has been a long-distance runner for 50 years, and he thinks that it is possible to do heart damage in very extreme cases, but these cases including being more committed than most Olympic athletes. The problem is when doing competitive racing type running without ever taking a break for recovery. He does know a couple of people who ran too fast and too much and had to quit due to what he calls “overtraining syndrome”. He specifically said he thinks Deo Kato isn’t likely running fast enough to cause overtraining syndrome. In the video, you might notice the data he shows depends on running pace; In the TED video, James didn’t separate miles per week from pace (at for example ~6:50). This means that distance alone - miles per week - doesn’t necessarily prove anything, miles might not be associated with risks until it’s enough miles that there’s no time left to rest.

        There is a real danger here of scaring people who should exercise more, of giving the wrong impression or a backwards summary to the vast majority of people who will never ever run the risk of over-exercising so much they could cause heart damage. Your summary left out the part where James pointed to the absolute consensus that an hour a day of “vigorous” exercise is known without a doubt to be very beneficial. There’s also a danger of giving a misleading impression about the risks of not exercising compared to the risks of extreme exercise. The data in the video at ~5:10 shows not exercising leading to dying many years earlier, while there is no data here that shows extreme exercise leading to higher mortality; all it shows is that the benefits plateau. There’s some data and discussion on incidence of heart problems, but not outcomes. Essentially the summary should be: exercise all you want, and if you are wondering if you’re exercising too much, then you’re nowhere near the threshold - the very few people exercising enough to do heart damage are extreme and already know they exercise too much, because they’re compromising on work, hobbies, friends, and family in order to exercise. ;)

        [1] https://www.outsideonline.com/health/training-performance/ex...

        [2] https://www.utsouthwestern.edu/newsroom/articles/year-2019/e...

        PS you’re not the Andrew Stuart of Sudoku/puzzle fame are you?

      • dudeinjapan18 hours ago
        Only love can break your heart. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=364qY0Oz-xs
    • dudeinjapan18 hours ago
      When he got tired, he slept. When he got hungry, he ate. When he had to go... he went.
  • highcountess22 hours ago
    [flagged]
    • mb773322 hours ago
      He lives in London.
    • pineaux19 hours ago
      He lives in London
    • eesmith18 hours ago
      Quoting the linked article:

      > The epic run was conceived by the London-based Kato to highlight the history of human migration and the discrimination faced by many black Africans, a message underlined by the fact he endured daily racism from police and passersby in parts of Europe.

      Running to the 'epicenter of global subjugation and decimation of large parts of Africa' seems part of the point for the run.

  • ajaixncicknd1 day ago
    [flagged]
  • workfromspace12 hours ago
    I don't like his take on Czechia: while being stopped by police 4 times is not pleasant, I'm guessing it's nothing compared to the (lack of) safety in many countries in Africa, South/Central America and Asia. [0]

    [0]: https://www.numbeo.com/crime/rankings_by_country.jsp?title=2...

    In the meantime, could someone with experience (i.e a local) please tell me about the current safety of and racism against a white person in Cape Town, where he started his peace run? Is it safer than Johannesburg? I'd love to visit South Africa, but I'm too scared of visiting there nowadays.

    • prmoustache10 hours ago
      Czechia has never been mentioned.

      As a matter of fact, Africa is crossed partially or completely on a fairly frequent basis by white backpackers and bikepackers. You can find numerous guides and reports on the internet. Also, around 16% of the population of Cape Town is white.

      Having said that even in the most dangerous places in Africa the problem is not necessarily racism but inequalities and unemployment. Cross a place where unemployment is high and education level is low due to inequalities, crime will be rampant regardless of average skin color. If you happen to have interesting goods or be seen as a vulnerable, you may have problems. Hence the reason you might have issues in some places in Cape Town but not in a peaceful village somewhere else in Africa. And said peaceful village that could happen to have been very dangerous in another time when same country was in civil war.

      I am not saying racism against white people don't exist, but there is no reason to oppose racism against white people to a black guy running to raise awareness about racism. That guy is probably against any form of racism, especially as his life partner happens to be white.

    • workfromspace8 hours ago
      (Edit: My bad, I meant Croatia.)
    • aprilthird20218 hours ago
      Look at the mental gymnastics you need to do to hold this worldview.

      1. Not 4 times. 4 times per day every day you are in the country

      2. Don't complain about racism in 1st world if you are from the 3rd world because the 3rd world isn't safe. Conveniently missing that racism here is between ethnicity of the 1st world towards 3rd world ethnicities, so basically this absolves all racism in that direction in the 1st world.

      3. I'm scared of visiting South Africa because of racism, but a black man scared of racism in Europe where the police are constantly called on him, that's no big deal and he shouldn't complain, which I'm doing right now.

      • workfromspace8 hours ago
        1. Yeah, 4 times a day is a lot and I'm sorry for him. Although I would like to learn more about the details. (I.e other comments mentioning about illegal crossings etc)

        2. I'm sorry I didn't fully get this (English is not my first language) but I'm also from a 3rd world country).

        3. I'm guessing you are in the USA bubble (which always had and still have a racism problem on a different level) and don't know much about Europe. In Europe, racism would almost never result in any physical violence or not being allowed any rights.

        • infrawhispers7 hours ago
          Racism would almost never result in any physical violence or removal of rights in Europe? Hahahahah this gave me a great laugh.