Episode
5 Running Studies That Actually Matter in 2025 (Skip the Hype)
- Podcast
- The MicroCast
- Published
- Dec 17, 2025
- Duration seconds
- 4046
- Processing state
not_requested
Actions
POST https://stenobird.com/v1/public/podcasts/the-microcast-3510125/episodes/5-running-studies-that-actually-matter-in-2025-skip-the-hype/transcription-requests
Idempotently request low-priority transcript generation for this episode.GET https://stenobird.com/podcast/the-microcast-3510125/5-running-studies-that-actually-matter-in-2025-skip-the-hype.md
Read the agent-friendly Markdown representation of this episode resource.
Summary
We break down the five most important running studies of 2025 and give you a framework for deciding which science actually deserves your attention, and what's just expensive distraction. Plus, we debunk the hype around ketone supplements and Norwegian double threshold training. What We Cover: The "Should I Care" framework for evaluating new research Why strict 80/20 polarization isn't magic for recreational athletes How strength training improved time-to-exhaustion by 35% The fueling gap: marathoners averaged just 22-35g carbs/hour vs. the 60-90g recommended Why poor sleepers are 1.78x more likely to get injured The single-session spike that increases injury risk by 128% Resources: Tom Ralph's fueling tracking app: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/fuelflow/id6755150914 Training Peaks HRV for Training app Studies Referenced: Rosenblatt et al 2025 (Polarized Training) Zanini et al 2025 (Strength Training) de Jong et al 2025 (Sleep) Franson et al 2025 (Injury Risk) Work With Us: One coaching spot available with TJ! Don't wait until January 1 reach out today. Microcosm-coaching.com