What's better, running or cycling? The New York Times blog recently dived into the question that so many endurance athletes bicker about. Running is much more time efficient, and a bit harder on your joints. Cycling takes a bit more time, a bit more planning, but it's easy on your muscles and won't leave you as sore. Both will increase your fitness and lengthen your lifespan. So really, it all comes down to personal preference and what your body and mind favors. Read the full article here. Over at the Feed office we have a mix of passionate athletes, but mostly, if you haven't been able to tell, we're a little cycling fanatical. And while my personal passion for cycling hasn't diminished, a recent tumble left me with a broken wrist and a doctor ordered break from the bike for 9 weeks. GASP. What was to do now? Run?! I used to run. I've trained for marathons and trail runs. I can run. I just, umm, haven't in about 2+ years. Now without the ability to use my left arm it seemed like I was going to learn to run. So I went digging in my closet, dusted off my running shoes, and decided it was time to go jog up the 2000-foot mountain conveniently located right outside my door. I made it to the top. But it was more of a walk-run-disaster-thing. The next two days I hobbled around town and was limping worse than I was after my bike crash. I never remembered running being so painful. I called my triathlete and running friends and asked them if this would get better. I pulled the total cyclist maneuver and thought maybe I just needed better gear. They told me I just need to run more. So yeah: Running verse Cycling? I'm choosing running now, or at least for the next 9 weeks.