Skip navigation
Community: Exchange advice in the forums and read running commentary Resources: Personal running log, calculators, links and other tools for runners News: Running news from around the world Training: Articles and advice about fitness, race training and injury prevention Races/Results: Find upcoming races and past results Home: The Cool Running homepage
Cool Running homepage  Search Cool Running Community

2754 Views 5 Replies Latest reply: Aug 15, 2011 12:13 PM by JamesJohnsonLMT RSS
ThirdWill Amateur 9 posts since
Nov 7, 2010
Currently Being Moderated

Aug 4, 2011 1:26 PM

Right Ankle Pain on the Left Side

So I have been running a 5k training about once or twice a week. I overpronate and wear the right shoes for that.

 

For some reason I have been getting this sorta sharp pain (with no swelling) on the left side of my right ankle or JUST above the top.

I have switched shoes from Asics to Sauconys for overpronation but still doesn't seem to control the problem. I need to ice it when I get home from running....Again this pain is JUST right foots ankle on the left side only ....

 

Any idea what this might be?

  • Haselsmasher Legend 505 posts since
    May 25, 2009
    Currently Being Moderated
    1. Aug 12, 2011 8:42 PM (in response to ThirdWill)
    Re: Right Ankle Pain on the Left Side

    I'm not following when you say "...or JUST above the top".  Do you mean just above the top of the ankle bone (bony protrustion) on the inside of the ankle?

     

    Does the pain get worse as the run progresses?  Or does the pain get lesser as the run progresses?  Can you find a spot on the bone where, when you push it, it hurts quite a bit?

     

    Jim





    http://jimhaselmaier.blogspot.com/


    "Kick off your high heel sneakers, it's party time."

    -- From the song FM by Steely Dan

  • JamesJohnsonLMT Legend 1,127 posts since
    Aug 23, 2009
    Currently Being Moderated
    3. Aug 13, 2011 10:05 PM (in response to ThirdWill)
    Re: Right Ankle Pain on the Left Side (Bone density?)

    Calcium is only one of many minerals required to make bone, magnesium, phosphorus, boron being some of the many others. Even if you have plenty of calcium and trace minerals, the average digestive system will only take in a few percent of the most popular forms of these as supplements. Some people with weak stomach acid absorb even less. The most popular form of calcium added to foods, calcium carbonate, is almost indigestible. Calcium citrate is an example of a form of calcium that can absorb at 10 times the rate, even with weak stomachs.

     

    Taking  calcium with vitamin D improves its absorption, but does not guarantee it will wind up in your bones instead of your arteries or kidneys. That's one of the jobs of fat-soluble vitamin K, which most people are deficient in, and which few supplement with in any meaningful way. The best forms of K are produced by bacteria, which few people ingest unless they are fond of fermented foods.

     

    Even with minerals absorbed and distributed, nearly half of bone is something other than minerals, including water, collagen and other proteins. The hard to  store vitamin C is essential to the formation of the collagen matrix into which your minerals must deposit in order to increase bone density. Take it with your calcium for the buffering effect. Vitamin A is important too, but like D and K, needs to be absorbed with dietary fat. Without a strong matrix, even mineralized bone is prone to breakage. One of the problems with bone mineralization drugs is that they produce franken-crystals in bone that make them more brittle.

     

    We already know you are taking care of one of the most important steps to increasing healthy bone density, which is to produce the demand via exercise, but activity will just increase the likelihood  of fractures and other damage if your nutrition is not complete. Hormones are very important to bone management, but they are also dependent on proper nutrition, which includes content and timing. While the doctors are busy figuring out your symptoms, I would consult with a  nutritionist famiiar with the potential reasons for why your bones have lost their density in the first place, if that is indeed the problem you have. Chances are your blood calcium level tends to be low, increasing your PTH levels and stimulating the breakdown of bone to release calcium into the blood. Bone health is not rocket science, but is more complicated than most people think.

  • JamesJohnsonLMT Legend 1,127 posts since
    Aug 23, 2009
    Currently Being Moderated
    5. Aug 15, 2011 12:13 PM (in response to ThirdWill)
    Re: Right Ankle Pain on the Left Side (Bone density?)

    Well, I am tempted to go off-subject again because I always think   there is another onion layer to peel away, especially when confronting   difficult cases like what you are going through right now. Straight up,   though, I have to say I am surprised that you are following your   weight-lifting sessions with whey protein powder alone, because I wasn't   expecting that to be a problem at all. It made me re-think my general   opinion that protein after exercise is a good thing. I still think it   is, but there may be a round-about connection when your body reacts to   the next meals. You otherwise didn't mention any dietary interventions   like caloric restriction, fat restriction, carb restriction, etc. A   scoop of whey protein after vigorous exercise is supposed to be a good   thing. I will say that brands are important, and there is a lot of   opinion in weight-lifting circles about that. The type of filtering,   heat used in processing, isolate vs. concentrate, etc., are points of   passionate discussion. Personally, after trying the lower cost products   and reading the labels, I switched to Jarrow because it has less junk  in  it and I trust the brand. Beyond that, I am wondering if there could  be  an effect caused by the artificial sweeteners in the BF product.  Almost  all of the wheys out there are artificially sweetened, because  they  don't want to defeat the other purpose most have in mind when   supplementing with whey after workouts, which is also carb-restriction.  More and more, though, there seems to be some evidence that the body at  least begins to react to artificial sweeteners the same way it  responds to actual  sugar. It may be a psycho-somatic response, but it  seems to be there (BTW, this applies to Stevia  or anything else that  tastes sweet, regardless of other pros and cons).  Ever notice that  people who drink a lot of diet beverages tend to  retain weight?

     

    My  whole reason for digression here is  the effect of glycemic load on  bone calcium, which is what we are trying  to talk about (I think). The  general process is that a blood sugar rise  (and in my opinion, based on  various current hypotheses not adequately  tested), or the expectation of a rise in blood glucose level  after eating, calcium is released  from bones in order to buffer the  resulting acid imbalance caused by  digesting sugars. What I am saying is  that although the dose of BF is  actually lean, there could be some  reaction to the taste of sugar. I  just have trouble believing that so  small a dose could have such a  profound effect, unless there are other  aspects of your diet that might  intensify the response from your body to  this treat after vigorous  exertion. OK, you asked for an opinion, and  there it is, if there is  going to be a tie-in at all.

     

    Further off the subject, there may be other reactions to the intake of calcium with or without vitamin D that could come into play. It is   interesting to note that several studies have indicated no improvements   in bone density after calcium supplementation, even with supporting   co-factors. As I mentioned earlier, your exercise turns out to be a more   effective catalyst for bone mineralization than the presence of the  raw  material alone. Moreover, there are indications that calcium   consumption (or perhaps more correctly, absorption) often does   more harm than good, since unneeded calcium must be eliminated by the   body, leading to the formation of "stones" and storage of calcium in   various organs and tissues of the body, including the cardiovascular   system, not excluding the heart itself. Remember how eggs were good for   us, then bad for us, then good for us again? Calcium is on the   roller-coaster now.

     

    As I alluded to earlier, there is a   very good chance that dietary interventions, whether prescribed or   self-modulated, may have some impact on hormone levels, which in turn   are hammering your bone matrix. Bone is so incredibly complicated the   reasons for its lack of health are often a step or more ahead of our   best intentions and treatments. When I mentioned some of the popular   "bone density meds," I was talking about more than crystal formation.  The bisphosphonate  drugs retard the breakdown of old bone in order to  preserve more dense  bone, but the irony is that healthy bone only  contains a small  percentage of old bone. The majority is middle-aged  and there should be  about the same amount of new as old. When there  isn't enough new, the  old is a poor replacement, taking on more of the  characteristics of porcelain. Any minerologist can tell you that  crystalline  structures are often in flux, continuing to define  themselves until  they are easily fractured along molecular borders.  This occurs even in  metals, which is why structures need to be  periodically replaced. Bone  is designed to continually reinvent itself,  based on an intertwined  collagen matrix into which mineral salts are  laid to add hardness. Left  unchanged too long, it becomes brittle. But  that's only part of the  story, since we draw on this rich mineral  reserve constantly in order to  balance blood chemistry. Another problem  with too much calcium is that  it can be used to armor pathogens, and  it can bond with other metals  that need to be eliminated from the  system. This won't happen if it  deposits into tissues, as it often  does. The reasons for this are of  course more complex than intake.

     

    When I spoke of timing  of meals, I mentioned it because when we eat  often has a greater effect  than what we eat. How and when things are  metabolized occupies vital  organs that are involved in other things  such as hormone production.  Eating too close to bed time, particularly  of carbohydrates, can throw  off the night-time production of critical  hormones that affect recovery,  and might have an effect on what you are  going through. One thing that occurred to me when you mentioned the  whey, is the question: if you are not getting your carbs then, when are  you finally succumbing to the need for carbs, without which you will  starve? I agree that right after a workout may not be the best time for  them, for the thermogenic  and hormonal effects, but late in the day is  definitely not the time.  My guess is you already know this, so the  mystery continues. Hopefully the docs will examine whether or not, like  many people who are exercising for health, you are on the verge of  insulin resistance, and the complications in calcium distribution that  can cause.

     

    Message was edited by: JamesJohnsonLMT

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Legend

  • Correct Answers - 10 points
  • Helpful Answers - 7 points