"Runners are far ahead in aging healthfully" NY Times 12 Oct 1994

Running and the development of disability with age, "Annals of Internal 
Medicine" Vol.121, No.7, pp.502-509

1. The newspaper article gave a very thorough account of the study.  Try 
answering the gollowing questions by refering only to the article:
a. Who were the subhects of the study?
b. How long did the study last?
c. Why was the study conducted?
d. How was health measured?
e. What are some potential differences between the 2 groups that could 
confound the response?

2. Using the report in the Annals of Internal Medicine, what would you 
add or change above?

3. Something happened in 1989 that led to an increased difference between 
the 2 groups.  What happened?  How does it effect the status made in the 
article:
"There was but a slight increase in disability in the runners and a 
substantial increase in the nonrunners during this period," the team 
reported.  By the end of the study, the nonrunners reported three and a 
half times more disability than did the runners.

4. The report discusses the advantages of a longitudinal study over a 
cross-sectional study and a prolonged experiment.  What are its 
disadvantages?

5.  Who is an "ever runner"?  Why did the study compare ever runners with 
never runners?

6.  If you could add one sentence to the newspaper article, what would it be?

7.  If you had to remove three sentences from the newspaper article, what
would they be and why?