Scientifical Research Studies: When ‘Optimal’ Isn’t the Point for Trail Running or Life

Before we talk about how to use research, or when to ignore it, or why it makes people spiral, we need to say something out loud that rarely gets said clearly enough.

Most research studies are exclusive by design.

Not accidentally. Not maliciously. Just… structurally.

They are usually built around people who are easier to study, easier to control for variables, and easier to compare. That often means elite athletes. Men. Smaller sample sizes. One body type. Bodies that already tolerate high training loads. People whose lives revolve around training, recovery, and performance.

That doesn’t make the research useless.

But it does mean it’s not neutral. And it definitely means it’s not universal.

Why This Gets Missed So Easily

Most people aren’t reading full research papers. And honestly, that’s fine. They’re long. They’re dense. They’re written for scientists talking to other scientists.

What most of us see instead is the highlight reel. The takeaway. The “this improves performance by X percent” line. The post that says “the science says…” and then moves on.

What usually doesn’t make the headline is who was actually studied. Or who wasn’t. Or what assumptions were baked into the protocol. Or how narrow the population really was.

So the research starts to feel like a rule instead of a data point. And when something is presented like a rule, it’s really hard not to internalize it.

Where Everyday Trail Runners Get Caught

Trail runners are especially vulnerable to this.

Not because they’re naive. But because trail running already requires so much problem-solving. Fueling over long hours. Managing terrain. Adjusting effort constantly. Dealing with heat, cold, elevation, and whatever your body decides to do that day.

So when someone says, “This is optimal,” it’s tempting to think, Okay, maybe this is the missing piece.

Except a lot of that research wasn’t built around trail runners at all. And even when it was, it was often built around trail runners who live very different lives than you do.

Different stress. Different recovery. Different bodies. Different margins for error.

Women Are Often Not in the Room

This part matters, and it needs to be said plainly.

Women are still underrepresented in endurance research. And when women are included, the research often doesn’t fully account for hormones, cycle phase, perimenopause, menopause, birth control, or the sheer variability between women.

Add in differences in body size, body composition, and GI tolerance, and you start to see why so many women read research, try to apply it, and end up thinking something is wrong with them when it doesn’t work.

Most of the time, the issue isn’t execution. It's applicability.

Why People Try to Implement It Anyway

Here’s the part I think we need more compassion around.

When life feels heavy, uncertain, or out of control, research can feel grounding. It feels concrete. It feels like something you can do. And for busy women who already doubt whether they’re doing enough, that certainty is appealing.

So people don’t try to implement research because they’re obsessed with optimization.

They do it because they want reassurance. They want to know they’re not missing something. They want to feel capable.

That’s human.

The Reframe That Actually Helps

Research is not a prescription.

It’s information.

It can spark curiosity. It can suggest possibilities. It can point toward something worth exploring. But it cannot tell you what will work in your body, in your life, in this season.

When you stop asking, “Should I be doing this?” and start asking, “Is this actually meant for someone like me?” the pressure eases up.

And more importantly, you stop treating every new study like a referendum on whether you’re doing trail running “right.”

What This Looks Like in Trail Running

Using research well doesn’t mean copying it. It means translating it.

It means noticing patterns instead of protocols. It means experimenting slowly instead of overhauling everything. It means understanding that just because something worked for an elite athlete under controlled conditions doesn’t mean it’s the next thing you need to implement on a random long run.

Learn to take these thing with a grain of salt. Sometimes the smartest move is not changing anything at all.

Why This Applies to Life Too

This same pattern shows up everywhere.

Productivity advice. Wellness trends. Parenting guidance. Political talking points.

Someone is always telling you what’s optimal, what’s proven, what works.

And just like in trail running, context gets lost.

You’re allowed to step back. You’re allowed to ask who something was built for. You’re allowed to choose what supports you instead of what impresses the algorithm.

‘Optimal’ Isn’t the Point

The point is sustainability.

The point is staying engaged with trail running instead of burning out on it. The point is trusting yourself more, not less, as you learn. The point is recognizing that if something doesn’t work for you, that doesn’t mean you failed.

It usually just means you weren’t the audience.

Research isn’t wrong.

But it’s not personal.

And “optimal” isn’t the point — in trail running or in life.

Good effort. Positive attitude.💛🧡⛰️