How about this ..
Here's a news flash.
Distance running is destructive to the human body.
Sprints under 100 meters are better.
Distance running prohibits protein synthesis within the muscle fibers thus causing them to become weaker and smaller due to the stresss.
And if your comeback to this is that distance runners lungs are stronger. Then guess what? You're wrong again.
The only reason why it appears that a distance runners lungs are stronger is because of the fact that most distance runners have destroyed basically all muscle tone in their body thus reducing their overall mass.
It's not hard to move through the earth when you're only 105 lbs. It's basic physics. It has nothing to do with your lungs being superior or anything.
A sprinters lungs are a billion times stronger than any distance runners lungs because they look like what they are suppose to look like.
Distance running is like some kind of disease that people get addicted to and it literally destroys their bodies from the inside out.
It makes even their lungs weaker. Think about it. If you're making your body weaker overall by doing distance running and you're stressing out your body and your mind repeatedly for no reason then what makes you think that your lungs are not also becoming weaker?
Just because there are two points on earth A and B, doesn't mean that the human body was ever designed to run it.
And if anyone brings up some crap about well early humans needed to run far then you're wrong again.
Because if you didn't have any type of elemental escapability to start then it doesn't matter how far you think you can run.