But my good will to the author is now shattered and I am totally baffled that someone who wrote so convincingly about the way running could transform the life of a middle aged woman could write so spitefully about middle aged men who jog. Admittedly it is part of the press campaign to ridicule Gordon Brown in every way possible(and she does spend an awful lot of words mocking the way he looks when out for a run) but the conclusion is that middle aged men should not run. They should stick to the traditional, more dignified pursuits of bridge, gardening or a bit of bowls and she describes jogging as a modern plague brought to us by the Americans before delivering this dire health warning.
But Gordon Brown is in his late 50s - not an age to hurl yourself into a fitness regime from scratch.
It isn't good for the ageing knees, it will inflame sciatica and it risks bringing forward the date of a hip replacement.
Most worryingly, the sudden strain on ancient heart valves can occasionally be fatal.
The implication is that after you have reached a certain age you should fade away to gentle irrelevance and not strain yourself too much because it might be dangerous. I can almost feel the metaphorical pat on the head and the "there, there dear. Now you mustn't overtax yourself" (plus of course concern that you wrap up warmly and wear a vest).
This is so wrong.
Every time I see someone out on the road, man or woman, young or old, struggling with their run but still trying, I want to offer support. Every time someone manages to break a personal barrier and for example manages to run for fifteen minutes without walking, they are right to be proud. Every time anybody makes the effort I think their achievement should be appreciated.
The most important thing is to continue to try. It doesn't matter what at, it just matters that you continue to strive. Running is good, people should be supported and Julie Welch in this one mean spirited article has undone much of the good of her other writings.
It is such a shame.