I haven't read the study, but I did read the rebuttal link posted.
The site requested data from the original large scale study this study's authors referenced in determining that more than an hour loses benefits, and found that the original study found no upper limit. While there's a diminishing return, there is no upper limit on health benefits from running and no maximum time you should run after which it becomes more harmful than beneficial.
Of course there are studies that say one thing and studies that say the opposite thing, and we do need to be careful what we believe.
But I believe the balance of the evidence here is in a poor study and faked data to claim over-exercise is harmful where that result is NOT what was found by the original large-scale study they reference.
Besides, ZENANDNOW you say you will "never be running, unles being chased". Even this study doesn't say running is bad for you. It says running is good for you and provides health benefits, up to an hour a day.
If you want to "not run" because you don't like running, then don't run. There's nobody telling you that you must run. But at least be honest about why you don't want to run. There is no evidence that running is actually SO bad for you that you should not ANY running at all. None. Nada. Zip.
By all means exercise to your own preference. But don't say science backs you up. It doesn't.
Deb, in New Zealand