Barefoot Running

[westdale]

ca.sports.yahoo.com/top/news;_ylt=ApesolPrbQihvFUBwJ9fPLVShgM6?slug=ap-barefootrunning&prov=ap&type=lgns

[oldbones]

"The research was funded in part by a company that makes minimalist running shoes that try to mimic barefoot running. But Lieberman, who disclosed the grant, said the company had no say in the design of the study and didn’t influence the outcome."

The battle of who funds what studies continues ....

truth = most money

[oldster]

Jan 27, 2010 12:52:04 GMT -5 westdale said:

ca.sports.yahoo.com/top/news;_ylt=ApesolPrbQihvFUBwJ9fPLVShgM6?slug=ap-barefootrunning&prov=ap&type=lgns

There's nothing new here, and the same questions are left unanswered (only one of which was acknowledge by the researcher-- concerning actual injury rates for barefoot vs. shod running).

I've always been a wearer and supporter of lighter, more flexible, and less corrective footwear; but, there is a fervour developing around the whole barefoot/minimalist thing that is turning it into a dubious, anti-modernist crusade, replete with conspiracy theories about big corporations trying to keep us hooked on footwear (as if footwear weren't one of our oldest and most important technological advances!).

Start with the argument about the evolutionary basis of barefoot running: We are evolved to run, and to run barefoot, of course, but we weren't necessarily evolved to run as fast as possible over very long distances, on hard surfaces (acknowledged by the researcher) and into late-middle age (our primitive ancestors would have died long before their collagen levels had time to drop and reduce the natural shock-absorbing properties of their muscles and tendons).

From the point of view of running as a sport, the question that needs to be asked is whether racing and training barefoot actually makes us faster. The answer to this has partly to do with the risk/benefit ratio involved; but, we need to consider that fact that some protection of the foot, and even some biomechanical support and correction, may actually enable us to run faster in both the short and longer term. It could well be that shoes make us able to strike the ground harder and generate more force off the ground, regardless of what part of our foot is touching down first. Even the Kenyans, after all, switch to shoes at the first opportunity (and, yes, before they get sponsorships, which the majority of them never do in the first place). And these are athletes who have grown up running barefoot. If it really made you faster, don't you think they'd be sticking with it in training (even the sponsored ones-- your sponsor isn't watching you 24/7, after all, and likely wouldn't care anyway, so long as you were ripping it up in races with their shoes on)?

Finally, those who like to refer to the corporate vested interest in keeping us shod really underestimate the ingenuity of these companies when it comes to design and marketing. Even if we all switched to barefoot running, they'd find a way to sell us products. Just look at the success of the buffet belt? But, the point is, there is no way more than a fraction of us is ever going to be able to go completely without shoes.

Note: I have actually done some barefoot running in my time (a couple of summers running up to 25k barefoot, on a golf course)-- although in my 20s. It's great, but highly impractical, and not really advisable for anyone over about 35 who wants to train seriously, rather than run a few easy kms a day.

And, I coach a well known and very good barefoot runner, who also happens to be over 50! I fully support his choice. However, anyone seriously contemplating following his example should be aware of the following: He grew up barefoot in the Bahamas; for simple, practical reasons, he's only able to do maybe 50% of his running each year barefoot (most of the time he's in my worn out racing flats!); and, he has to run at least once a week barefoot on the treadmill during the winter just to maintain his callouses (and if we're not evolved to run in shoes, we certainly aren't evolved for running on treadmills, are we now?)

[madm]

oldster, i'm not sure running barefoot would make you faster per se...just less injury prone

[pq]

I'm not sure I understand the current seeming fascination with barefoot running, although I think a little bit of it can be right in the correct circumstances for some people. Personally, I like to train and race in light shoes with no support (Nike Streak XC and Adidas Adizero PR), but I don't think this is for everyone. I'm lucky to have pretty good biomechanics and I land fairly light on my feet. The only time I run barefoot is after extremely hard sessions of short fast repeats, when I will try to cool down barefoot on grass if I can manage it. This seems to help the lower legs recover a little better. As for trying to run barefoot as a general rule, I don't see the attraction, and fail to see any compelling evidence that this would make somebody faster.

[oldster]

Jan 27, 2010 14:48:41 GMT -5 madm said:

oldster, i'm not sure running barefoot would make you faster per se...just less injury prone

This is why I specified that the whole question might be irrelevant from the point of view of running as a sport. What's the point of being less injury prone if you're not any faster? Training less and going more slowly will also make you less injury prone, but it will also make you a slower racer!

Now, if someone could show me that training barefoot would reduce injuries at a given level of training intensity , thereby making training more effective, I would take a different view.

[kmaser]

You know there's a lot of interest in barefoot running and the products are out there. I even ran a race barefoot (though not by choice ) a 10k xc in Lethbridge. Seems to me there are a lot of gimmicks with shoes these days some good some bad. A lot of the trail running products I've seen are quite good. Old school stuff we used to get out after a hard workout and do strides on the grass barefoot. Abebe Akila ran marathons barefoot but I couldn't see that happening now. If run on grass tracks you could get away with it but running barefoot on asphalt =
injuries/short career in IMHO. A lot of the good NZ/Kenya guys ran there training in the day barefoot but it was on soft surfaces/cross country.

Cheers

[Max]

I am currently working on a research project at the University of Tennessee as part of my doctorate degree investigating shod-to-barefoot transitional effects in barefoot-simulating shoes. I have read countless barefoot running articles in the past months and as Oldster pointed out, a very important question still remains to be answered:
"(...) whether racing and training barefoot actually makes us faster?"

Do running shoes have detrimental effects on our running gait? If our ancestors survived running around barefoot and Kenyan kids grow up not wearing shoes to become elite distance runners, isn't it obvious that we shouldn't wear shoes?

Once again, as Oldster said, there are many factors that dictate whether or not our gait is efficient or injury-prone. Connective tissue in children is more flexible allowing for greater joint ranges of motion and tissue strain (change in length). Therefore, minimal foot support at a young age may likely help a "long term" adaptation to barefoot running to ensure proper foot mechanics. As they age, they would without a doubt be able to handle "more" barefoot activities compared to a 20-60 year old barefoot "rookie" (Yes this is a big age range, for comparison purposes, there would be another billion factors involved with older age). That being said, in a modern world, I wouldn't recommend that parents should let their kids walk around the neighborhood park in their bare feet, for obvious reasons.

Now for the 20+ elite runner that is striving for excellence, throwing their shoes away to start a new barefoot running regime would be 100% absurd. Barefoot running may (I say "may" because laboratory research has many many limitations) help promote proper foot strike (fore or mid foot) patterns for "speed". Thus, incorporating cooldowns, strides, running drills on a soft surface such as grass once or twice a week (as a starting point), would unlikely lead to serious, if any, injuries. Ultimately, an adaptation phase (highly variable) would be required to prevent injuries while developing a new, proper strike pattern. And even then, leg muscles would need a fairly long time to adapt to a new, more taxing strike pattern during longer and more intense runs on harder surfaces.

A major benefit that may result from barefoot "training", not necessarily running, is leg (leg = ankle to knee) strengthening on soft surfaces through drills, plyos, etc... The advantage of wearing a barefoot-simulating shoe is that it provides cutaneous protection that would allow us to train on harder surfaces to speed up the adaptation phase (while still being smart with the load and frequency). As of now, no research has studied the adaptation or strength training effects of barefoot running (in bare feet or in barefoot-simulating shoes)

We are currently throwing some ideas around to study the potential for lower limb strengthening in bare feet or in "minimalist" shoes through a training intervention study.

To be continued....

Cheers!

Max Paquette

[kmaser]

Good points and interesting research. One of the reasons for
running the strides/fast stuff on the grass was to strengthen the
foot muscles and work on running/form style. Also if you look a lot of the old school running shoes in the 60's 70's they were pretty simple. Maybe it's not such a bad idea to get back to that.

Good post

[oldster]

Very interesting stuff, Max. I had no idea there was research money around to look into this sort of thing in a systematic way.

I have to say, I found the barefoot running I was able to do in my 20s very exhilarating. I remember my legs coming to life when my shoes came off. There are clearly some "reflexological" effects triggered by exposing all those normally heavily protected tissues and nerves to the rough surface of the ground (even if "reflexology" itself is a pseudo science). That said, I still think the barefoot fundamentalists are making altogether too big a thing out of it. It may feel great and be fun on some level, but that doesn't mean it's going to make us all any faster. All the fastest races are still going to be run on hard and relatively smooth surfaces, so I can't see any disadvantage to wearing shoes, given that they enable us to get a grip and really drive the foot down hard, producing a lot of power off the ground. And if we're always going to race in shoes, I suspect we'll always need to do the vast majority of our training in them.

Anyway, we'll see what you guys come up with in the lab!

[Parrott]

My thoughts on the issue include that modern running shoes are designed for all people. Meaning that they are designed for people who have not developed form or technique. Thus the need these corrective types of foot wear to prevent injury. But doesn't the elite runner have no need for these if they already run a certain way. For example why would you correct your running stride if you are still improving and injury free. This concern can be seen when people go to doctors who tell them how there stride or way of running is wrong. But in the end they suffer more from corrective activities because the muscles in their body did not develop to support this new mechanics. Just my thoughts of this type if issue not sure if they have any validity.

[trailer]

I've been a runner for quite a few decades. Last spring I bought a pair of Vibram KSO's which are about as close to barefoot as one can get. For many of my off-day runs in 2009 I ran in said shoes in a grassy park in town and can't remember when I enjoyed running as much. No problems, no pains, just a neat, free feeling with the peace of mind that just a thin layer of rubber was between my soles and the ground. I understand that everyone's feet are different, but I'm sure the KSO's contributed to my feet being healthier and happier.

[scottkent]

Hi Everyone, just adding my biased input into this topic. The small percentage of us that are competitive runners probably don't use very structured shoes. The purpose behind the many shoes we have out there is to allow the masses of couch potatoes to experience a little of what we do and create a better standard of living for themselves. The reason the masses didn't run before the 70's was that most people, except a small elite group, are not as anatomically correct (spelling?) to with stand the continued impact running creates. It just wasn't any fun! The shoe has afforded this, good or bad. My fondest memories of running was barefoot when I ran along spanish banks when the tide was out. Most of the people I know could never experience a runners high without the basic neutral or structured shoe. I am talking masses, not the few of us that can run 10x400m off a minute in spikes! The ones that are over 40 minutes in a 10km FUN RUN (thats almost everyone)

[benjamin]

My brother, who is not a runner but who has been trying to find safe ways for his wife, who has some health problems, to get in some physical activity and recently asked me whether www.squidoo.com/mbt-anti-shoe would be worth trying. I had never seen them before, but I figured that based on her history she would get injured and recommended she not get them. That's really an aside, as I have nothing to say about them.

However, that discussion led to him sending me this article this morning: uk.news.yahoo.com/22/20100127/tsc-life-us-running-011ccfa.html which again says nothing new. But it links to www.barefootrunning.fas.harvard.edu, a site b the Harvard Skeletal Biology Lab. Maybe it will add to the discussion, or Max can supplement his research with their findings. Or maybe it's useless. I haven't actually had a chance to look through it, as most of it won't load at work.

[pato]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jrnj-7YKZE

[tree]

Some added input:

From my personal experience, I seem to get the most miles out of my legs when I'm running in shoes with a) less support and b) less structure. I used to have injuries all the time in my hamstring, knee area, and in the shins (not sure how that could be related) and I always used to wear corrective shoes, because that's what my local runningroom recommended; what did I know? However, for the last year almost I haven't had a single injury and what did I do? Two things: 1) Switched to unsupportive shoes and basically ran them into oblivion. They almost looked like slippers before I stopped using them and I loved every run. 2) Started running exclusively on grass and trails.

Now, my injury-free running spree could have just been caused by running on softer terrain, but I for one believe in the minimilistic approach regardless whether or not it's a marketing scheme. I'm no kinesiology major, but it seems to me that joint loading is a lot less extensive when fore-foot running. I've gone on shoeless runs before and excluding the pain on the bottom of my foot, I've never felt more at ease.

I'm taking some time off after OUAs and skipping outdoor, so I'm actually considering doing a little experimentation with Vibrams. I'm not sure what kind of benefits can come in terms of performance, but I hope to find some .

Also, it's fair to add that Haile used to run barefoot growing up. And not many people can say they have a more natural stride than him, haha.