Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Everything that you are ever going to want to know about running shoes: Running Shoes Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Have you considered the Critical Thinking and Skeptical Boot Camp, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Examining injury risk and pain perception in runners using minimalist footwear

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by NewsBot, Dec 19, 2013.

  1. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.


    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    Examining injury risk and pain perception in runners using minimalist footwear
    Michael Ryan, Maha Elashi, Richard Newsham-West, Jack Taunton
    Br J Sports Med; Published Online First 19 December 2013
  2. The minimalist shoe fad has finally ended with this study. Good riddance!!
  3. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Here is my spin on this study:
  4. docbourke

    docbourke Active Member

    This proves that 10 weeks is not enough time to transition to minimalist shoes. 12 month follow up would be interesting but the question always arises, why change to minimalist as there Is no proven benefit even in the long term.
  5. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Indeed. I have seen this sort of comment come up a lot since this study was published, especially on running blogs; which is a sort of comment you would never see a few yrs ago and if you were brave enough to say that, the fan boys were on you like vultures. A lot of people are really questioning why bother to expose yourself to the injury risk transitioning when all virtually all the research in 2013 (injury rate; running economy; and biomechanical) have shown no benefits of minimalism over traditional running shoes.

    The fan boys have not had a good 2013. I recall posting something here late last year (2012), that I sense a disturbance in the force. All the research has shown no benefits. Both SoS and LT have reported a decline in sales of minimalist shoes dropping every month in 2013, now down to < or ~ 4% of the market. More people are searching Google for the maximalist Hoka One One's than for Vibram Five Fingers (see this).

    Runners have voted with their feet and the fan boys who so firmly hung their hats on the minimalist fad now have egg on their faces.
  6. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Kevin, Craig, and fan boys,
    Are you really interested to know if minimalism is better on the long term or not really?
    Do you have just one single piece of evidence that the big bulky shoes that 90% of runners are wearing (recommended by retailer, companies, podiatrist, physios and physicians… and probably you) are better than just nothing or Walmart 20$ shoes?
    For deeper analyses of the study that you maybe kevin didn't read, see http://www.therunningclinic.ca/blog...trial-minimalist-vs-maximalist-running-shoes/ (including comment of the main author) or http://runblogger.com/2013/12/do-minimalist-shoes-increase-injury-risk-merry-christmas-vibram.html
  7. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Where have any if us ever made unsubstantiated claims for "big bulky shoes"? I have never made any claims for those. The only unsubstantiated claims are being made by those promoting minimalism.

    Care to show us where all the evidence that the fan boys keep telling us there is for minimalist shoes? The claims that have been made are not being supported by the evidence --> egg on face and high embarrassment for those who have so firmly hung their hat on the minimalist fad. I never hung my hat on the "big bulky shoes". (I do some of my running in minimalist shoes!)

    The minimalist fad is over. Runners have voted with there feet. Minimalist shoe sales have dropped continuously in 2013; while "motion control" and "cushioning" shoe sales have increased.

    Almost all the research in 2013 has shown that there are NO GENERIC advantages of minimalism over "big bulky shoes" in terms of running economy, injury rates and biomechanical loads, so what is the point of transitioning to them when there is an increased injury risk during the transition. The evidence now supports that there is no generic long term benefit from doing so, so why bother?
  8. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Craig, I can feel you bias (strongly), and your lack of rigor when you say :
    - The minimalist fad is over
    - The only unsubstantiated claims are being made by those promoting minimalism
    - Runners have voted with there feet (come back one earth Craig, runners buy what retailers -bias by companies- are recommending… )…
    - Almost all the research in 2013 has shown that there are NO GENERIC advantages of minimalism over "big bulky shoes" in terms of running economy, injury rates and biomechanical loads, (What? Are we calling this cherry picking?)

    I'm interested to know
    - how much volume (% and km) are you doing in your minimalist shoe (because you say :"I do some of my running in minimalist shoes!")
    - how much % of your patients you recommend BBS vs minimalist shoe.

    - I'm use to run in minimalist shoe. Must I start to wear BBS?
    - My kids have 16, 7, 5 and 1 yo… what type of shoes must I buy for them.
    - My brother (200pounds, flat feet, never runs) want to start running what type of shoes must I recommend to him?

    It's late in Canada. Going to bed. Hope you will answer to my questions and not doing politics agains with your fan boys :)
  9. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    What more evidence do you need for that than the sales figures? Runners are voting with their feet and buying less and less minimalist shoes and more and more 'motion control' and 'cushioning shoes' - just look at the increased popularity of Hoka One Ones .... up to a third of competitors in ultramarathons are now wearing Hoka One Ones. That is not due to any bias from me. The sales figures speak for themselves.
    Those promoting minimalism claim there are less injures when there is NO evidence that says so. How is that me being biased? There is simply no evidence.

    Look at a recent issue of Runners World magazine. The only shoe manufacturers that make injury claims are the minimalist manufacturers. There are no injury claims being made in the adverts for 'big bulky shoes' ... yet you keep demanding evidence for big bulky shoes, when they make no such claims (and neither am I). Are you not showing your bias by not demanding evidence for the minimalist shoes claims?
    See above. So why aren't they buying the minimalist shoes despite all the adverts of the (unsupported) benefits being claimed in all the running magazine and advertisements - there has been an extraordinary amount of hype and promotion of barefoot/minimalism over the last 5 or so yrs; every runner I meet is familiar with it or heard about it;, yet the runners are obviously not buying it!. Obviously they are not gullible enough to fall for all the unsubstantiated injury claims being made. You really are insulting the runners intelligence to claim that they are that gullible.

    I recall reading a comment from a prominent USA running specialty retailer (I think it was in Running Insight) that what is happening is that runners who bought into the minimalist fad are not buying a second pair of minimalist shoes, but are returning to what they were familiar with. The retailers were recommending them and devoting space to them are now reducing the stock and space as it the runners who are deciding, despite the advice they got from the retailer. So they tried it and obviously did not like it. That is not due to any bias from me. That is the runners voting with their feet.
    Cherry picking? Which studies have actually showed there is a benefit? Most of the running economy studies this yr have shown that heel striking is more economical or there are no differences; the two injury rate studies have shown no differences between minimalist vs shod and rearfoot vs midfoot/forefoot; ALL the biomechanical studies have just shown you move the load from one tissue to another - no generic benefits.
    In the last few months I probably did around 50-60k a week (including a 1/2 marathon); probably 12-15 of those in the NB Minimus; I do a hard steep hill trail run each week in the Hoka's (probably 7-8k)- mainly as I find the post run recovery is much quicker in the Hoka's for me; the rest in the Kinvaras - I going to up the ante soon for a marathon, I assume the bulk of that will be in the Kinvaras (4mm drop) as that is what I feel comfortable running in. I just not that arrogant to evangelize and promote that what works for me will work for everyone else.
    None. Generally I advise them to stay in what they are comfortable with and find what suits them. There is no reason for a generic recommendation of one over the other.
    Why would you want to do that for? Stay with what you are comfortable with. Why risk an injury changing. Personally I prefer to mix the shoes up; its up to you if you want to or not want to do the same think, It works for me; doesn't mean it would work for you
    Whatever you and they are comfortable with.
    Whatever suits him and he is comfortable with.
  10. DaVinci

    DaVinci Well-Known Member

    Blaise, you really are getting desperate now. The story that you have been spinning for so long now is unraveling and loosing support.
  11. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    not really… it's exactly what I say since 10 years : your feet become so weak with your BBS that you cannot switch to less shoes (the Free) in a short period. ;)
    What doesn't fit in my model is their result about the 5F : Recreational runners used to wearing traditional shoes and who were assigned a full minimalist shoe (5-Fingers, 10 minutes more per week during 12 weeks) did NOT show a significantly higher risk of injury… That's the best evidence actually (RCT of Ryan et al.)… over all the anecdotes from Podiatry arena and the other case serie studies (2013-Cauthon, 2013-Ridge, 2012-Salzler, 2011-Giuliani)

    Hummm maybe less is better… maybe I need to change my opinion about risk of switching… :rolleyes:
  12. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member


    You say " I advise them to stay in what they are comfortable " …
    I agree… but it's not enough. The reality for more than 80% of runners is that the market don't offer to runners the choice of minimalist shoe (retailers shoe 3 pair of BBS to test it and let the patient taking the one he feel the better… 80 to 95% of the shoe in their shop are BBS… ). If the client ask for a minimalist shoe, he will be discourage to buy it (because it's dangerous and not protective like the "normal" BBS … it's like that in Canada, in US, in Europe everywhere and in Australia!!!)
    So you have the choice to let the patient be oriented by the retailer/publicity/companies/trend… or to educate him about a little more that just the comfort (same thing when some one want a 5F because it's cool)

    You say "NO GENERIC advantages of minimalism over "big bulky shoes" in terms of running economy" … my god! Are you joking? I cannot argue against this… ALL papers (14) show that less weight in the shoes -more minimal shoes- are decreasing O2 consumption. One little paper show that a little of cushioning (in a minimalist shoe) is a little better than barefoot (for 8/12 cases).

    I'm always waiting one single peace of evidence from your fan boys club telling me to recommend a BBS for beginners and children.
  13. This is how much I think about what Blaise Dubois is preaching now...

  14. Dr. Steven King

    Dr. Steven King Well-Known Member

    Aloha Blaze

    Welcome to the Kevin Kirby Ignor list!

    You should buy your children the shoes that are best for the job and their protection.

    If they will be running on glass or broken uneven terrain with the possibilty of puncture wounds i would recomend the new advanced composite spring lever maximalist footwear systems as sold by Kingetics here on Podiatry Arena.

    If you need footwear that has superior fire and flame resistance i would recomend the same system.

    Both of these orthotic attributes have proven scientific results as reported in the final report for SBIR A11-109 "Advanced Composite Insoles for the Reduction of Stress Fractures." US Department of Defense and Army Medical Research and Materials Command.

    A Hui Hou,

    Co-Principal Investigator SBIR A11-109 US DoD
    Maximalist Composite Spring Lever Runner

Share This Page