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. Its been a busy week moving to new domain and new server and new platform. We still have a lot to do. The basic functionality is there, but we working long hours on the rest and awaiting the new design.
    Dismiss Notice

"Tackling the 10 Myths of Barefoot Running"

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by Kevin Kirby, Jan 5, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kevin Kirby

    Kevin Kirby Well-Known Member


    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    A recent article in Podiatry Today magazine was just published online by a "medical advisor" for Vibram USA. Any one care to add to the comments in this article?

    Tackling the 10 Myths of Barefoot Running
     
  2. Robertisaacs

    Robertisaacs Well-Known Member

    Look at it...
     
  3. David Smith

    David Smith Well-Known Member

    What?:confused:

    Dave
     
  4. Griff

    Griff Administrator

    Say what it is...
     
  5. Kevin Kirby

    Kevin Kirby Well-Known Member

    Huh?!
     
  6. mike weber

    mike weber Well-Known Member

    Look at it and say what it is ...... Sh!t is the full quote I believe Kevin.

    Which I dont get why barefoot running would get that quote re barefoot running but that me.

    Thanks to barefoot I learnt and read about leg stiffness - great moment in my Podiatry education.
     
  7. David Smith

    David Smith Well-Known Member

    I'm reading these papers and articles at present and from these data it would appear there's not a lot of difference between peak forces forefoot to rearfoot and although many other articles talk about lower forces when barefoot and forefoot striking some data appears to show higher peak forces. Some like to emphasize rate of loading at initial strike and this tends to be greater in rearfoot strike but not by a lot. There's a lot about force peaks and rate of loading but not so much about how those forces act about joints of interest with regard to moments. Considering the point of application of forces it seems likely that moments about joints would be higher with forefoot striking even if the peak forces were lower, which they are not. I particularly like the study that looked at over 300 elite runners, actually running, and hi speed videoed them to reveal how they strike. Only 1% were forefoot strikers and they were not anywhere near the winning times.

    I have an open mind because I used to barefoot run when I was doing a lot of karate but I think the running style changes mostly to assist in avoiding injury by sharp object such as stones and cobbles and gravel because it gives you a little extra time to feel the ground before committing to full and sudden loading, if you feel something sharp you can quickly skip to the opposite foot.

    Regards Dave
     
  8. blinda

    blinda Well-Known Member

    Sorry, off thread I know...but I`m surprised that Hicks wasn`t a contender for quote of the year, considering the frequency of this genius` quotes on the forum.
     
  9. Simon Spooner

    Simon Spooner Well-Known Member

    For those that don't know: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrTifComO7U

    "Take a deep breath, look at it again.... no it's a piece of ****"
     
  10. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    Kevin.. I spend an inordinate amount of time last year looking at, discussing and debating the issue of barefoot and minimalist running with a variaty of people. The highlight was in Austin Texas in December where I debated Blaise DuBois who presented material of such an unbelievably questionable nature I was forced to publically unleash my patented Bulls#it detector upon him, an experience he apparently did not enjoy. At least he had the grace to admit he was roundly thrashed in the debate. It could well have been he who wrote this article for Podiatry Today ( he believes everyone should run minimalist, especially if you are grossly overweight, a child or a beginner).
    So at the end of all this, I came to the conclusion it is a waste of time for anyone with any sort of balanced, scientific approach to running, biomechanics, injury, physiology.. etc to engage with these people in any sort of discussion.. period. You will just be vwasting hours of your valuable life with no reward iof any kind.

    These peoeple are simply not interesdted in the relevant questions, but just pushing their own barrow, for whatever it is they are selling.. and trust me.. they are ALL selling something.

    So my New Year's resolution, which I should have applied half way throughh 2011, is to let go.. let 'em bang on about whatever the heck they want, coz at the end of the day, they know they are after all, just salesmen.
     
  11. Kevin Kirby

    Kevin Kirby Well-Known Member

    Simon:

    Thanks for the advice.

    The problem is that I actually enjoy making the barefoot/minimalist runners squirm by engaging them in debate. This process forces me to be better aware of the research on this subject and, since I did the Runner's World Magazine interview nearly two years ago on barefoot vs shod running with Barefoot Ken Bob Saxton, my decades long interest in running biomechanics has truly been renewed.

    Very few of these people that I debate realize that I read nearly every piece of research on running biomechanics back and devoured all of Benno Nigg's and Peter Cavanagh's books and papers during my biomechanics fellowship in 1984-85 and during my early years of practice. In addition, I have been giving lectures on running biomechanics for the past quarter century to podiatry students and podiatrists both nationally and internationally.

    So for someone like me, a competetive distance runner turned sports podiatrist, with a very keen interest and training in the physiology and biomechanics of running, this barefoot vs shod running stuff is like all icing on the cake for me. It is one of the intellectual battles that I feel I am very well suited for and that I really don't mind participating in as a sidenote to my otherwise busy private practice and other academic committments.

    Looking forward to seeing you again in Manchester in June.

    BTW, how was the honeymoon?
     
  12. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2012
  13. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Well-Known Member

    Dear Simon,
    Don't think I didn't enjoy the debate. Your bul**** detector was funny... but biased, unscientific (Best example of cherry picking) and just good to convince an unscientific audience. If people of podiatry Arena want see your weak argumentation and your lack of criticism on science they can read our exchange at the Austin debate on the blog of The Running Clinic. http://www.therunningclinic.ca/blog...austin-texas-austin-texas-debate-on-footwear/
    Will be in Australia soon... another debate?:drinks:drinks
    Blaise

    P.S. if you have time, you didn't answer some important questions:
    1. If someone starts a running program, which kind of shoe would you recommend to this person?
    2. What type do you recommend to children and teenagers who run?
    3. Do you really think the anti-pronation technologies control pronation?
    4. Do the shoes sold by ASICS prevent from injuries?
    5. Do you consider that your references quoted in Austin were valid to justify the prescription of « big bulky shoes » (>95% and more of ASICS’s market) ?
     
  14. Kevin Kirby

    Kevin Kirby Well-Known Member

    Blaise:

    It would be much more fun to debate these topics if we had some better research to hang our hats on. As for now, this barefoot/minimalist shoe thing simply has not made a big dent in the running shoe sales here in Sacramento (which has a huge running community) or in California in general, but certainly "minimalist shoes" are more common than they used to be. I'm all for runners self-selecting which shoe works best for them and if a runner chooses a "minimalist shoe" and isn't having problems with this minimliast shoe then I don't have any problems with that.

    However, this continuous use of terms such as "big, bulky shoes" by you, being obviously used by you as a negative term, is truly unscientific since we all know that there are tradeoffs with all types of shoe designs. In addition, your creation of the term "proprioceptive heel strikers", a term which you cannot define adequately, again weakens your case because it demonstrates that you are now trying to create a term that allows you to backtrack and qualify that maybe some of the 90% of heel strikers may actually be running "correctly" by "proprioceptively heel striking", whereas early on in the debate, the minimalist-barefoot advocates basically preached that if you were heel-striking that you were running incorrectly.

    I do, however, agree with you on the fact that the running shoe companies have been making their shoes more complex, more expensive and not much more effective at preventing injurues over the past decade. Gimmics have been added to running shoes for the past 25 years that were advertised as being helpful when, in fact, they were useless modifications that seemed to simply allow the shoe company to claim that they had enhanced their running shoe. In fact, in most instances these useless modifications simply allowed the shoe companies to charge more money for the shoe with no benefit to the runner either in performance, comfort or injury prevention. In addition, some of these modifications led to more running injuries, not fewer injuries.

    So, even though I am not in agreement with many of the minimalist shoe advocates and all of what they preach, I do think that having this larger variety of running shoes on the market may eventually force the shoe manufacturers to simplify their running shoes, make them lighter and hopefully also make them less expensive so that the runner may be able to find the most comfortable and lightweight shoe that allows them to run injury free on the surfaces they run on.

    That being said, I currently am enjoying running in my Hoka One One Bondis and think that the "maximalist shoe" may be the next big thing within the running shoe industry.
     
  15. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Well-Known Member

    Agree... for the moment we can analyze what we have... even if it's grey, there is a tendency.

    Agree... but consumers need to have the choice... and we need to offer the choice

    I love those terms because it means 3 things
    1. It's Shoes
    2. there are too Big
    3. there are Bulky ;)

    100% agree

    100% agree

    Best:drinks
     
  16. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    I will respond to that one. Yes and no. Depends on which studies you want to cherry pick to support or not support it.
    The latest industry figures are that the sales of "big bulky" running shoes are up.
     
  17. Dana Roueche

    Dana Roueche Well-Known Member

    Show me the data.

    Dana
     
  18. Dana Roueche

    Dana Roueche Well-Known Member

    Show me the data.

    Dana
     
  19. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    I already showed you that data in another thread. I can't be bothered looking it up again for you.
     
  20. Dana Roueche

    Dana Roueche Well-Known Member

    Craig, no you didn't. You told me you asked 3 friends what they thought about the sales of "motion control" shoes. That is not a market survey and nothing more than a guess.

    My point is that in spite of you or Kevin speculating about the direction of the shoe industry, you really don't have any conclusive data about the direction of sales of the various categories of shoes.

    OK, I'm done. This is a pointless waste of time.

    Dana
     
  21. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Nope. They weren't "friends". They were contacts within running shoe companies who asked I not identify them and not reveal the actual figures. They had no reason to lie to me. It was not a guess, it was based on their sales figure. I also quoted you this industry source, discussed in this thread: Running shoe sales are up despite trend to minimalist running
     
  22. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

     
  23. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Well-Known Member

     
  24. mike weber

    mike weber Well-Known Member

     
  25. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Well-Known Member

     
  26. Griff

    Griff Administrator

    Hi Blaise,

    I just read this entry on your blog and have a few references I'd like if possible please:

    1. The references that more minimalist shoes improve performance (assumed from your contention that runners should only wear PECH shoes if they are not interested in improving performance)

    2. The reference that backs up your claim that less than 11% of the running population should wear PECH shoes, the rest should be in minimal shoes.

    Thanks in advance

    Ian
     
  27. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    been waiting for the response that has not come Ian... not really surprising. just been listening to one of his podcasts wiith an Aussie physio.. amongst other things he says

    • treadmill running does not change biomechanics
      video is not needed to assess running gait.. it can all be done by eye and a biomechanical assessment takes 10 minutes
      barefoot technique is the gold standard
    increased vertical loading rate, increased braking forces, increased vertical displacement and increased heel strike ALL come from shoes
    shoes cause heel striking
    80% of people running barefoot run midfoot and forefoot.. (a position directly challenged by 2 recent studies)
    if you heel strike in shoes, the body is not able to protect from injury.. gosh I wonder what happened to passive and active shock attenuation mechanisms.. and leg stiffness.. and proprioception, which, contrary to popular opinion, still happens even in the shod state???
    finally.. the best way to run safely is to run barefoot.. although he does acknowledge that this is not always practical..

    I gave up about 15 minutes into the hour long podcast unfortunately..

    dang...
     
  28. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Well-Known Member

    Hi guys,
    Just very busy
    I will be answer to those questions soon,

    But I suppose that Simon don't answer to my questions not because he is busy but because he have no answers!!!

    Hope you will be part of the next debate in Australia Simon...
    Soon your video from Austin... ;)
    Blaise
     
  29. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    Sorry mate.. I was busy with other things..!
    Hmmm.. the questions..... here are my answers

    1. If someone starts a running program, which kind of shoe would you recommend to this person?

    err... it totally depends on the person

    2. What type do you recommend to children and teenagers who run?

    ummm... it totally depends on the child or the teenager

    3. Do you really think the anti-pronation technologies control pronation?

    No.. not at all

    4. Do the shoes sold by ASICS prevent from injuries?

    Yes absolutely

    5. Do you consider that your references quoted in Austin were valid to justify the prescription of « big bulky shoes » (>95% and more of ASICS’s market) ?

    my oath i do.. read 'em again Blaise

    so that was pretty easy..
    I do not think I will be able to join you on your Oz tour unfortunately. I will be in North America.. I am lecturing in Montreal And Quebec.. your stomping ground I believe!
     
  30. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    by the way... I wish you would get your facts straight.. my bulls*itometer just went into overdrive again..

    5. Do you consider that your references quoted in Austin were valid to justify the prescription of « big bulky shoes » (>95% and more of ASICS’s market) ?

    dunno where you get this stuff from, but the figures you quote are not even close to the mark.. actually I do know where you get it from and there is no sunshine there..

    :pigs:
     
  31. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    Sorry.. just one more thing while we are asking questions on this excellent forum.. can you please give us some scientific justification for the following statements you made on the podcast?

    treadmill running does not change biomechanics

    video is not needed to assess running gait.. it can all be done by eye and a biomechanical assessment takes 10 minutes

    barefoot technique is the gold standard

    increased vertical loading rate, increased braking forces, increased vertical displacement and increased heel strike ALL come from shoes

    shoes cause heel striking

    80% of people running barefoot run midfoot and forefoot..

    if you heel strike in shoes, the body is not able to protect from injury..

    the best way to run safely is to run barefoot..

    thanks mate!
     
  32. Kevin Kirby

    Kevin Kirby Well-Known Member

    Whoa Bartold!!! Four posts in one day on the same thread.....you are on a roll, mate!!! Pretty soon, at this rate, you'll be passing up Dr. Spooner in highest number of posts here on Podiatry Arena......:rolleyes::drinks
     
  33. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    that's my goal.. albeit a lofty one.. make that 5
     
  34. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Well-Known Member

    Sorry, 97%?

    Because you didn't answer again to the question 1 and 2 I will challenge you juste on the Question 3 and 4

    Do you have data showing that ASICS shoes prevent injuries for runners... you said Absolutely... or theses studies are in the secret lab of your companies?

    And about anti-pronator... why you were defending the opposite in Austin and in my blog...

    Need to stop to do politics again!
     
  35. mike weber

    mike weber Well-Known Member

    Blaise while you are waiting for Simon

    How about the evidence Ian, Simon, Kevin,I and others have asked you for.

    While you may claim Big Bulky shoe are bad and alternative x is better - you also should be held accountable.

    Show us the evidence
     
  36. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Well-Known Member

    #1 question
    * It’s clear that the shoes have a huge masse effect on the O2 consumption : 0,7 to 1,0% O2 /100g . This was shown by 11 studies!!! (2011-Hanson, 2008-Divert, 2009-Bonacci, 1985-Burkett, Squadrone 2009, 1994-Flaherty , Catlin 1979, Roston 1981, Soule 1969, Martin 1985, Jones 1986)
    * Some proposed that the cushioning properties are increasing O2 consumption (by loss of energy) (2011-Hanson, 2012-Perl, 2008-Divert) OR decreasing O2 consumption (1984-frederick working in the Nike Lab) OR being subject dependent (2009-Bonacci, 2003-Nigg)
    * During overground running, the traditional shoes (BBS) increase the O2 consumption by up to 5,7% (for the same speed) with shoes compared to barefoot (2011-Hanson)
    * The mass effect seems to be more important that the cushioning effect to explain the increase in O2 consumption (2008-Divert)
    * Soft surfaces increase O2 consumption (Hardin 2004, Elliott 1994)
    * Anti pronator technologies don’t increase O2 consumption (Rubin 2008)
    * After looking for confounding factors (mass and cadence) more minimalist shoes (Vibram FiveFingersTM) was more economical than BBS (Asics Gel-Cumulus 10TM, a neutral shoe)
    * Stiffer sole in running shoes was increasing running economy (just by 1%) (Roy 2006)

    In conclusion,
    1. It’s clear that shoes need to be as light as possible.
    2. There is no evidence showing that characteristics of the modern shoes (high heel, cushioning and other technologies) are good to improve performance.
    3. The tendency of the literature is that the shoes need to be as close as possible to the barefoot condition
    4. for the modern shod runners, barefoot will take too much time to adapt, so they should have very minimalist shoes that don’t cause to much ‘protection behavior’… and that’s the reason why a majority of the high level athletes run in racing flat shoes.
    5. the next generation of performers will run in flatter shoes (less that 3 oz, very flexible and 0 drop)

    #2
    Why not?
    Do you have data showing that it's not true?
     
  37. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Well-Known Member

    I remember evidence and good questioning from Kevin and maybe from some of you... but not from Simon... even in a 1h lecture!

    so My answer
    - Everybody knows that there is no clinical trial for the moment... (but 4 are on the way –Boston/Vancouver/Quebec/South Africa).
    - Everybody interprets the indirect science to support their point (some to sell their shoes)

    So at that point NOTHING is 100% sure. We cannot state clearly on the topics of injury prevention and shoes... But for sure we CANNOT say that ASICS big bulky shoes (ex : Nimbus, Cumulus, Kayano, 33, Kinsey, … ) are preventing running injuries.

    But who needs to prove his point? The person who wants to do an intervention (or to do more of something or to change what was plan by nature) OR the person doing nothing (or less of an intervention).

    It’s for this reason that pharmaceutical companies need to prove the efficacy of their intervention before putting the pills on the market! That’s the reason why we try to prove that orthotics work… and not that ‘not wearing them’ works.

    And it’s the reason why companies NEED to prove that their product are :
    1. Safe
    2. Efficient to do what they claim… preventing injuries.

    So I’m waiting your evidences about prescribing that type of running shoes. Especially from Simon that claim that ASICS shoes prevent injuries :boohoo:

    For the data, I try to answer clearly to the initial question about performance. After that I invite you to follow one of my course (or come to quebec to take a bear :drinks )to understand all the topics of shoes, orthotics and biomechanics… with real and deep debate on science and practical experience!

    Going to teach all this great stuff, during the next weeks, so I won't be able to blog.
    See you all
     
  38. Simon Spooner

    Simon Spooner Well-Known Member

    I'd agree that mass is obviously important in metabolic cost. Yet I don't necessarily agree regarding "soft" [sic] (compliant) surfaces and increased metabolic cost, I think your statement needs some caveats within it, Blaise. It is simply overstated and not supported by all research:

    http://jap.physiology.org/content/92/2/469.full.pdf

    It may well depend on where the cushioning is applied as to the metabolic cost; if it isn't attached to the body, it probably doesn't increase metabolic cost and rather, it decreases it. Viz. the cost is in the mass, not the stiffness per se.

    Anyway:
    http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/v...az-1g#search="kerdock foot ground metabolism"

    Everyone with an interest should read the PhD thesis linked above. Y'all go read this, get yourselves learned and come back and talk about it nicely.

    A different Simon.

    P.S. I've only scanned it thus far, but the first take home from this speed read is that barefoot running isn't the same as running in minimalist shoes; no brainer.
     
  39. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Well-Known Member

    Thanks a lot for this info.

    I agree that minimalism (not just 5finger but also racers like the piranha of ASICS) is not barefoot... but certainly closer than the BBS (90% of the market running shoes) in a point of view of 1. Biomechanics, 2. neurophysiology, 3. economy, 4. promotion of tissue adaptation.

    Nice to meet you 'other Simon':drinks

    B
     
  40. Simon Spooner

    Simon Spooner Well-Known Member

    Please reference 1-4 and explain your rationale.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page