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!

There is no barefoot running debate

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by Craig Payne, May 10, 2011.

  1. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    would you mind shooting it across to me too Athol.. I could not get the full text
     
  2. Athol Thomson

    Athol Thomson Active Member

    No Worries Simon,

    Done there now.
    Athol
     
  3. Athol Thomson

    Athol Thomson Active Member

  4. stickleyc

    stickleyc Active Member

    Kevin - I offer you the podiatry arena equivalent of an "Amen!" It gets even worse when different areas of research adopt differing conventions for reporting moments. Then, because the people who are working in that area of research are all "in on it", they don't necessarily feel the need to clearly state in an article whether they are reporting internal or external moments. For example, we are working with THA and TKA patients in our gait lab. TKA research typically reports results using an external convention whereas THA research typically reports internal. But, like I said, the authors must think we all have the secret decoder ring and for the most part, don't identify the moment convention they are using. I can't tell you the number of times I would have paid a healthy bounty for the authors to have added a single sentence that said: "Joint moments were reported using an external moment convention." :)

    Cris
     
  5. Agree. What does "THA" and "TKA" mean? I think they call that: "practicing what you preach". :rolleyes:
     
  6. stickleyc

    stickleyc Active Member

    No way I'm telling what THA and TKA means...that's one of those insider bits of information I'm actually in on and you can't just let everyone know or else I wouldn't feel special. :cool:

    okay, fine...total hip and total knee arthroplasty. :rolleyes:
     
  7. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    This just turned up in my alerts:
    from: “Barefoot Running” WTF? LOL
     
  8. stickleyc

    stickleyc Active Member

    But you missed the best one:

    5. I imagine that running through dog crap is considerably more pleasant in shoes than not.:D
     
  9. stickleyc

    stickleyc Active Member

    Just saw this one come across:

    Diebal AR, Gregory R, Alitz C, and Gerber JP. Forefoot Running Improves Pain and Disability Associated With Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome. Am J Sports Med, 2012.


    Thoughts?
     
  10. Admin2

    Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

  11. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Its makes intuitive sense. As I have said repeatedly: different running forms load different tissues. As its been shown that the external ankle dorsiflexion moments are higher during forefoot striking, this means that the plantarflexion moments must be less, which means the anterior tibial muscles does not have to work so hard in forefoot striking.

    That study was only in 10 subjects and was uncontrolled, BUT, the results were massively significant ... given that all 10 were saved from surgery, we should be adding this to the treatment options for anterior compartment syndrome

    Normally I would not say that we should be changing clinical practice based on the results of an uncontrolled study with 10 subjects, but the results are consistent with sound theory and were very significant and if surgery is the only next option left ....
     
  12. stickleyc

    stickleyc Active Member

    I was particularly interested based on the title of the article and then this statement:

    Of these, the anterior compartment is the most
    commonly reported location of CECS and is the most frequently
    studied in regard to intramuscular pressure.

    While I agree that it is the most frequently studied, from my experience clinically in a sports medicine / athletic training setting, the prevalence of compartment syndrome to the anterior compartment from a chronic mechanism is much lower than chronic compartment syndromes occurring to the deep posterior compartment. Yes, for acute compartment syndromes, anterior is more common but in high school and college athletes, I have seen many times more chronic deep posteriors than anteriors.

    And in that regard, I was thinking specifically of your previous key points Craig. If my clinical experience with CECS is accurate (and from talking with other athletic trainers and orthopods over the years I think it is), then yes, forefoot striking would seemingly benefit the smaller group of people whose CECS is anterior compartment but forefoot strike might serve to increase the problems for the typical (deep posterior compartment) CECS sufferer.
     
  13. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Absolutely. There is no doubt that the post tib muscle is having to work harder in those who forefoot strike.
     
  14. dmalcantara

    dmalcantara Welcome New Poster

    Hi,

    What was your impression with the NB Minimuss?

    Cheers,
     
  15. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    They are fine; I run in them 2 days/week now. However, I also now run 2 days/week in my maximalist's - the Hoka One One's and they are fine too!
     
  16. JB1973

    JB1973 Active Member

    http://www.examiner.com/wellness-in-chicago/vibram-fivefingers-shoes-named-lawsuit

    You might have seen this already and it might be on another post ( i had a quick look but didnt see it). It is alleged that the company, which makes the now famous Five-Finger shoe have made deceptive claims about their health benefits, and this is leading to increased injuries among runners who make the switch.

    Interesting stuff

    JB
     
  17. Admin2

    Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

    Discussed here: Vibram Five Fingers facing class action over health claims
     
  18. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    A year ago in the previous (now closed) thread, on the Barefoot Running debate, I reported on how many people I came across barefoot/minimalist at the Run for the Kids.

    Well, I just back from todays 2012 Run For the Kids; 33 000 runners and I was looking hard - I came across no one barefoot; 2 in Vibrams and 1 in Merrell's (obviously there would have been more). I asked others if they came across any. Everyone I asked noticed NONE! Like the comments a year ago, where are they all? Despite looking, why did I not see more?

    If you follow all the blogs writing about the Vibram class action, there are 100's of vibram wearers posting in the comments sections. Maybe Kevin is right with his comments about all this being a "virtual trend" .... ie a lot of noise is being made online about it, but in reality so few are doing it.
     
  19. Dominic Smith

    Dominic Smith Welcome New Poster

    As what Christopher Mcdougall said “I can’t prove this, but I believe when my runners train barefoot, they run faster and suffer fewer injuries.” Just forget about the debate. It's totally pointless. I think what's more interesting to read is "The long term effects of Barefoot Running"
     
  20. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Perhaps you could explain why there are so many injuries in barefoot runners?

    You were asked this and other questions in the other thread that you spammed and you never replied. Care to come back and answer this one?
     
  21. Barry Onion

    Barry Onion Member

    The reason there are so many injuries, is that people do To Much Too Soon Too Far (TMTSTF). They don't listen to their feet and run when they should rest.

    This typically occurs because people having experienced the exhilaration and freedom of moving their bodies naturally, i.e. barefoot, overdo it.

    If feet have been kept in shoes (atrophy capsules) all their life then they are not fully tuned to the needs of barefootedness. Our bodies were born to run barefoot, accordingly most people should be able to do it as long as they don't TMTSTF it.
     
  22. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Really? How do you know that? How many of these injuries have you actually treated? Why can not the injuires be due to the higher forefoot dorsiflexion moments. the higher ankle doresiflexion moments and the higher rearfoot eversion moments that occur when forefoot striking?

    How about explaining why is that when someone running barefoot gets an injury, the barefooters all claim that its "TMTSTF", yet when a runner gets an injury in a shoe, then the shoe is to blame. Care to explain why that can not also be a "TMTSTF"?

    BTW, we still waiting for you to answer the question you have been asked several times in others threads: How many cases of posterior tibial tendon dysfunction have you treated without foot orthotics?

    Rather than keep on being a one hit wonder and just drop propaganda and rhetoric, why not engage and actually answer the questions you are being asked. Rather than parrot the same old, same old, answer what you keep being asked.
     
  23. Athol Thomson

    Athol Thomson Active Member

    I was lucky enough to hear Proff Joseph Hamill speak today at a BIG (Biomechanics interest group) conference at the University of Ulster Biomechanics lab.

    I was the only Podiatrist at the meeting so maybe shouldn't spill the beans before he speaks in Sydney next week and also at the Biomechanics Summer school in June.

    If you are interested in the subject whatsoever I wouldn't miss his lecture. It was a fabulous overview of the state of play so far.

    Its fair to say he would have Barry for breakfast......

    Cheers,
    Athol
     
  24. CraigT

    CraigT Well-Known Member

    IFab next week- will be there with bells. I am expecting Joe to be a highlight (more now).
     
  25. Athol Thomson

    Athol Thomson Active Member

    Enjoy the trip home Craig. I'll be keen to hear what you think next week.
     
  26. JB1973

    JB1973 Active Member

    Barry- "atrophy capsules". That actually made me snigger out loud.

    Anyway back to Craigs points. Why keep banging on about the virtues of barefootedness but not answer any reasonable question posed. I've run in trainers all my life, use shoes to walk about and I am not injured. Why would I jeopardise this to run barefoot. I have tried it, and I didn't do to much too soon, and my calf muscles were screaming at me to stop.

    Do you use shoes in daily life? Why so concerned about the 30 mins of running barefoot when you have been in "atrophy capsules" all day? Most of us walk more than we run. Are you advocating barefoot walking too?
    JB
     
  27. efuller

    efuller MVP

    I listen to my feet and that's why I wear shoes with orthotics. They are much happier with the the orthotics. May not be true for everyone, but it works for me.

    You know what tuned to barefootedness means, it means you run like you are worried about hurting your feet. However, you still can hurt your feet.

    Eric
     
  28. stickleyc

    stickleyc Active Member

    As I won't be at either of those talks, could you spill the beans a little? I'm curious mostly because this quote seems to suggest he would be rightly opposed to Barry's way of thinking though my impression has been that he and Irene Davis are completely in sync on the "barefoot for all...injuries for none" philosophy. Maybe I am wrong...
     
  29. I know for a fact that Joe Hamill is not on the barefoot bandwagon but Irene Davis definitely is a barefoot enthusiast. I will be debating Irene Davis on Barefoot vs Shod Running at the American College of Sports Medicine Annual Meeting in San Francisco on June 2, 2012 and will be lecturing with Joe Hamill on Barefoot Running at the Biomechanics Summer School in Manchester, UK, on June 22-23, 2012.

    Both Irene and Joe are excellent lecturers and researchers so I encourage you all to attend their lectures, no matter what type of running style or running shoe/barefoot you feel is best. Should be fun.:drinks
     
  30. stickleyc

    stickleyc Active Member

    Thanks for the info Kevin...I heard Irene speak at ACSM last summer with Lieberman and then thought I saw a number of poster presentations on barefoot running that had both Drs. Hamill and Davis' names on them so I made an apparently incorrect assumption. :eek:
     
  31. Joe and Irene have been coresearchers on a number of very important papers over the years. However, I don't think that they are in agreement on the benefits of barefoot running since Joe just recently debated Irene on barefoot vs shod running at a conference last month in Minneapolis.

    I think Irene is a brilliant researcher, we have lectured together at many national and international conferences over the last 10+ years, and we are good friends. However, I can't agree with her on many of the statements she makes in her lectures on barefoot running and other topics. What else is new....I don't agree with someone on everything!:rolleyes:
     
  32. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    ...and they wonder why they get ridiculed so much!
    In my alerts this AM was a blog post from Barefoot Running University: Is Barefoot and Minimalist Running Supported by Research? in which they list a lot of research (its actually a good list) and conclude:
    ....when in reality not a single one of the studies they listed actually supports it :bang: Why do they get it so wrong? What is it that they see in those studies that says barefoot/minimalist is better than traditional shoe wearing? Why do they continually misuse, misrepresent, misquote and misinterpret the research?
     
  33. Honestly, Craig, people who makes lists of reference articles that don't support their views but then claim that the referenced articles support their views are either 1) ignorant of the scientific method, 2) dishonest people who have an agenda, or 3) so religiously attached to their ideology that logic and reason will not get in the way of their pursuit of attracting others into their religious sect.
     
  34. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    I will start running barefoot tomorrow if the evidence tells me its better ... until then ...
     
  35. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    Funny that. I was talking to Ryan Hall recently ( USA Marathoner 2:04... can run a bit).. he told me he was gonna take up running barefoot or minimalist the day someone passed him running barefoot or minimalist.. can't see that day coming anytime soon
     
  36. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    I am happy to issue a challenge to anyone to point to any one of the research based articles listed on the site I linked above that they claim supports barefoot running over shod running and I will show why it doesn't.
     
  37. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    Blaise.. are you there? Craig has a challenge for you..:bash:
     
  38. Craig and Simon:

    If I were to take up your challenge, this is one of the few articles I would use:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22427621

     
  39. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    (That study was covered here)

    Firstly, my challenge was about the list of articles on the site I linked above and they do not have that one there, so you loose on that one :D

    Secondly, it was a small sample size and there was no control group, so we have no way of knowing if the results were not due to the placebo or Hawthorne effects. It was just an uncontrolled case series which is only one step up the hierarchy of evidence ladder from an anecdote, so you loose on that one as well! :D

    HOWEVER, having said..... that I am currently writing an essay for a book chapter on where does knowledge for clinical practice come from and what to do in the absence of evidence and at what stage should clinicians change clinical practice ...... I am using that study as an example.

    One of the principles I use is what I mentioned in this thread on Dennis's foot typing about what to do in the absence of evidence:
    1) Theoretical coherence
    2) Biological plausibility
    3) Consistent with the available evidence

    So in that uncontrolled case series on anterior compartment syndrome, despite its limitations, the results were dramatic (all subjects were spared surgery) and there is a theoretical coherence and plausibility and it is consistent with the available evidence ...... when forefoot striking it is theoretical and plausible that the anterior tibial muscle does not work as hard as when heel striking ... which is consistent with the evidence...... so it makes sense it would help anterior compartment syndrome.

    So do you change practice based on that study?
    At one end of the spectrum we have the anecdotes from nutters who think everyone should do what they do as it worked for them, and at the other end of the spectrum you have the EBM aficionados who sit behind a computer and never have to make a clinical decision that you should not change practice until there are enough RCT's to collate into a meta analysis ... and then you change practice.

    So do you change practice based on that study? I think we should based on the biological plausibility, theoretical coherence and consistent with the available evidence, despite the weakness of the study. I think we should be transitioning those with anterior compartment syndrome to forefoot striking ... I I will give you that one :D
     
Loading...

Share This Page