Another day, another headline. This time, it's from VOX, a site which I've enjoyed reading since it launched a little while back. But I've got a teeny tiny little tarsal bone to pick with it about this article.
Despite the headline, at least this article explains how there just
isn't much good evidence one way or the other about styles of running
and injury rates. Again, the Vibram settlement doesn't suggest that
barefoot running is wrong (though the headline kind of implies that),
just that they made some marketing claims without sufficient evidence.
Toe shoes were around for a while before the "Born To Run" book became a
bestseller and helped spark a lot of interest in barefoot/minimal
running. It just so happened that Vibram had a product that wasn't
initially marketed for runners, but enthusiasts quickly seized on them
for that purpose. Seeing a potentially lucrative sales opportunity, Vibram overreached in their
marketing claims in order to cash in on the interest. And now they're
paying for it.
I continue not to have a problem with this, both with respect to Vibram getting its comeuppance while simultaneously not feeling "lied to" by the company.
But barefoot
running and forefoot striking has been around a lot longer than this
company. Despite this ugly fiasco, the 'barefoot running boom' has at
least engendered some skepticism towards the de facto form of running
footwear with its raised heels, cushioned soles, and 'motion control'
technology. This is a case where more technology and intervention may
not be necessary for everyone to enjoy a healthy running habit. Some
people really need orthotics! Some don't need shoes at all, and it may
be best to avoid them because they will inevitably mess with your
biomechanics.
Again, I feel it necessary to point out that any kind of running increases your risk of injury. It's hard to get a stress fracture while sitting on the couch or in front of a computer screen. But there's no magic bullet for injury prevention. People get hurt in modern running shoes, and people get hurt running barefoot (albeit potentially in different ways and for different reasons). The question is: What's best for the individual when it comes to balancing the benefits and risks of enjoying running as part of a healthy lifestyle? This question is not to be taken lightly, and it may require doing plenty of research online, talking to your doctor, and just experimenting with different shoes (or forgoing them altogether) while being cautious and honest about your own abilities and needs. But don't just take my word for it.
As usual, we just need more evidence about form, footwear and injuries. At least now more people are starting to look for it, rather than just assume that big soft shoes must be good for running because they make it easier to get out there and 'pound the pavement'.
Again, I feel it necessary to point out that any kind of running increases your risk of injury. It's hard to get a stress fracture while sitting on the couch or in front of a computer screen. But there's no magic bullet for injury prevention. People get hurt in modern running shoes, and people get hurt running barefoot (albeit potentially in different ways and for different reasons). The question is: What's best for the individual when it comes to balancing the benefits and risks of enjoying running as part of a healthy lifestyle? This question is not to be taken lightly, and it may require doing plenty of research online, talking to your doctor, and just experimenting with different shoes (or forgoing them altogether) while being cautious and honest about your own abilities and needs. But don't just take my word for it.
As usual, we just need more evidence about form, footwear and injuries. At least now more people are starting to look for it, rather than just assume that big soft shoes must be good for running because they make it easier to get out there and 'pound the pavement'.
