Comments on: Why Can’t Science Determine the Best Running Shoe?

By: Weybridge Sport

Weybridge Sport — Wed, 14 May 2014 10:44:43 +0000

I think that with the variety of human beings, physically, there can never really be a “perfect” shoe for all. People have different sized feet, weight, height, all can be factors in the best shoe for them. Different people also personally prefer different things – some like their shoes cushioned and some like them very plain!

By: Josh H

Josh H — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 05:02:02 +0000

Interesting take, sounds like pretty vague research data on their part…i guess the debate continues. da-da-da
For myself personally…i do treadmill work in my vibrams, but most of my race and speed work is done in “traditional shoes”. Being in shoes since we’ve began to walk has def changed the bio-mechanics of the foot. Jumping right into minimalist shoes is discouraged by any barefoot enthusiast. Its something you must work up to and condition your foot, joints, and muscles to do. technique seems to be a lot more important as well.

By: Brett Sanders

Brett Sanders — Sun, 09 Feb 2014 20:38:43 +0000

My experience of wearing minimal shoes is one that has had both the ups and downs that most people have had.

I originally hurt myself a lot with no coaching, but my intuition told me that being closer to barefoot was the right thing to do, so I persisted and now I run completely injury free. Would I be injury free if I was wearing normal running shoes? We’ll never know :-)

By: Peter Larson

Peter Larson — Mon, 27 Jan 2014 01:07:28 +0000

In reply to Joel. Thanks for the comment, and I agree on all points. And yes, minimal shoes can be really fun!

By: Joel

Joel — Sat, 25 Jan 2014 01:06:16 +0000

Good read, thanks. An infuriatingly erroneous media response though, as is too often the case nowadays…

As you’ve pointed out, the vast variability in body types makes trying to suggest a best shoe to run in a rather futile quest.

I think one other massive issue with transitioning to minimalist shoes is the pervasive ‘technofix’ culture. So many people buy Vibrams/Vivo’s and assume their injury risk will fade away on it’s own, and make no attempt to change their form. It reminds me of all those people that consume vast quantities of ‘scientifically proven’ protien powders expecting to bulk up, without really doing any more exercise…

Another point worth making is that there are some serious negative feedbacks from wearing traditional running shoes that, I’ve learnt first hand. With big wedges of chushioning under your feet the likelihood of a sprained ankle shoots up, and a likely consequence of a few of those is a chronically stiff ankle with reduced dorsiflexion. Unfortunately this traps you into the need for a shoe with an elevated heel, unless you get some surgery to free up the ankle joint again (which I did). The upshot of this for me is that it’s taken me nearly three years to transition to low (3-4mm) drop shoes – a far longer time-frame than the authors of the study considered. But now I’m running better than ever.

Final point, something that doesn’t get mentioned enough is that, even if minimual shoes don’t actually lower injury risk, they’re just FAR more fun to run in anyway!

(sorry for the excessively long comment…)

By: Michael

Michael — Fri, 24 Jan 2014 05:36:41 +0000

In reply to Carsten.

Sage finishes 2nd in Carlsbad in the Huaka:
http://sagecanaday.com/carlsbad-marathon/

By: Friday Five: Reading About Running—January 17, 2014 Yuri in a Hurry

Friday Five: Reading About Running—January 17, 2014 Yuri in a Hurry — Fri, 17 Jan 2014 22:13:24 +0000

[…] Why Can’t Science Determine the Best Running Shoe? Runblogger At the end of the day it’s an individual journey of finding out what works for you and your body given your genetics and environmental background. […]

By: Geoffrey Gray

Geoffrey Gray — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 18:09:25 +0000

First–great post. I hated the title of the article but this was a really nicely done science study. I think we can learn a lot and it will stimulate more future research.

One of my peeves is that studies lump all runners together, similar to the problem Peter mentioned with grouping all injuries together. If we really want to learn, we should separate out variables like age, running pace, running experience, and recovery.

Science can produce better run shoes, but we need to try a lot harder!

By: Geoffrey Gray

Geoffrey Gray — Thu, 16 Jan 2014 18:06:11 +0000

In reply to Tom. It should also be noted that it takes a LONG time for EVA foam to rebound from repeated compressions, like running. We have seen some new shoes take 2-3 days to fully rebound from an hour long run. An older shoe will take even longer. If the foam hasn't rebounded then the shoe will perform very differently. This is the main reason why we recommend rotating shoes.

By: Peter Larson

Peter Larson — Wed, 15 Jan 2014 02:57:53 +0000

In reply to Michael. Thanks! Running Warehouse just put a preview up on their blog as well.

By: Michael

Michael — Tue, 14 Jan 2014 19:46:39 +0000

In reply to Carsten.

I’m not sure what I think about this video, but anyway here’s a little more about the Huaka:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YC9xbHDZCcs&list=UUh_w_vLvlZNBeTAP8qaWhoA&feature=c4-overview

By: Kayan Wong

Kayan Wong — Tue, 14 Jan 2014 06:51:21 +0000

I used to wear big clunky cushiony shoes for running, thinking that that was the way, more cushion as prevention from injury, but after going with the Skechers Go Bionic series I’ve never looked back. I guess I like and want to feel the surface/road/treadmill/impact more. That way I can decide whether I want to slow down or speed up listening to how my body feels as it happens. In fact, lately I’ve even removed the insoles from my minimal shoes for even more minimalism. I loved your point about calf soreness does not mean minimal shoes are bad. Over time, calves get less sore. I also liked EMBY’s comment about rotating. Some days I feel like wearing my Vaudes, other days it’s back to Go Bionics. Or my bright yellow Sauconys.