In the midst of Saturday’s snow and ice storm, Jon Hayden of Holly Springs went for an 18-mile run wearing a pair of $5 water shoes from Walmart. The water shoes, a thin glove of rubber and mesh intended for a hot summer day at the beach, were a concession: Hayden, a marathoner, prefers to run in his bare feet.
Why? It’s easier on his body.
To non-runners that may sound crazy. To a lot of runners it sounded crazy until Christopher McDougall made a compelling case for shedding your high-tech, high-price running shoes in “Born to Run.” Since its publication last year, “Born to Run” has been a must-read in the running community, especially among the estimated 40 percent to 60 percent of runners who are injured every year.
McDougall himself was a statistic, having aggravating his cuboid, “a cluster of bones parallel to the arch that I hadn’t even known existed until it reengineered itself into an internal Taser.” One of the nation’s top sports medicine experts told him to quit, to ride a bike instead, that the human body wasn’t designed for running. McDougall wasn’t ready to give up that easily. Besides, it didn’t make sense: “ … why should every other animal on the planet be able to rely on its legs except us?” And why did some humans have absolutely no problem going out and running day after day? McDougall embarked on a quest to see if there wasn’t some way he could run injury free. He found his answer in the barefoot and sandal-clad Tarahumara runners of Mexico’s Copper Canyon.
Actually, he didn’t find answers so much as examples. The Tarahumara were capable of running extraordinary distances — 100 miles or more at a time — with no shoes, or minimalist footwear at best. They were able to run late in life, into their 80s and 90s, and they were able to do it virtually injury free. Last week’s study in the journal Nature — “Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot runners versus shod runners” — shed some light on why this might be.
Like similar studies in the past, the study lead by Dr. Daniel Lieberman with Harvard’s Department of Human Evolutionary Biology, found that barefoot runners tend to land on the forefoot, shod runners on their heels. What the Nature study added to the discussion was that running barefoot and landing on the forefoot reduces both the loading rate and peak impact force, both of which are thought to lead to greater risk of injury. Thus, the study suggests that people who run barefoot or with minimalist shoes such as the Nike Free have fewer injuries.
Hayden and other local runners say they didn’t need a study to tell them that.
“I was always battling some sort of injury after another,” says Hayden. “I have feet as flat as pancakes and am also an over-pronator.” To solve his problems he was told to invest in pricey motion-control shoes, such as the $130 Brooks Beast, a shoe that broke down quickly and had to be replaced every 400 miles.
“But the shoes did nothing to prevent the injuries or the sore knees,” he says.
Research lead him to barefoot running. He stuck his toe in tentatively, tacking a quarter mile of barefoot running to the end of his training runs. As he built up calluses, he extended his barefoot mileage. Before long he was running 8- to 10-miles a day barefoot, donning shoes only for his weekend trail runs (“I still haven’t been able to run barefoot on rocky, rooty trails and am not sure if I ever will.”). In October, he ran a half marathon barefoot. During his barefoot tenure he’s had no injuries.
“Running barefoot forces you to run with good form and gives you immediate feedback if you’re running wrong,” says Hayden. That instant correction of bad form is what prevents injury, he says. You don’t necessarily have to be barefoot for that to happen.
That, agrees Josh Sutcliffe of Madison (“45 minutes straight north of downtown Greensboro”) is the crux of the issue. Sutcliffe started running in 1999, was soon doing respectable 23-minute 5Ks. In 2003, he developed ITB — iliotibial band syndrome, or pain and inflammation of the outer knee — and went looking for help. His search led him to the Web site of barefoot running guru Ken Bob Saxton. Last March, Sutcliffe finally gave barefoot running a try; since July he has run 500 miles sans shoes. He, too, has been injury free since.
“My bare feet teach me how to run smoothly by providing instant feedback about the conditions of the surface I’m running on,” says Sutcliffe, who keeps a blog on barefoot running, barefootjosh.com. “You don’t need to be barefoot, or even in minimalist shoes, to alter the way your foot lands. But if you don’t understand how to be smooth, my guess is you’re still risking injury, regardless of what part of your foot hits the ground first.”
In “Born to Run,” McDougall says our distraction from this smooth, natural way of running began in the early 1970s with the introduction of the modern running shoe, specifically Nike’s Waffle Trainer. Born on the waffle press of University of Oregon running coach Bill Bowerman, the shoe had a cushy heel that encouraged runners to foresake the forefoot strike favored by humans the previous 2 million years in favor of a stride-lengthening heel strike. This sudden heel-strike business was new to the foot, the ankle, the knee and assorted other body parts that have responded, McDougall writes, by breaking down.
Triangle-area running coach Bob Dannegger says another recent study, published in the December issue of PM&R, the journal of the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, supports that notion. “They concluded that increased joint torques at the hip, knee, and ankle were observed with running shoes compared with running barefoot.” However, he adds, the study did not determine whether that increased torque led to injuries, “but it’s highly probable it eventually would for many runners.”
Determining whether that increased torque does lead to injuries, most agree, is the next step in vetting the merits of running barefoot.
The Science of Sport Web site cites a study in Cape Town, South Africa in which runners had their footstrike patterns altered to more of a barefoot style with two weeks of training. A biomechanical analysis found the forefoot strike did indeed lower the impact force and created less stress on the knee. Yet after two weeks of running using the new forestrike approach, 19 of the 20 study participants were injured because their calves and ankles couldn’t handle the sudden change.
“If you wish to guarantee yourself an injury, then go out for a 2km run barefoot on a hard surface, and you will be asking your calf muscles and Achilles tendons to do work that for perhaps 30 years they haven’t had to do, writes Ross Tucker, who has a Ph.D in exercise physiology and runs the Science of Sport site with Jonathan Dugas.
“It’s intriguing,” Tucker writes of the Nature study, “and certainly does suggest advantages to barefoot running. It is not the last word, but rather the latest word in this debate.”
Tomorrow: Intrigued by running barefoot? A look at how to make the transition or incorporate it into your running routine.
Sources: HealthDay, an online publication of the U.S. National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health; The Science of Sports Web site; Biomechanics of Foot Strikes & Applications to Running Barefoot or in Minimal Footwear Web site, by Dr. Daniel E. Lieberman, Madhusudhan Venkadesan, Adam I. Daoud and William A. Werbel.
Great post, Joe. The aspect of barefoot running I like best is how much fun it is. Much more engaging than trudging along in sneakers. I notice the textures and temperature of the surfaces I tread on. I have to be alert to changes, obstacles and potential hazards. And my feet have so much to teach me about posture and technique!
Hey! Any barefooters in Durham?
We need no stinkin’ shoes!
Nice write-up!
One correction, depending on how one defines “injury.” I gave myself a really bad blister running the Mistletoe half that put me on the couch for a month. 40 degrees + rain + winds from the north + PR by 14 minutes + hilly course = in over my feet. I made some rookie mistakes in an advanced level situation. I tend to overdo things.
I make the mistakes, so you don’t have to!
But that has been it. My body feels much less abused.
But the whole “injury” aspect is just my excuse. I really run barefoot because it’s enjoyable. And faster – I took three minutes off of my shod 5K PR. 😉
I’m guessing you would have had blisters wearing shoes in rain and 40-degree temps. Thanks for being a guinea pig for the rest of us.
Joe,
Maybe. But I would have avoided them if I slowed down and stopped to check my feet every once in a while, like a newbie barefoot runner is supposed to in tough weather conditions.
Just keeping things on the up-and-up. Many people are interested in barefoot running because of promises of no injuries. It’s a LOT easier to avoid injuries, but even running barefoot can’t fix stupid (or over-ambition).
Ever since I gave up my cushy shoes and switched to MIKE Free I’ve had no injuries. I also read and incorporated some of the techniques in Danny Dreyer’s book Chi Running. I no longer have an IT band issues, my achilles pain went away and my recovery time is minimul. I don’t stretch much after running and I don’t have to soak in ice water any more. My average run during the week is 5 miles at a time and on weekends as I train for the next marathon I start at about 5 miles and get to 26 a couple of weeks before the race. This weekend I plan to run 20 miles and don’t expect any issues.
Great article. Thanks Joe for writing it Joe!
I just got a pair of the Vibram 5-toed shoe socks from a store in Hendersonville. Is there any store in the Triangle area that carries them?
(REI treats them as a seasonal product and they are not in stock now.)
Just received them and they feel really great. I just don’t see me running w/o some protection from sweet gum burrs and other pointy things.
Great Outdoor Provision Co. has ’em. I was just there.
Joe,
I look forward to reading more of your blog. I enjoyed this post.
I bought a pair of the Vibram 5 Fingers last Fall after listening to McDougal’s Book (the audio version), and after experiencing some discomfort (needle-type pain in my arches) stopped running in them.
Last week I went out on Wednesday and ran 4 miles in them, and when the pain started up again – I adjusted how my foot was hitting the ground and the pain went away. On Sunday after resting for 3 days I did my long run of the week (6 miles) on a treadmill, varying the speed and incline of the treadmill. I ended up with some gnarly blisters and a really sore toe area on my left foot (the sports doctor said it’s just a tissue injury). So, I won’t be running a while until the pain goes away…but when I do return, I’m going to continue with the Vibram’s in the hopes to someday go completely barefoot. I believe my injuries came as a result of trying to do too much too soon. Even though 4 and 6 mile runs in shoes don’t present a problem for me…with the Vibram’s i think I need to take more time…Anyway, I thought I’d share my experience thus far with the Vibrams…so far so good – but not without a few incidents!
Hey Dale,
Thanks for sharing your experience. I’m intrigued by the Five Fingers and checked some out today. Hearing from folks who’ve already taken the first step is a huge help to the rest of us who are still in contemplation mode. So again, thanks, and keep us updated on your progress.
Joe
I offer my not-so-positive thoughts on minimalist shoes here:
http://www.barefootjosh.com/?p=18
I do wear them in the cold and on the gravel-iest of gravel paths, but I run in them differently than I did before I started running barefoot.
Here’s another take, for your comparison shopping purposes … http://www.barefootrunner.com/2009/03/review-vibram-fivefingers-classic/
“If you wish to guarantee yourself an injury, then go out for a 2km run barefoot on a hard surface…” – Ross Tucker
No one with infantile wisdom (especially infants) would try to run 2 kilometers the first time they run barefoot!
When you try running BARE foot (rather than in minimalist footwear), your first time out of shoes in 30 years, your tender BARE soles should be yelling (quite wisely), “Not so far, not until AFTER you LEARN to run gently, and have given us a chance to adapt!”
It’s up to us to listen.
Thanks for stressing the point, Barefoot Ken Bob. For the uninitiated, BKB is one of the most highly regarded advocates for smart barefoot running. Check out his Wed site at http://runningbarefoot.org.
I have spent about 5 hrs. total in the Vibrams so far. I immediately altered my foot strike pattern since the heel is not cushioned. My first hour+ was at the gym with an indoor .1 mi. track. I cannot jog, but rather lope and catching my breath was the main problem. The muscles in the side of my calf complained and the ball of my foot was “rippled” a lot, not bruised. I was sore, but exhilarated the next day. Walking on cold wet ground severely chilled my feet. I consciously lean forward when walking to minimize heel strike.
So far this is a gadget to me, but one in which I am much more interested than most. I walked (regular shoes) on the ATT and the pea gravel is wet and frozen as hard as the macadam surface. There is also quite a bit of debris from the windstorm on the trail: pine needles, cones and branches.
What other surfaces have you … “loped” on? I’ve yet to take the Five Finger plunge, but thought about it yesterday on a run at Umstead. The bike & bridle trail, usually like concrete, was loosened up by the recent wet weather; it was very forgiving in trail shoes (I concentrated on a forefoot strike), made me wonder what Five Fingers might be like.
This history:
===================
In “Born to Run,” McDougall says our distraction from this smooth, natural way of running began in the early 1970s with the introduction of the modern running shoe, specifically Nike’s Waffle Trainer. Born on the waffle press of University of Oregon running coach Bill Bowerman, the shoe had a cushy heel that encouraged runners to foresake the forefoot strike favored by humans the previous 2 million years in favor of a stride-lengthening heel strike. This sudden heel-strike business was new to the foot, the ankle, the knee and assorted other body parts that have responded, McDougall writes, by breaking down.
===================
is quite bogus. Lydiard was recommending an almost flat footed landing, with the heel striking just before the rest of the foot, in the early 1960s; so Bowerman certainly didn’t invent the heel landing. Lots of guys were heel landers back in the 60s when I was in high school. And the original Waffle Trainer? A brick by today’s standards. It certainly didn’t have a “cushy heel”. No way. The real evil shoe was the LD1000, and that was because of its extreme heel flair, which caused an increase in lower-leg rotation at impact and added stress on the knee. That was really the worst innovation of the 70s: heel flair (plus added heel lift).
https://www.getgoingnc.com‘s done it again! Great article.
Super awesome read. Truely!
I want quote your text in my personal website, can i to do that if I place a link-back to your blog?
You bet. Have at it.
These are my New Year’s resolutions: 1)Make an effort to make someone’s day brighter once a week. 2) Sustain my GPA, and volunteer far more each on campus and within my community. 3) Get in shape to run the 5k Susan B. Komen run in May/June with my sister 4) Get rid of unnecessary or negative stressors in my life 5) Produce a recipe binder, attempt new things, be more creative with food and eat healthier 6) Make an effort to stay in contact with friends and family. 7) Get far more sleep!