by Jim Hixson, CSCS
It’s clear that minimalism is alive and well. Less shoe is thriving far beyond what naysayers and running magazines want us to believe. While mega-cushiony running shoes have taken over shoe walls at many independently owned stores (don’t get me started on big-box or running-chain stores), there’s still plenty of choices for the minimalist mindset, barefoot lifestyle, and healthy feet. (Altra, Lems, Skora, Xero Shoes, Merrell, Newton, Topo Athletic, Vibram FiveFingers, and Vivo Barefoot).
The first two parts of “Why Minimalism Went Flat” ( http://naturalrunningcenter.com/2015/03/25/form-vs-running-shoes-why-minimalism-flatpart/ ) have generated a number of really smart and helpful comments. I am grateful to everyone who took the time to respond to the different ideas that I had set forth about shoes and running technique. I tried to answer comments on both of these posts.
The following Part Three expands on this discussion for added clarity. A majority of the NRC comments focused on the correlation between running shoes and injuries. Lousy technique is often a recipe for injury. And too often, technique is affected by footwear. Though there are other variables, what one wears on the feet sets things in motion for the rest of the body. This refers to the kinetic chain, when your muscles, joints and nerves, must work together to produce movement.
Here are excerpts from comments submitted by NRC readers:
Minimal shoes revealed the flaws in my running technique. — Ciaran Guilfoyle
With minimalist, no more plantar fasciitis especially, but also other common injuries [were gone]. My form was always fairly good, but got much better post-minimalist –Rich Kerr
I switched over to minimalist shoes and all pain was immediately gone; I feel I can run until I am 100 now (I am 50…I started minimalist 3 years ago). – Chrissie
In modern society, which is based on rush and quick fixes, most people are not ready to allocate their time and mind to learn to walk or run in a way their weakened body is supposed to. They just want to buy a promise of a shoe that will do all the work for them. — dXm99
And while there has been a fair amount of discussion around improving running form and technique in recent years, we could all benefit by spending more time understanding, identifying, and addressing the root causes of our form failures. — Tony Post, founder and president of Topo Athletic
Transition time is absolutely crucial for anyone switching from regular shoes to minimalist shoes. — Danny Dreyer, founder of ChiRunning and ChiWalking
(Yes, Danny is right on the money here. Runners who make a gradual transition and are attentive will receive significant benefits from running with good technique: lower incidence and less severity of injuries, increased efficiency, and improved performance.)
The problem is every study done on American runners is dealing with already weak, compromised feet. Of course runners get injured when you take their feet out of clumpy coffins and put them into minimalist footwear; they already have weak feet and altered movement patterns. –Tim Brandson
My real bone of contention is how modern running shoes are referred to as “traditional”. There is nothing traditional about the rubber, amount of cushioning, posts, and other “motion control” devices that manufacturers use.– Michael Nelson
***
Generally speaking, I believe there’s consensus with the following points in support of minimalism: 1.) Humans have evolved to walk and run barefoot 2.) Running is one of the two natural modes of locomotion for humans; the other being walking. 3.) Humans have naturally run barefoot for almost all of their time on earth.
But since most runners don’t run barefoot, this has several implications. First and foremost, the majority of runners have poor form or technique. Since we seem to understand the concept of correct technique in other sports, I’m not sure why we often refuse to recognize the importance of running with correct technique. Unfortunately many runners rely upon the “advice” and “recommendations” from shoe companies, running stores, running magazines, and even coaches!
The U.K.’s Gordon Pirie won a silver medal at the 1956 Melbourne Olympics in the 5,000 meters, and was a lifetime student of the sport. In his book, “Running Fast and Injury Free,” he wrote: “Athletes, who have access only to the volumes of bad information on technique being pedaled by the running magazines and shoe manufacturers, have no way of discovering the benefits of proper running style. Coaches who hold erroneous notions concerning what constitutes correct technique, or who refuse to acknowledge its importance, are short-changing their athletes, severely curtailing their ability, and inviting injury.”
In terms of technique, why do footwear studies (usually conducted on treadmills that immediately call to mind Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle because they aren’t a normal running surface) show that heel strikers and midfoot strikers have the same rates of injuries? And why do runners who wear minimal shoes also become injured?
It is true that some runners making the transition from rearfoot striking to forefoot striking do become injured, but a simple gait analysis usually reveals the cause of these injuries, all of which are easily prevented through proper instruction: (1), the runner is actually not striking forefoot, but continues to heel strike; or (2), the forefoot contacts the ground with the heel too high off the ground, a position which increases the stress on the calf muscles and Achilles tremendously; sometimes the heel does not even touch the ground; or (3), the foot placement is too far forward, and places excessive stress on metatarsals.
Then, how do runners successfully switch from traditional shoes and heel striking to minimal shoes and forefoot striking? They have the awareness of correct technique and its importance:
–They have had an accurate gait analysis, so they know their own technical flaws
–They regularly practice correct technique, while closely monitoring themselves
–They run either barefoot or wear shoes that protect, but do not restrict natural movement.
None of these points are emphasized in most running programs, unless the runner is a sprinter! Shoes affect the way we run. There are people who will agree, sometimes grudgingly, that technique affects rates of injuries, but will not even listen to the argument that running shoes might be the most important variable correlated with injuries. I have to admit, this reaction is completely baffling to me, at least on a rational level. I can’t think of any engineer or biomechanic specialist who would argue that shoes do not have multiple effects on running technique. I realize that some people have been convinced to buy shoes from reading running magazines (for the most part sponsored by shoe company ads), listening to most running store employees (almost completely dependent upon shoe companies), or listening to podiatrists and orthopedists (strongly influenced by New Balance, Brooks, and ASICs), but there is absolutely no way, a zero chance, that the shoes we wear don’t affect the way we sense and react to the ground, no matter what we’re doing, including standing.
This is what Dr. Joseph Froncioni, an orthopedic surgeon and the author of “Athletic Footwear and Running Injuries”(2004), wrote: “Oh…and one more thing: don’t listen to the guy at the running store. He’s there to sell shoes and is under the spell of the powerful shoe industry advertising machine. He has become well and truly brainwashed with the traditional concepts that we all need cushioning and arch support. Don’t believe him.”
Gordon Pirie also wrote: “Most running shoes today are designed and constructed in such a manner as to make correct technique impossible (and therefore cause chronic injuries to the people who wear them). It is a common misconception that a runner should land on his or her heels and then roll forward to the front of the foot with each stride. In designing their shoes, most shoe companies fall prey to this incorrect assumption. The result is that running shoes get larger and clumsier every year. Far from protecting runners, these shoes actually limit the runner’s ability to run properly, and as a result may contribute to the injury epidemic.”
Minimalist shoes were designed to reverse this trend. But runners and shoe companies were too impatient. Marketing trumped science. Although wearing minimal running shoes does not automatically enable a runner to run with correct technique, this goal is more likely to be achieved when wearing minimal shoes than it is when wearing over-built, motion-control shoes.
There is no denying the promise of minimal shoes to encourage running with correct technique. Ideally, if we wear shoes that simply protect the soles of our feet, our entire bodies will be able to move with as little restriction as possible, and we should be able to run with correct technique, as long as we know what that technique is. To become a proficient runner might take only a moderate innate ability, but many miles and even years are required to master this complex athletic skill.
During a gradual transition from the corrupted movement patterns that have been encouraged by wearing “traditional” running shoes, we are trying to create new muscle memories as the unsupported foot is allowed to function more naturally. Incidentally, most running-related injuries are not limited to the foot; but also affect the lower leg, knee, and hip, because the unnatural position and placement of the foot places the entire body in a biomechanically compromised position. In fact the most common site of running-related injuries is the knee, which is forced to absorb shock inefficiently when overstriding, a common habit for runners wearing “traditional” shoes.
It is important to remember that “traditional” running shoes are actually a very recent invention, and one that is unfortunately based upon a faulty initial design. In fact, there were many runners who were quite satisfied with thin-soled, lightweight shoes of the 1960s and 1970s who could not understand why anyone would want to wear a pair of shoes that looked more like a moon boot than a racing flat. It’s obvious, that despite the popularity of minimal shoes several years ago, most runners continue to wear traditional shoes and some even are running in maximalist shoes.
Although some runners have suffered injuries when switching from traditional shoes to minimal shoes, these rates are exaggerated, because a significant majority of the affected runners were running with poor technique. When runners run with correct technique, the incidence and severity of running-related injuries drops to a very low level; in fact, to the same level of running-related injuries in sports that are based on running. This rate is, well, minimal.
As Tony Post, who is the founder and president of Topo Athletic, commented on NRC: “Wearing thick cushioned shoes may relieve the symptoms for some who suffer aches and pains while running. I’m sure it’s helped some folks to get out the door, and that’s a good thing. But in the end, it never addresses the root cause of the problem, and in fact, it may obscure the real issues. Personally, I believe that insulating and casting the foot in thick cushioned shoes over a longer period of time may lead to muscle atrophy in the feet, reduced range of motion, reduced proprioception, and/or muscle imbalances that show up in other negative ways down the road. Once we realize that the body functions best in its natural state, we understand the detrimental effects support, restriction, and desensitization have on the foot and, of course, the entire chain of movement. Being an advocate for something which reduces injuries, increases efficiency, and improves performance isn’t snobbery, any more than advocating a diet that reduces the chances of high blood pressure and diabetes is snobbery. It’s a rational decision based on a logical investigation of the topic.”
I’ll end Part Three with this very apt and relevant observation by Danny Dreyer, the author of
“Chi Running” and “Chi Walking”: “My rule for ANY running shoe is: The LEAST amount of shoe you can SAFELY run in… given HOW you currently run, and the distance you are hoping to run. This definition has never failed me.”
Once again, I look forward to your comments!
Read this!.
http://works.bepress.com/joseph_hamill/3/
Read journal articles by Dr. Irene Davis for the opposite conclusion.
The problem is that runners tend to know only one thing: that they must run. For that they can’t be faulted. But it has created a mileage culture where the question on everyone’s lips is ‘What’s your weekly mileage?’, where every mile is deemed a good mile, and where every run is a journey that takes you that bit closer to your shoes’ 500 mile limit. This is the culture that the barefoot/minimal proponent is up against.
I became injured a measly 24 hours after running in minimals. I wish I could say I had met injury with equanimity, but I can’t. From running at the ‘heady’ heights of 25 mpw, I now look with envy at 15mpw heel-strikers while I currently nurse my PF and tight calf by stretching and strengthening exercises, and with the occasional mile run (sometimes in minimal, sometimes in ‘traditional’ shoes). I also confess that I do not feel particularly fraternal towards runners who have no interest in biomechanics, and who shout back ‘If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’ while they bounce away in their moon boots.
The challenge for the barefoot/minimal proponent is therefore to get runners to stop running – just for a few minutes – in order to assess their mechanical/muscular strength/flexibility in a few key areas: the ankles, the calves, the thighs, the hips and the core. My problem (in addition to my bad attitude already referred to) is that I have no idea what to consider a satisfactory standard in these key areas. I’m not qualified. I’m feeling my way through. There’s plenty of (often conflicting) advice out there on how to treat injuries, but there is no established standard of what the runner should be aiming for in order to avoid injury in the first place. All this means that when the average runner feels ready for action, the first thing he/she will do is go running. I think we need to be aiming for a culture where the first thing might just as easily be be ‘work glutes’ or ‘strengthen hips’.
great comment Ciaran. come to one of our Healthy Running courses! we go into this stuff Mark
I agree with the points you’ve made: 1) the shoes effect on the body 2) proper technique is critical
However, the first thing a runner has to accept is they are taking on a new “sport” and need to treat it that way. Have the proper equipment, learn and practice form. Personally, I took off my shoes, listened to my body, and practiced proper technique every time I took a step. Be that around the house, running errands and just the act of standing barefoot ,day in and out. As far as learning to run again I took it slower than any thing I have read. I listened to my body. I went at my pace. I first learned to stand, then walk, jog, then run with proper form. It is five years ago that I took those first steps into the natural running world. There is no transition in this process I’ve learned. We are starting with broken, injured, unhealthy, misused bodies at the begging of our barefoot journey! No one wants to call it out for what it is. It is a rehabilitation of our bodies. It takes time and dedication to stick with natural running. The process is not for the faint of heart. It is painful, lonely and one of the most difficult things I have done. I had to change my mind set and goals for five years of hardwork and rehabilitation of my body. To anyone I would say it was worth it for me. I am able to run my six minute miles again! Learning to run with correct form my body has rewarded me with the gift of true speed and health. I know I will be among the few who will be enjoying running pain free and injury free as long as I live.
wow great comment Julia and thanks for sharing. this is so true of recovery too. need to go really slow and your body guides you. Mark
The natural running center has many wonderful articles but I would like to see some of these things that over the last five years I’ve learned addressed by you. I can not be the only one who went through years of frustration, pain, and huge paradigm shifts!!!
A few things that helped me in my Journey into natural running;
One: excepting what I was about to do was not running as I knew it.
I would be using muscles, tendons, strengthening bone mass as I had never done before.
Two: throw all preconceived ideas of training out the window and start from scratch. I used plyometrics, Hiit, MMA,swimming, biking as my training. no running! I gradually added walking in a few times a week barefoot about six months into my adventure.
Three: toss all running shoes and other shoes!!!! By quality zero drop barefoot shoes for when you have to wear shoes other wise go barefoot .My first goal was to learn how to stand correctly in my own feet and use and develop strength in my feet. Second I started to run in place trying to feel where my feet should land and how well I executed each movement. Just small amounts of time, 10 seconds here and there throughout the day.
Four: remembering you are healing your body. This was the hardest challenge of all, conquering my mind. I was addicted to fast times,winning races,running long miles when I wanted to. I hated all runners even those at the back of the pack. I envied them for being able to run even though I knew ultimately they were only degenerating their health and their bodies.
Five: accepting feeling out of shape, unhealthy. I had to learn that I might look healthy on the outside but on the inside I was extremely unhealthy. My goal became to strengthen my body and to have my feet function properly.
Six: learn to listen to your body and get to know it and what works for you. This takes time /patience. Adding running back in to your training, only barefoot. This will help you stay at the appropriate speed, and appropriate distance plus use proper form.
Thank you, I would love to see piece written addressing the frustrations we as “use to be runners” faced in our rehabilitation of our bodies. There are no guide lines or “workouts” out there that I have been able to find. Only watered down 5 k workouts. OR “Oh, do these strength exercises and in six week tops 6 months you’ll be up and running again as fast or faster,It is just a transition ” the reality is What seems to happen:1)is people give up, 2)get hurt then then give up or 3)they muddle through and figure out what works for them through trial and error like me. And it takes a long time!
The word “transition” is often thrown around casually, as if it’s a simple series of obvious changes that anyone can make, as long as they’re given just a bit of instruction. I agree with you, that this is not true and that relatively few people actually succeed. I’ll start working on an outline for a piece and I’ll use your post as the starting point.
Are there any research papers or something like that on the claim beneath?:
“When runners run with correct technique, the incidence and severity of running-related injuries drops to a very low level; in fact, to the same level of running-related injuries in sports that are based on running. This rate is, well, minimal.”
The barefoot or bust notion is at the heart of why the minimalist movement is shrinking. I think many who quickly embraced minimalism after reading Born to Run believed the goal was to get to zero drop and everything else was just transitional. In my facility alone I know a few who forged ahead and progressed as far as VFF or its kin and ended up right back in traditional footware due to injuries brought on by the hyper-minimal shoes. I am a fringe member of the minimal movement I guess and consider myself lucky for finding something that worked and not feeling the need to get to zero drop. Nike Free 5.0s with an 8 mm drop have worked wonders on my plantar fasciitis, all but eliminating a problem that plagued me for years as an older, overweight runner, running in stability shoes with custom orthotics. There are elements of the minimalist movement which ring true but the hue and cry for zero drop is ill-founded. Folks can learn to run more efficiently without forcing themselves to run through fire. Everything in moderation people.
steve– well said! i went from over a year in nike frees before going with vivo barefoot, altra running, and skora– each different in ground-feel sensation and cushioning. minor tweaks in the foot would mysteriously appear and then disappear if i ran too much in the vvf and didn’t rotate to something else. as much as i loved the frees, after 2-3 hours of a slow run, the left knee would ache. culprit? who knows? too much cushioning? not zero-drop? lesson here is to listen to your body, and adjust accordingly. — bill k, editor
When I discovered Nike Frees five years ago, running went from a chore to a joy. But pretty quickly I began to get calf sprains as my miles increased. Through Kinvaras, Virratas, PreConnects, although I loved the lightness, I still got strains. But I noticed they were more frequent the more I landed on my heel. Altra One2’s changed this. Zero drop, good cushioning. I have a perfect mid-forefoot strike every time. My stride is necessarily shorter and quicker. I wore them first for a fast 10k and five weeks later for my first marathon. Not a single twinge, when I had always felt some tension in my calves before. I read that calf strains can be caused by poorly calibrated firing of calf muscles during the land-to-pushoff phase, and this makes sense. Part of me was zigging while the other zagged. Zero drop was my answer. From there it’s just a matter of fit, cushioning, stiffness — and these only to suit my general comfort and pace. What a revelation!
I’ve never experienced calf pain from the Nike Free 5.0s and have been running in them for close to 3 years now. Regarding the Altra One2s, do you get the same level of proprioception in them as the Frees? I’m searching for a shoe with the same feel of the Free 5.0 but with more room in the toe box and that shoe has been suggested. Also, I can’t find them anywhere to try them on so how does the fit compare?
Steve-
I suppose it depends on what a person’s goal is. Most often I have found that people begin exercising because they want to get healthy. Keeping regular shoes on will not promote health. It is a false health. False speed. False in shape. Take off your shoes and you’ll find out how healthy you really are! Do your feet really work? are your arches truly strong ? can they support your weight ?can you move about,jump,run, play? You can’t, can you! Your body is weak. And unhealthy! Most people keep the blinders on saying that they are getting healthy because they buy a certain pair of shoes. I would say these people suffer from the same dilutions as individuals who drink soda and eat sugar and decide that they will add vegetables to their diet to lose weight, so they eat a carrot stick once a day and then after months of doing this can’t figure out why they’re still fat. Individuals must heal their body! One great way to facilitate this is by taking off though shoes and exercising without them, doing your normal daily activities without shoes,living without shoes. If you want true health you have to learn how to listen to your body!! Otherwise just call it what it is, you are faking health. Admit that you are fat and happy inside and out. Most people will never take the journey to true health,it takes way too much! A change in mind set, sacrifice and dedication. So keep it up :”everything in moderation”and you will never see a true healthy change in your body.
About five years ago, I figured I had about five years left to run. I was sure that I was down to my last millimeter of cartilage – everywhere in my body! Injury (plantar fasciitis) pushed me to land more on my forefoot than heel. That led to experimenting with zero rise shoes, then minimal, then almost nothing (sandals). Then, I arrived at true barefoot. I am thankful for the “fad” of barefoot running. I would have quit otherwise.
I am running strong, my feet are blocks of muscle, and I’m pain free. I’m as fast as I’ve been in 20 years, well, maybe the last ten 😉
I have also found that running barefoot is the best training thermostat. I can’t over-train when running barefoot (and can’t go too intense when nose breathing). My goal for years has been to be able to run any distance, in any weather, at anytime. Although it’s just a rhetorical goal, natural running has given me my running life back.
I have found that now, running is less an activity for me than it is a definition of me.
I’ve been running minimalist/barefoot since the Summer of 2010. I went from cushioned shoes straight to running barefoot and in Vibram sprints. Your skin gives great feedback, and if you run incorrectly it fails first, especially on tracks or pavement. It’s impossible not to be light and smooth if your completely barefoot. Also, ditch the ipod, I hardly ever run with music now, it breaks my concentration and distorts my form. I think running minimalist is easier than people think, but you need to go all the way. Start barefoot and learn to go with the flow.
Where does the notion that cushioned shoes lead to muscle atrophy in the foot come from? I believe it’s a false assumption.
If you run on a soft, lush field of grass — or sand, as in the photo with the Australian running guru from Part 2 — which offers plenty of cushioning with each step, does your foot atrophy? Clearly not. So what difference does it make whether the cushioning is strapped to your foot, rather than being on the ground your bare foot is running on?
One could argue that the whole foot tenses more when the body anticipates an unprotected impact — “foot clenching” if you will — while with proper cushioning — whether it by from the shoes or the running surface — relaxes the foot to the point where more flexing and movement take place during the foot strike.
So cushioning in shoes, in and by itself, should not be viewed as negative in anyway. The same can’t be said for things like heel-toe drop, the stiffness of the sole, and motion-control strategies that alter the way the foot wants to naturally move through foot impact.
@Frank…. Your assumptions that cushioning should not be viewed as negative are not based on physiologic reality. Traditional shoe cushioning absorbs forces that would go throught the foot. These forces though should not be viewed as negative. The great thing about the human body is that it is adaptable to increased forces as long as it is not too much, too soon. Perfect example: Look at the hands of a lifetime construction worker vs an office worker. It can be clearly seen the construction worker has more robust hands. Feet are no different and if we,through a lifetime,”shelter” our feet from those forces that the coushion absorbs then our feet end up not as robust as they should be.
After making a slow gradual proper move to barefoot/minimalism over 9 mo, my feet had thickened as dress shoes and other shoes I had for years no longer fit….my feet were thicker. I went from not even being able to stand on asphalt with bare feet because it felt like daggers to being able to run on it. By removing the cushioning my feet adapted to this new stress and became more robust. This adaptation of thickening is repeated time and time again with those that i have turned on to the barefoot / minimalist lifestyle.
I have treated many patients for plantar fasciitis and one of the main repeating issues i see are they have very thin, “dainty” feet and wear shoes all the time, even in the house. I get them going on just standing and walking barefoot and their feet thicken over time. So the theme: Get rid of the cushion and let your feet grow and adapt and then overall your feet become the tools they are truly capable of being.