Why barefoot isn’t best for most runners

Pop-corn time!

I thought the same thing! Let the drama begin…

Of course, in my orthopedic PT practice I get so much business from barefoot runners these days…I feel like just handing out my business cards on running paths sometimes.

I always love the comment that "we didn't evolve to wear shoes…"
Well, yeah, but YOU grew up wearing them and your bones and muscles and neurological connections and heel pads developed with shod feet. If you grew up in the Mexican highlands wearing huaraches, or running through the Kalahari barefoot, well then yeah, you're going to be good at it. But for the rest of us, maybe not so much.

I am a HUGE advocate of wearing minimal shoes or going barefoot to work muscles in your feet and lower legs, but as an exercise, not necessarily as a lifestyle. Everyone is different of course, and for some people it really is the way to go. But early research so far is not really pointing to less injury among runners overall…and that study cited in the article is one of the stronger ones to come out. I think we don't have enough long term information yet to make any good recommendations. So that means I am a strong advocate for moderation: you probably should stop putting orthotics and superfeet in every pair of shoes you own, but you should also not walk around in barefoot shoes all day every day either.

Meh. Talk about the other end of the spectrum. I'm heading out today for a 41-mile overnighter in PA. I'll be wearing a pair of nicely cushioned Hoka trail shoes. First time hiking in them. Should be interesting…..

I walk around in sandals or a shoe with barefoot "technology", like Merrells. I sometimes wear Fivefingers around town or on short BP'ing trips.

I am more comfortable in them, but am I doing unnoticed harm to my feet? I dunno.

Edit: "Them" being minimal footwear.

Man, Eric, Why not just ask if grassy-knoll conspiracy theorists who served in Vietnam and are now Scoutmasters should vote for or against land rights for indigenous gay whales?

Sandals are documented from 10,000 years ago in Oregon (and still all my Portland friends wear Birkenstocks!).

Otzi the Iceman had his bearskin/deerskin shoes over 5,000 years ago.

Decreased toe size in human remains suggests shoe use started 40,000 year ago.

So we've actually evolved from wearing shoes.

No Iditarod sled team gets to Nome without lots of booties for the dogs.

That said, I use the lightest shoe I can for the task at hand. "Barefoot" models for 10 mile / day. Running shoes for 20+ miles on sidewalk or great trails. Low-cut hiking shoes with a stiffer sole for rough trails over 20 miles / day.

I don't run. Ever. But I live and hike in minimalist shoes. I've put 25 miles in my vivobarefoot neo trails on rocky terrain and my feet didn't hurt.
This is probably because I'm young and I've been wearing minimalist shoes for several years. Before that I was wear fairly flexible shoes without any arch support. I started cutting the midsoles out of sneakers for more flexibility and ground feel until I found out that some shoe makers were already making really minimal shoes.
Do your children a favor and start them off in minimalist shoes.

I am puzzled by runners who will argue that barefoot shoes are natural, and then go out to run on pavement or a track.

I sincerely doubt our ancestors spent much time on hard, perfectly flat surfaces. (Let's see, a fine sand beach at low tide, post-glacial bedrock, ice, dry mudflat…um…that's all I got.)

As a kid I hiked in Keds and I still prefer highly flexible shoe soles on the trail. The bumpy/even, hard/soft, up/down/sideways trail. But thin soles on pavement hurt. It sure doesn't feel 'natural'.

So what? You can still walk barefoot on pavement. If you do it every day your feet will toughen up and it won't be uncomfortable.

Buttered or nutritional yeast?

The oldest shoe so far discovered, in a cave in Armenia, was 7,000 years old. It is probably not THE oldest, as was pointed out in an earlier post. People have been wearing shoes for a long, long time now, doubtless with good reason. Fads come and fads go. As the orthopedic bills mount, I suspect this one's time in the limelight will be mercifully brief.

Justin, maybe I didn't make my point very well. Barefoot may be natural. Pavement definitely isn't.

But we are indeed adaptable creatures, and THAT is the main gift of our evolution.

Another great gift, the ability to make tools and devices to protect ourselves. Like clothes and shoes. Naked may be natural, it may be how we evolved, but it sure isn't comfortable, or even safe, in many circumstances. We made things so we wouldn't be limited by our evolution.

Tom, I seriously doubt those shoes had any arch support or heel rise. Not much different from the minimalist shoes available today.

I walk around in Merrill gloves, but run and hike in Hokas. I like the Merrill's , love my Hokas!

"Tom, I seriously doubt those shoes had any arch support or heel rise. Not much different from the minimalist shoes available today."

I don't know, Justin. Maybe, maybe not. My point was that going about barefoot went out of fashion thousands of years ago, with good reason, and the feet of the vast majority of humanity have adapted to wearing shoes, to the point where any sudden reversion to going around barefoot is likely to result in a lot of injuries. This is particularly true in hard surfaced urban areas, where the majority of mankind now lives. In any case, I personally have nothing against minimalist shoes, although I am skeptical as to their efficacy on hard surfaces or for running long distances. Time will tell, as peoples' experience with them, and the corresponding orthopedic data, accumulate.

I enjoy being barefoot. I've spent the last year slowly getting out of shoes. I find, and this is my experience not scientific or what other's say, that with proper technique even granite isn't a problem. The second hardest part of going barefoot is making good technique (like in any physical activity) second nature. I think the most difficult part is getting over the belief that you need shoes. Unfortunately many don't understand that proper technique isn't come by in a few weeks.

>"Another great gift, the ability to make tools and devices to protect ourselves."

True that. Says the Alaskan.

>"Like clothes and shoes. Naked may be natural, it may be how we evolved. . . "

Naked was a large part of our evolution. Until 50,000-150,000 years ago (moving out of the tropics). Caucasians wouldn't have light skin if they hadn't continued to evolve. Samoans' large chests may relate to only the best rowers colonized new islands. Pima Indians survived periods of famine by packing it on during feast times (a trait that results in diabetes in today's economy).

For the most succinct response to the shoes/no-shoes debate:

"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-ie_aFsfb8"

Love it! Always use the right tool for the job.

Once I took the time to learn proper running technique (midfoot strike, high cadence), I found that I no longer needed shoe gimmicks like pronation control and lots of padding. It's not about the shoe, it's about the runner. For me less shoe is more.

Evolution is about success in mating. With that, the best shoes for hiking and running are very expensive Italian loafers, and maybe high heels.

You minimalist shoe guys really need to read up on Darwin.

"Evolution is about success in mating. With that, the best shoes for hiking and running are very expensive Italian loafers, and maybe high heels."

Only when paired with a Lotus or Bugati. In the modern age, it's the wheels that make the man, not the shoes.

"Only when paired with a Lotus or Bugati. In the modern age, it's the wheels that make the man, not the shoes."

http://youtu.be/i3VxuWT6Dk0

Yeah, I know this dates me. :)

"Buttered or nutritional yeast?"

Nutritional yeast–I'm allergic to dairy.

nm

I just don't believe I was born to run. My ancestors weren't chasing down their food – turns out potatoes don't run very fast.

I was born to carry sacks of turnips. Any 14th century peasant would be happy to have me for a wife!!