Running Shoes, You Need Them to Run..or Do You?

As we enter the long weekend, the weather is slowly (and I men slowly) getting nicer.  With the weather getting above freezing temperatures, it is time to start running outside, if you haven't already.  Running is an easy form of exercise, as you can do it pretty much anywhere and it doesn't cost you a dime.  There are many things I can get into when it comes to running, such as your form, your arm movement, your cadence, how high your knees should raise, how low your heels should be and more.  But before I ever get into those things, many of you need to know the importance of running shoes...or lack thereof.  I will briefly discuss barefoot running and minimalist running compared to running with your good, ol' fashioned running shoes.

There is quite a craze going on with barefoot running and minimalist running. It seems every shoe company has some sort of minimalist shoe to complete with the Vibram Five Fingers shoe. Everything from the Nike Free to the New Balance Minimus.  Many people want a barefoot feel, or run barefoot itself.  But what is the big difference?  First of all, if you've always run with shoes on, borrow a pair of Vibram's and go for a run.  Then, over the next couple of days, tell me how your calves feel. Basically, it's the heel strike.  Barefoot or minimalist running greatly reduces the impact of the heel strike by forcing you to strike with the mid foot. and forefoot  Running shoes with a nice cushion, allow for a heel first impact.  Take a look at the two graphs below. They are from Daniel Lieberman's 2010 Nature paper, which discusses the footsrike patterns in barefoot runners compared to those who run with shoes.  

 

It seems pretty clear that barefoot running is better than running with shoes on, as the amount of impact with your initial foot strike is absent.  Not so fast.  According to certain work done by various doctors, 75% of running injuries occur during push-off, not during heel-strike.  So tendonitis, plantar fascitis and shin splints are caused after heel-strike and impact force is pretty much the same in both graphs, barefoot or shod.  Interesting, eh?  If all the injuries occur during push-off, then why the big push for barefoot or minimalist running?

Barefoot and minimalist running has been around for a long time, even though shoes like the Vibrams are more recent to come out.  There is a reason why we were led to believe that cushioned heels were more important.  It's because the research suggested it.  Research pointed towards running with cushion soled shoes.  It reduces injuries is one argument.  But the same can be said for barefoot running.  Two theories stemming from the same research.  If you like barefoot running, you are probably drawn to the graphs above and the impact (or lack of it) with barefoot running.  But you could be an advocate of shod running, and are more drawn to the injury rate and what causes them.

So, what does that mean for you? It means you have a choice.  Running with Nikes and a nice cushioned sole isn't necessarily bad, but either is running with Vibram's and no cushion.  The debate on whether you with shoes or without comes down to how you interpret the research and individual preference.  I like minimalist shoes and run with Vibram's, but you may like a thick, cushioned sole for your running shoes.  Shoes are an important piece of equipment when it comes to running and I may have just confused you even more with no answer to "with or without", so you'll have to draw your own conclusions on the debate!!