12

Running shoes and injuries (again) (Read 783 times)

    I've been always a strong believer that there can be too much of a good thing and running shoes are no different. I found an interesting blog and I think what the guy says has a lot of merit. From my own experience less is more. Just something to consider next time you pull out your credit card in a shoe store: http://www.quickswood.com/my_weblog/2006/08/athletic_footwe.html
    I would rather wear out than rust out. - Helen Klein You create your own universe as you go along. - Winston Churchill
      Hey SkBunny - I'd like to read your article but can't get the link to work. If it's just me, ignore me. If not, could you fix it?
      E-mail: JakeKnight2002@aol.com
      -----------------------------


      A Dance with Monkeys

        That is why we have Nike Frees and Vibrams.
        Scout7


        CPT Curmudgeon

          This is a topic that comes up fairly regularly. I am always interested in what people have to say about it, but it hasn't made change to running barefoot. There's a lot of variables that go into someone's injuries, and I think it's tough to make a blanket argument for the shoes being the primary cause.


          A Dance with Monkeys

            The great irony is that the google ads on the side of this blog are all for shoe stores... Roll eyes
              If those modern shoes wouldn't have such a high heel they'd be fine. After all, I don't think humans are meant to be running on asphalt Smile I did do some barefoot running last year when it got warm. There were some practice football fields, the track itself and in between some paved cement. As soon as I was reaching the paved part I had to slow down considerably, but running on the track and grass was great. You find that when the surface is moderately firm, you land more to the front. When it is a bit soft, i.e. wet, mushy grass, I fully touch my heel as well - but not *just* the heel - hitting a hidden stone with just your heel is very painful.
              RunningHammer


                the article doesn't mention that in the last few thousand years where people went unshod and had no injuries (although it doesn't say how that conclusion was reached) they didn't run primarily on asphalt/tarmac/concrete surfaces. Personally i have had no problems from shoes although I've only been running for around 9 months (i have 3 pairs in rotation). There's absolutely no way i will be running barefoot on any of the surfaces i currently run on. I have tried running on a treadmill barefoot - and the arches of my feet hurt before i've done a mile. If I run in my regular trainers the same happens. Sorry but i think it's bunkum....maybe it'll work for others but it's not for me. Running shoes definitely work for me. Seems to me that more injuries are caused by people choosing the wrong shoes, or being mis-sold dodgy pairs.


                Needs more cowbell!

                  Seems to me that more injuries are caused by people choosing the wrong shoes, or being mis-sold dodgy pairs.
                  That's kind of my thinking, as well. Or perhaps wearing the wrong shoes when not running. Lord knows the high heels a lot of women wear probably damage their lower legs when they are worn day in and day out, then they try to run in shoes that don't have high heels. I think he might be onto something with wearing shoes that have too much cushioning, but maybe this isn't true for all people. I think Trent is probably onto something with having his needs assessed frequently and adjusting the model and type of shoe as needed. I think my recent problems with a shoe that previously worked well for me have more to do with my needs changing than they do any inherent problems with the shoe. k

                  I shoot pretty things! ~

                  '14 Goals:

                  • 2 olympic distance duathlons -- 6 days apart -- PR at least 1

                  • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)

                    Cushioning is one thing - I for one welcome some cushioning. High heels and wedged soles are another thing, they force your feet to move in an awkward way and yet it is impossible to find a shoe without things. I also find that the wedges are in such a way as to make it easier for you to sprain an ankle! [All shoes have a firmer medial midsole that further contributes to that, but some shoes seem to have at least a higher lateral, though still softer, insole]. These design decisions seem to be quite random to me... I talked to an 8i0-yo ex champion hurdler - he says that when they did longer training sessions they used to raise the heel a little bit with a bit of rubber in order to relieve the ankle joint from doing too much work..
                      "In 1988, Hamill and Bates showed that as running shoes lose their cushioning through wear and tear, subjects improve foot control on testing and presumably decrease their risk of injury, i.e. shoes get better with age." Good news for JK there - get those 1000 mile trainers out again Wink modified to add - I might even start using my old school shoes again. Smile

                      2013

                      3000 miles

                      Sub 19:00 for 5K  05-03-13 Clee Prom 5K - 19:00:66 that was bloody close!

                      Sub-40:00 for 10K 17-03-13 Gainsborough 10K - 39:43

                      Sub 88:00 for HM

                       

                        I have suspected this for some time:
                        The authors conclude that running injury rates are greatest in users of the most expensive shoes because advertising has deceived these users into believing that the shoes provide a superior level of safety thereby inducing an attenuation of impact moderating behavior, increasing impact and injury.

                        Runners run.

                          There are a few interesting things in there, but overall I was not impressed. My personal experience has been that expensive shoes have been worth it and kept me healthier, and I really only get injured when I run on shoes that have far too many miles on them. I also don't dig this guy's half-baked allegations of some kind of conspiracy among the "billion-dollar" shoe manufacturer industry. That "interview" with the Nike Research guy made me laugh. Who does this guy think he is? Don't get me started on bloggers.
                            I usually shell out about between $89-$95 for a pair of shoes. I always look at the $135 shoes but, just don't think another 40 bucks are going to make me a much better runner. I think running shoes are like stereo equipment. You have to be willing to make an investment to get a decent shoe but, beyond a certain point you're spending big dollars for incremental differences. That being said, I retired my Mizunos yesterday (411 miles) for a new pair of Gel Asics. Although it's hard to make a definitive judgement from just one run, I like the extra cushioning. On an 8+ mile run yesterday the knee pain & the hip discomfort I'd been getting late in my runs were gone.

                            The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made.

                              I think if you have pains you should back off on your running. Nevertheless, an interesting quote from "The biomechanics of running" by Tom F. Novacheck, appearing in Gait and Posture 7 (1998) 77 – 95 " Interestingly, quantifiable differences between racing and training shoes are negligible despite the commonly held belief that racing shoes provide less shock absorp- tion and control of movement [43]. Perhaps runners adapt their running style to maintain acceptable force levels. On the other hand, actual differences may exist but are undetectable." [43] Williams, Cavanagh, Ziff. Biomechanical studies of elite female distance runners. Int J Sports Med. 1987 Nov;8 Suppl 2:107-18.
                              12