1

Interesting study on rotating shoes (Read 176 times)

ShuffleFaster


    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24286345

     

    Interesting study (although there were several important confounders present).

     

    Nevertheless, gonna use it to justify the 5 pairs in the closet to DW!  Big grin


    MoBramExam

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24286345

       

      Interesting study (although there were several important confounders for it be definitive).

       

      Nevertheless, gonna use it to justify the 5 pairs in the closet to DW!  Big grin

       

      Like the .gov part in the link?

       



        tl;dr

         

        Are there ball bearings on the shoes or something?

        Well at least someone here is making relevance to the subject.

          That's totally what I thought when I read the thread title! Disappointed.

           

           

           

          Are there ball bearings on the shoes or something?


          Fat butt on couch

             

            Like the .gov part in the link?

             

            I'm not sure why that bothers you.  If you actually looked at the abstract or article, this study/authors had nothing to do with the US government; it was, in fact, from Europe.

             

            PubMed is simply an open-access database of research provided through government.

             

            As for the study, the hazard ratio for changing shoes was quite compelling.  As interesting were the findings that people who ran longer sessions and higher MPW had fewer injuries.

            "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

             

              Is this multiple shoes as in different models of shoe?

              ShuffleFaster


                 

                As for the study, the hazard ratio for changing shoes was quite compelling.  As interesting were the findings that people who ran longer sessions and higher MPW had fewer injuries.

                 

                Agree.   I also think the crosstraining effect in the abstract was interesting as well.   I'm going to pull the actual paper for review when I get a chance.

                zonykel


                    

                  As for the study, the hazard ratio for changing shoes was quite compelling.  As interesting were the findings that people who ran longer sessions and higher MPW had fewer injuries.

                   

                  I'm no statistician, but is there a way to determine cause and effect? Couldn't it be that those who are less susceptible to injury can run more?


                  Fat butt on couch

                     

                    I'm no statistician, but is there a way to determine cause and effect? Couldn't it be that those who are less susceptible to injury can run more?

                     

                    It could also be that those who run more have strengthened themselves against injury.

                     

                    No, the data presented do not show cause and effect.  That is a much more difficult proposition, especially when the subjects are human.  But what it does do is somewhat discredit the notion that simply running more makes you more likely to get injured.  I've lost count of the number of times people find out I run 2000-4000 miles per year (the higher numbers being in the past) and immediately respond that I'm destroying my knees/hips/etc.  Recently on an internal message board at my employer, someone was going on and on about how they stopped running and only walk now because of how dangerous running is for you.

                    "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                     


                    I'm back!

                      As interesting were the findings that people who ran longer sessions and higher MPW had fewer injuries.

                       

                      I didn't see higher MPW mentioned as such -- longer sessions, and higher volume of *other* sports. Bummer. Cross training is a benefit? Really?


                      Fat butt on couch

                         

                        I didn't see higher MPW mentioned as such -- longer sessions, and higher volume of *other* sports. Bummer. Cross training is a benefit? Really?

                         

                        You are correct.  I read too quickly.  Although this is in line with what I posted earlier today in my opinion on the "runners being strong" thread.  So not surprising (to me).

                        "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                         

                        zonykel


                           

                          It could also be that those who run more have strengthened themselves against injury.

                           

                          No, the data presented do not show cause and effect.  That is a much more difficult proposition, especially when the subjects are human.  But what it does do is somewhat discredit the notion that simply running more makes you more likely to get injured.  I've lost count of the number of times people find out I run 2000-4000 miles per year (the higher numbers being in the past) and immediately respond that I'm destroying my knees/hips/etc.  Recently on an internal message board at my employer, someone was going on and on about how they stopped running and only walk now because of how dangerous running is for you.

                          - Agree on running more possibly strengthening the runner.

                          - I suppose there has to be a balance between recovery and workouts. I wonder at what rate elites get injured, considering all the miles they run. It seems to me they are right on the edge of maximizing fitness while staving off injury. And when you're right on the edge, it can't be too hard to exceed a threshold somewhere that will cause an injury.


                          Fat butt on couch

                            - Agree on running more possibly strengthening the runner.

                            - I suppose there has to be a balance between recovery and workouts. I wonder at what rate elites get injured, considering all the miles they run. It seems to me they are right on the edge of maximizing fitness while staving off injury. And when you're right on the edge, it can't be too hard to exceed a threshold somewhere that will cause an injury.

                             

                            Elites have unusual "talent".  This "talent" can be defined in multiple ways.  For most, it is a high degree of baseline fitness.  In other words, the training that gets you or I to a 17min 5K gets them to a 14min 5K.  For many of them, this is coupled with a high degree of resistance to injury.  They simply can train very hard for a long time and never get injured.  This allows them to compete at a high level.

                             

                            Then there are people like Dathan Ritzenhein.  An incredible talent from a young age, but also very injury-prone.  One has to wonder what kind of times he would have turned in by now was he able to string together more than 9-12 months without a major injury.

                            "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand