Hoka One One Shoes and Stress Fractures

Yes.

not if that cushioning promotes unnatural/shitty running form, then you are in trouble.

ytryut wrote:

not if that cushioning promotes unnatural/shitty running form, then you are in trouble.

QFE

Absolutely not a shred of scientific evidence to prove or disapprove this.

Hoka is being careful not to make any of the false statements we saw come the minimalist advocates that essentially cured everything including cancer !

I bet I could run long enough and hard enough to get a stress fracture in my Hokas. I could probably pound out a metatarsal stress fracture in a couple weeks.

Or I could run a sensible amount of mileage at a pace I know I can handle to avoid injury regardless of what shoe I happen to be wearing.

Actually, there is no connection between softer shoes/surface and stress fracture rates. Here is some of the research: http://runnersconnect.net/running-injury-prevention/running-surface/

I got 3 stress fractures in my left foot from wearing Nike Air Max in high school. Had healthier bones training in racing flats for 10+ yrs.

Let me correct this statement.

Actually, one epidemiological study analyzing large-scale scientific studies haven’t found any connection between how much of your running is on hard vs. soft surfaces and injury rates showed there was no difference.

I changed it because stress fractures are not the only running injury and you cannot definitively say something like you did without multiple studies to back it up. One article proves NOTHING.

You got to try them, they do not have a big pillowy feel.

They are not moon shoes, or mush boots.

Maybe they are not for everybody, but they feel pretty damn shock reducing.

I think in another iteration or two, they're going to have an awesome shoe.

Now why a few weeks ago my post saying the same things was deleted, is beyond me.

I like the shoe, I do think they have a few tweaks and improvements to be made to the collar and the final lacing placement...but that could just be me.

I'm rooting for them.

And Leo of course.

surely more cushioning= less impact= less stress fractures???

No, up to a point not really. The body automatically responds to the surface or shoe, making the forces involved essentially equivalent.

Nope. Seems like the "wheel" is coming full circle. These were the discussions of 10+ yrs ago on the message board:

Reducing shock to what? That study was measuring forces on the hip joint. But what about forces on the foot? A large proportion of runners going with the minimalist shoes a few years back reported "top of foot" pain. Whether that's stress fracture of the metatarsals or tendon issues, it seems to me that the cause was increased shock from using less padding under the forefoot.

I should add that when I use thinner, more minimalistic shoes, my feet get more beat up. I can't say I notice a difference higher up the leg.

zzzz wrote:

I should add that when I use thinner, more minimalistic shoes, my feet get more beat up. I can't say I notice a difference higher up the leg.

The first time I lifted weights, did situps, and RAN, I hurt too. Then I did it over and over again and got stronger. Hence, what happens to your feet with less shoes= muscles and bones get stronger. What happens with more shoe? Read below. Hokas might as well be like casting your feet.

"Use it or lose it".

“I discovered that the bones of the little toes of humans from that time frame were much less strongly built than those of their ancestors while their leg bones remained large and strong,” Trinkaus said. “The most logical cause would be the introduction of supportive footwear.”

True for muscles and bones. What about tendons? Tendons seem to have a limit and cushioned shoes have their purpose. I wouldn't be running at all without cushioned shoes. PTT. Less drop is good.

Don't get me wrong, there's a place for more minimal shoes too. I like having both options. What I don't like are the shoes with the 12mm drop and big heel. But hey, they're out there for the runners that like that stuff.

Bump...I was going to start a new thread asking this same question.

I doubt it. The cushier the shoe,the less feel you have with the ground, the less aware you are of your form, and the more likely your form is to be less "natural" i.e. heel landing, slow turnover, long ground contact times, etc. This could lead to more injuries indeed.

Cavities wrote:

No, up to a point not really. The body automatically responds to the surface or shoe, making the forces involved essentially equivalent.

I'm afraid that statement is not really correct. You're probably referring to the research that looked at people jumping onto a variety of cushioned surfaces. If memory serves they looked at ground reaction force and showed that the peak ground reaction force in each scenario was roughly the same. However, such information is insufficient to tell us what is going on within the body.

The important information when looking at the loading of structures is the total energy storage and the rate of energy storage within those structures (in this case the flesh and bones of the legs). The ground reaction force experienced by the colliding body does not tell us that (unless you measure it correctly, which I have never seen happen to date).

You could be referring to a different study of course in which case link me up if you have it handy. Cheers.