Do shoes really have that much correlation with running injury?

Shoes are the #1 culprit with running related injuries. This is why so many prefer minimalism.

Maybe foot injuries. But i'm going to guess that shoes have very little correlation with chronic tendon, hip flexor, itb type stuff have.

As a running store employee when someone says they have an injury the first thing I ask is "how old are your shoes?". Why? Because people don't update them as often as they should. I'm guilty of it as well.

The top reasons for injury I believe are

-Shoes aren't updated often enough/are improper/cheap

-Too much too soon. Could be speed, mileage, or both.

-No post activity stretching/rolling

-Not enough iron or Vitamin P

Old shoes make no difference. You're just trying to sell shoes.

Yeap that's why usually within a week or two their injuries go away. Pure coincidence.

Nonsense. What difference would new shoes make. You have a conflict of interest which affects your credibility on this topic.

Shoes were the reason I had so many injuries, which is why so many people prefer shoes which offer some support.

Shoes caused you injuries which us why people wear shoes? WTF?

Shoeception

I once broke my nose running from the cops. Since then I started wearing racing flats for everything and haven't had one facial injury.

Dank wrote:

I've seen several posts/comments on here that basically blame shoes for their running injuries. Also my friend, whenever he gets an injury changes shoes hoping it will solve his problems. But do shoes really matter in the long run?

There are a lot of things that are correlated with injury risk. Shoes are not one of them. Statistically speaking, shoes do not matter much. For an individual runner, though, a shoe can undoubtedly make a difference (good or bad). There are a lot of things worth looking at BEFORE bothering with shoes: hip strength, calf strength, training progression, weight (i.e. weighting ENOUGH, especially for women: low BMI = higher injury risk), a few flexibility parameters.

Different shoes probably result in slightly different stresses being put on your feet, but that's a highly individual matter. I know of no study that's associated a particular shoe type with fewer or more injuries. Well, except for motion control shoes. Don't wear those.

Shoes are a significant factor in injury causation. Anyone who says differently is inexperienced or uninformed. Shoes designed for shock absorption are particularly bad. Research minimalism for more information. Good luck.

There are many potential reasons for injuries, but shoes must always be considered in any intelligent diagnosis. Motion control and highly cushioned shoes are likely culprits.

Take any advice you get from a running shoe salesman with a grain of salt. They are not experts.

If running solely on asphalt, is it better to look for a softer shoe say Pegasus over a lighter trainer/racing flat? (Ex adizero boston)

My dad ran a 2.39 marathon in 1980 wearing onitsuka tigers.

He and his friends at that time were all wearing just a piece of rubber under their soles. A ton of miles a month and never had a problem.

Were men and women stronger before? Why are people getting injured running 15 miles a week with a pair of 150$ ultra protective shoes?

I read a study that actually found corellation between rate of injuries and both price and age of shoes. Contrary to Al Bundy logic, worn and cheap shoes were on the feet on less frequently injured runners.

Shoes IMO can make the runner learn to run incorrectly. High heels make proper form nearly impossible, especially at sub-sprint speeds. And even then, whn switching too spikes for a race you'll injure achilles or calf. Textbook. Happens to national champions and nobodies alike.

If you take a month to go from zero meters to say a few kilometers of BAREFOOT running on pavement, you're bound to strengthen your feet and improve your form to a life changing degree.

In my case, I was diagnosed by a sports therapist to never be able to run again. Collapsed arches and useless ankles. Sorry mate, no way to help you. While his gym was stuffed with overweight people chugging along on treadmills.

I started from zero with barefoot running, did some surf sock runnign, all very careful. Until after a month or maybe 2 I was doing 600's on a concrete track, at very respectable speed. Outright track style running, no jogging or anything.

3 months after being diagnosed as helpless I ran a 5km in 18'00. Before I had never even had 20'00 speed. I went from a stupid heel strikers with motion control shoes and orthotics to an athlete on racing flats.

All my life I though I just wasn't a runner. At 33 I learned I had just been doing it wrong, and on the wrong type of shoes.

Once in a while I will cool down barefoot on the grass and even track to get my brain and nerves wired to maximum efficiency again.

You can't only change your shoes, you need to stop doing whatever it is you're doing wrong, and adjust your training volume to a level where you get stronger each time, rather than injured.

If you're not doing anything wrong while running then Usain Bolt will want to talk to you, and see you run. So find out what you're doing wrong and start fixing it.

Onitsukatiger wrote:

My dad ran a 2.39 marathon in 1980 wearing onitsuka tigers.

Those must have been some old shoes since Onitsuka had ceased to exist several years before that. Or did you mean 1970?

Small Town wrote:

-Shoes aren't updated often enough/are improper/cheap

-Too much too soon. Could be speed, mileage, or both.

-No post activity stretching/rolling

-Not enough iron or Vitamin P

I concur above except for Vitiamin P?

Yeah, I've learned that. Salesman told me to get a motion control shoe because I pronate quite a bit. I did and they ended up hurting my feet. Stuck with the Kinvaras and no injuries since.