why are you relating barefoot with forefoot striking? is this what their article is stating? the two are not necessarily related. oxygen cost with barefoot minimalist running. wooo , why does anyone wear flats/spikes in a race if they are going to be using more oxygen . keep drinking the kool-aid :$
That post addresses some of the concerns that many people have with the whole barefoot/forefoot fad. Check out http://www.endurancescience.com/blog for more analysis of the oxygen cost, injury potential and performance benefit (or lack thereof) from forefoot running
Maybe. But just think, if everyone in Boulder suddenly went minimalist, I'm sure Mark would have an influx of folks visiting him in his clinic with all of their various ailments brought on by the sudden change.
This is just rediculous. The assertation that there are no studies that show that traditional footware increases injuries is false.
And besides, its not difficult to see the conflict of interest going on there.
Well, the domain name for www.EnduranceSpeculationBasedo...tudies.com was already taken. Plus it would take along time to type.
doo doo wrote:
This study actually just talks about POSE, not midfoot strike, or even a forefoot strike other than POSE. Actually its not even a study. Just a look at a study done in '04 on athletes who had only been using POSE for 12 weeks.
I dont know why its called Endurance Science. It should be called Endurance Speculation Based on Really Old Studies.
Completely agree. Unfortunately, you'll never see a study like that - it's logistically difficult and no not likely to be in anyone's (i.e. company's) financial interest. My feeling is that the scientific evidence is limited, but what there is doesn't support an across the board adoption of forefoot/barefoot/pose/chi/whatever.
maybe so, but how many of them are long term studies?
i tend to think of it this way: the pharmaceutical industry does really long studies on experimental drugs before they are even considered for regular use by physicians. granted some of the drugs can have severe life altering effects and running is just a hobby, two different worlds. usually that time frame for new drugs is in years, not weeks or even months like you see with any of the barefoot/minimalist studies. i would love to see someone do a multi year study on minimalism with 100+ participants. i think it would really shed better light on what benefits/disadvantages it has and who can benefit. until then i am on the fence. i am just so tired of seeing people claim that barefoot/minimalism is better because it worked for them. everyone is different and there are lots of people out there that it hasn't worked for and won't work for. until then, experiment and find out what works for you.
No no, it was not an attack. Basically I was just trying to say that although yes, it does seem a conflict of interest for a running shoe store owner to promote minimalism, in his case he's "benefitted" (as far as his PT practice goes) FROM minimalism, people drastically changing running methods, etc. as well. So I do not believe that he would have any reason to "abuse" his credentials in a way by promoting anti-minimalist/POSE/whatever else simply to make sure that his running shoe business stays afloat. Because whether people are buying his shoes or not, he's still in buisiness because the folks who have undergone drastic changes in footwear and form just end up coming to him for their resulting injuries. That was a long winded explanation, sorry for the verbiage.
I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at, or the need to be insulting.
If you are actually serious in asking about the relationship between forefoot and barefoot runnig, ask any proponent of either. They will tell you that in both: 1) injuries are reduced, 2) running economy improves, and 3) performance is enhanced.
One of the key ideas of barefoot running is that it "makes" you run on your forefoot. That is the relationship between the two. I think that the scientific evidence doiesn't support this in the average runner (as always, individual results may vary). I also think that the rate of injury in forefoot/barefoot runners is far higher than is usually acknowledged by proponents. It's unfortunate that the people making money off this movement (i.e. POSE) gloss over this not insignificant fact.
I hope I've answered your question, assuming it was a question and not just an attack.