As our lab a part of the Department of Human Evolutionary Biology, we were essentially motivated by a single question: how were humans and our ancestors able to run safely and effectively for 2 million years without shoes? (The evidence for the role of endurance running in human evolution can be found here
http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~skeleton/pdfs/2004e.pdf
) We found that barefoot runners adopt a forefoot strike gait and hypothesize that this may be how our ancestors were running. We DO NOT conclude that barefoot or minimalist footwear is better for running. More studies need to be done in order to answer this question.
We do not make any conclusions about what type of running style or footwear is best. Please read our paper for OUR conclusions as the journalists often jump to conclusions to appeal to the masses. We report our finding that forefoot striking generates reduced impacts compared to heel striking and we analyzed the biomechanics to show why this is the case. You can forefoot strike with or without shoes of all sorts, your choice. You can also choose to heel strike with or without shoes.
It’s correct that the subjects ran approximately 25 meters which was done for logistical reasons, but the runners ran at endurance speeds. Approximately 10 meters is a sufficient distance to finish accelerating and begin running with a consistent endurance gait. The average speed for each group studied was reported. The subjects were not doing a 25 meter stride.
I suppose I could have said in the original post that the study was partially funded by Vibram USA. I had simply never considered it an issue while conducting research. Harvard strictly enforces that the right of free scholarship (to choose the nature and direction of research inquiries) cannot be compromised
http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~research/managing_your_research/managing705.pdf
. We had multiple funding sources for this study. Along with Vibram was the National Science Foundation, American School of Prehistoric Research, The Goelet Fund, and Harvard University.
I used the words “promote my own research” in my original post. I should have used the word share. I am not going to gain benefit from this being noticed. I simply wanted runners to be aware of this research and I knew that there would be some great comments and questions generated on this forum. I don’t see it as irresponsible for me to post. People should read through the entire paper or entire website carefully. I think runners should consider this and make their own choice about how they want to run after learning as much information as possible.
Horray for Bad Research, I understand you so much more than you know. I think that the “barefoot running movement” has the potential to be incredibly dangerous without proper research and instruction. I also think that it maybe should not be a BAREFOOT running movement but, if anything, it should be about forefoot striking, but we emphasize that no studies have been done considering foot strike type and injury rates. Practically every runner in the US grew up wearing shoes and ran all their lives in shoes. The muscles, tendons, and ligaments of the foot and lower leg are not developed in the same way as in a person who has run barefoot all of their life.
Personally I run in 3 different racing flats right now, no strong preferences between them, and converted to forefoot striking over a 3 month period this past summer. I do not plan on running completely barefoot in the near future.
Keep the comments coming.