It's finally out - a retrospective study comparing injury rates among 16 forefoot (not necessarily barefoot) runners and 36 rearfoot runners by Daniel Lieberman. Lieberman's conclusion was that rearfoot runners have more problems with "repetitive stress injury" than forefoot runners. Since I'm not a doctor I don't have access to the full article yet. I, for one, would like to know what "repetitive stress injury" is. Also, a retrospective study isn't, I think, as definitive as other types...again, it's not my field, so I just nod and say. Okay...more please?
The first thing I did was go searching for the name of the article to see what was being said. I saw, as usual, that all the pro-barefoot running sites were kvelling...honestly, I'm not sure it's time for that yet.
This one was where I felt I got the most information. I've found it before and it's always interesting. It's an international crowd of English-speaking podiatrists who all gripe at each other more or less constantly, some of whom have a clue and some who don't. At least one of them is fairly curmudgeonly about barefoot running with just as much or more bias that the most zealous barefoot running advocates. On the other hand, they are doctors and they have access to a wide range of studies and (presumably) know what they're looking at when they read them.
As someone who has run barefoot and minimally shod now for over a year, I can say that you do trade one set of possible injuries for another, especially as you make the transition. I don't hear much about that from the BF advocates, although you see it constantly on the BF running forums. I also hear constantly about the horrible injuries that rearfoot, thickly shod runners regularly experience. I can say from experience that my pain from running (and living) in shoes was much greater than any discomfort I've had from running barefoot.
What I don't see anywhere is the idea that transitioning from shod to barefoot running requires any kind of lifestyle change, which it does. The assumption is that when you transition to BF or minimal running that a runner will once again work competitively and repetitively to conquer miles upon miles of terrain with their feet.
Bare feet don't necessarily do that without a fuss, especially those that belong to someone who drives, sits and has worn supportive shoes all day most of their lives.
Barefoot work requires a certain amount of reverence for the earth and for our bodies. If that reverent attitude takes you miles on foot, then there you go, but my sense is that people follow trends more than they listen to their bodies. We are a culture that believes in conquests instead of experiences. History is ignored - if we paid attention to it there would probably be fewer wars and running injuries.
Being barefoot is a metaphor for the larger changes we need to make in how we live in the world. Maybe this is an unpopular attitude, but I think that we need to ditch the start and finishing lines and just get out there with our feet on the ground for a while, stop when we're tired, skip when we feel like it and use our senses to experience what we've been missing.
I'm with you on your approach to running -- stopping when I feel like it, skip or stretch or do whatever appeals along the way. I run, but don't identify myself as a "runner" b/c I don't feel like I fit in b/c of my approach.
ReplyDeleteAs for lifestyle. . . I've been working with my feet and running barefoot for over a year now, and now I'm really struggling to find work shoes that WORK for me. My feet are different than they were a year ago -- stronger, more sensitive, and more aligned through the toes (so, broader). They don't do well in shoes that used to be fine. And they aren't "bean" shaped! It's driving me nuts. I want a simple, elegant flat that I can wear in a professional environment. It's surprisingly difficult to find.