Training Update: I’m Running Well.

My training–particularly my running–is improving very nicely. I’m getting faster and I’m able to run without pain far more than I’ve been able to in roughly a decade. I think several factors are at work here:

1) I’m using my glutes: I’ve mentioned recently (here and here) that I’ve learned a tremendous amount of how to use my glutes to both stabilize my knees and propel me forward. This has been a huge bit of progress for me.

2) I’m aware of my arches: I recently stood on a device called a pedobarograph. Quite interesting. It showed me pressure was distributed through my feet as I stood on it. Turns out my arches were a bit collapsed. It wasn’t anything terrible but something worth working on.

I’m an advocate of minimal shoe running so I didn’t want to turn to an orthotic insert. I did a bit of research and found a tremendously helpful article about the three different arches of the feet–not just the one arch most of us think of. The article described where each arch is on the feet and how to move and perceive the arches. Unfortunately, the article and the site it came from seem to have vanished from the universe. I plan to do a video demonstrating where these arches are and how to move them. The video in the next paragraph should be helpful as well.

3) I’m toeing off: Along with using my arches, I’m also focusing on using my big toe to help propel me forward. It’s the last thing I feel on the ground as I drive forward. I’ve realized that in past years I haven’t been doing a very good job of this. This is a complex thing. Here’s a video from the Gait Guys that touches on the muscles and the actions that are responsible for good toe and arch mechanics. (BTW, the Gait Guys put out a lot of detailed info on all things pertaining to gait. They can also be found at Youtube. If you’re having problems with your feet, knees, hips, etc. you may find their information very helpful.)

The video is a bit technical but the long and the short of it informs me that the exercise known as the calf raise or heel raise should benefit me. Specifically the heel raise should help condition the muscles that maintain the arches in my feet (the flexor hallucis brevis, the abductor hallucis, and the tibialis posterior) I’m doing a lot of these daily in the 15-20 rep range. I’m also jumping rope.

4) I’m lighter and stronger: I’m under 200 lbs. for the first time in about 10 years. Less of me always makes running easier. It’s also a big help in mountainbiking. Not only am I lighter but my numbers in the gym are pretty decent being that I’m running and biking a lot. I power cleaned 175 lbs. recently. My squat is around 225 lbs. for 2 reps (I’d really like to get that number up…. some day). My deadlift is about 335 lbs. for 2-3 reps. My pistol squats are improving in terms of range of motion, reps, and technique. Stronger + lighter = better.

5) The FIRST plan is working: I “first” used a Furman Institute of Running and Scientific Training (FIRST) run plan for the Cherry Blossom 10-Miler several years ago. It was the best race I’ve ever run so I figured I’d use the FIRST half-marathon and marathon plan for my two upcoming races.I like these plans because they have me running only three days per week. I’m doing a speed workout on the track, middle distance “tempo” run, and a long run. I’m doing other things on other days of the week, typically lifting and/or cycling or just resting. Three runs per week is quite a bit less running than is advocated by other plans. For an explanation of the plan, have a look at Training Science.com.

6) Beet juice(?): I’ve mentioned the benefits of beet juice. Now, I never attribute one outcome to only one factor, but every time I drink beet juice before a run I feel really good. I go (for me) fast and I’m able to cover (for me) long distances while feeling quite decent.Perhaps this is a nonsensical placebo effect, it’s all in my head and purely psychological. Guess what: Who cares? If I think it makes me a better runner then it’s probably making me a better runner. Hooray for me and my brain. We shall choose to be happy.

News On Beet Juice, Running & Evolution, Saturated Fat & Cardiovascular Disease

I’m behind on posting and I’m trying to catch up. There’s been a lot of interesting information to read in various publications. If you’re a runner (and probably any other sort of endurance athlete) you definitely need to see some of this. If you’re listening to government guidelines on saturated fat, then definitely look at the last article.

Beet juice for endurance

A number of articles have appeared lately about beet juice and its benefits for endurance athletes. Never miss a beet is from Outside Magazine. The article discusses two studies from Exeter University in England that demonstrated performance benefits for cyclists. Here are the important details. (Emphasis added is mine.):

… In 2009, a small study done at England’s Exeter University caught the attention of the fitness world. Researchers discovered that competitive cyclists who drank half a liter (about 16 ounces) of beet juice right before they got on their bikes were able to ride 16 percent longer—a massive gain in a sport where only a few percentage points of improvement can be the difference between first place and fifteenth.

Last June, a larger Exeter study backed up this rather unusual protocol: cyclists who drank half a liter of beet juice for six days were 11 seconds faster over a 2.5-mile course and 45 seconds faster over a 10-mile course. The reason: more oxygen was getting to the athletes’ muscles, thanks to molecules in the juice called nitrates. “The oxygen cost of exercising at a given speed is basically fixed,” says Andrew Jones, a professor of applied physiology at Exeter and lead author of both studies. “Only nitrate ingestion appears to improve efficiency. These effects cannot be achieved by any other known means, including training.”

It works like this: Our bodies convert nitrates into nitric oxide, a gas that causes blood vessels to relax and widen, by a process known as vasodilation. This allows more oxygen-rich blood to flow through the body—and the more oxygen reaches the muscles, the longer they’re able to perform at high intensity. Athletes have tried to trigger vasodilation with various banned substances, including hypertension drugs and erectile-dysfunction medication, for years. It now appears that simply consuming large amounts of vegetables that are high in nitrates, such as spinach, carrots, radishes, and beets—the last of which pack the biggest punch, a whopping 310 grams per 16 ounces of juice—can offer the same performance boost.

The article also discusses beta-alanine supplementation. I haven’t used beta-alanine but recently I have been playing around with eating and juicing beets. (I don’t juice a whole beet. I combine about ¼ beet with other fruits and vegetables.) I pretty much will never say that one thing causes one other thing, but since I’ve been consuming more beets, my workouts have felt really good. Also, getting up early has been easier. Again, I can’t say this is the only factor but I see no reason not to continue gobbling a few beets through the week.

One odd thing about beets is that they color some of your bodily excretions, meaning you may see a red tint in the toilet soon after eating or drinking beet juice. It was kind of alarming the first time I noticed it. Turns out it’s normal. Despite this weird side effect, I’m giving beets a thumbs-up.

Evolution, distance running, and a controversial title for an article

Other articles have discussed the idea that human evolution and distance running are intimately intertwined. A recent article from Slate Magazine suggests the same thing. If nothing else, All men can’t jump: Why nearly every sport except long-distance running is fundamentally absurd sounds like fun reading. From our Achilles tendons, to our teeth, brains, our ability to dissipate heat , gait mechanics, and even the “runner’s high,” the article suggests that we are uniquely and powerfully suited to “persistence hunting,” that is chasing down prey until it’s tired. I think it’s an interesting theory, though I wonder if some day scientists will ruminate over the connection between our thumbs, evolution, and video games or text messaging.

Overhydration

It’s summer. It’s hot. We still run, bike, hike, walk, etc. How much should we drink? How often? Do we need to weigh ourselves before and after exercise? Does dehydration lead directly to heatstroke? Furthermore, have you ever heard of hyponatremia, or what happens to you when you drink too much water. (FYI, drinking too much can be far more deadly than being dehydrated.)

The issue of hydration is a pendulum that still swings around and there is confusion. Many of us are growing gills for the amount of water we’re drinking, but this high consumption of water throughout the day seems a fairly recent thing. Do we really need all this consumption? How did we manage before plastic bottles? (Watch an episode of Mad Men and you’ll see the only water anyone drank came from melted ice cubes in their cocktail. How’d we get out of the 1950s under those circumstances?)

For more information, read the Outside Magazine article Tim Noakes on the serious problem of overhydration in endurance sports. (Why listen to Dr. Noakes? He’s a leading exercise scientist and he’s just recently written a 439-page book called Waterlogged: The Serious Problem of Overhydration in Endurance Sports. He’s a very well informed guy. All runners should read his superb book Lore of Running.)

The article covers some interesting information including how hunter/gatherers run a lot during a hunt but don’t drink until they’ve caught their prey, the history and marketing of sports drinks, and why a bit of dehydration is nothing to fear.

Here’s some background on why we think we need to drink so much when exercising. (Emphasis is mine.):

When did we start drinking more water?

Well, the sports drink industry was involved. In 1969 a great American physiologist, David Costill, started new studies. Gatorade was just getting into the market, and he went to them and said, Listen, you produce this product, do you know if it works? Is it of any value? He said, I’ll do the studies and let’s see if it works. His focus was to try and raise money to fund his laboratory. He did the first study where he had people like Amby Burfoot—who writes the foreword for the book and won the 1968 Boston Marathon—not drinking anything. Costill had them run when they drank up to 1.2 liters per hour on the treadmill, and [then run] when they didn’t drink. When they did drink, he showed their body temperatures were much lower and he presumed that was better. But if you ask Amby Burfoot, he said he felt much better when he ran without drinking. Costill assumed then that drinking was good for you, although the study hadn’t really shown that because it wasn’t a performance trial, and all the runners found when they didn’t drink was that there were no problems associated with not drinking. The American College of Sports Medicine asked David Costill to write the first drinking guidelines, which he did in 1975. He said that runners should drink regularly during exercise, which is pretty good advice.

Then, what I discovered, which was really eye-opening, was that a single individual working for the U.S. military decided that water was a tactical weapon. That if the military could be encouraged to drink more during maneuvers, they’d have less heat stroke and less illness and they’d be more productive and could be better soldiers. It was purely his idea. It had no scientific basis at all. Two years later he published a paper supposedly saying that if the US soldiers drank 1.9 liters per hour [64 ounces] when they were exercising in the heat they would perform much better. There was utterly no concrete evidence that that was true. The problem was, his advice was embraced by the U.S. Military. They changed their drinking guidelines to say that you should now drink 1.9 liters per hour. The same people who drew up those guidelines were then invited by the American College of Sports Medicine to get involved with drawing up guidelines for runners.

The essential information first and foremost 1) let thirst be your guide, 2) over drinking is bad, and 3) anything short of severe dehydration won’t kill you.

Evidence on saturated fat and cardiovascular disease

Finally, I’ve mentioned before that perhaps we shouldn’t be as afraid of fat–particularly saturated fat–to the degree that we’ve been told. We’ve got a little more evidence in that direction. Saturated fat and cardiovascular disease: the discrepancy between the scientific literature and dietary advice is a recent study from the Netherlands.

Researchers evaluated three reports from leading U.S. and European dietary advisory committees with results of studies on dietary fat and cardiovascular disease as they were presented in the referenced articles. (These committees are the sort that tell us to eat less fat for fear of contracting such ailments as heart disease.) The findings indicate that the advice given by the committees doesn’t reflect the evidence. The concluding statement of the abstract of the study says, “Results and conclusions about saturated fat intake in relation to cardiovascular disease, from leading advisory committees, do not reflect the available scientific literature.” So again, perhaps we should reconsider our view of nasty old saturated fat.

The Mathematics of Obesity

” … the conventional wisdom of 3,500 calories less is what it takes to lose a pound of weight is wrong. The body changes as you lose. Interestingly, we also found that the fatter you get, the easier it is to gain weight. An extra 10 calories a day puts more weight onto an obese person than on a thinner one.”

– Dr. Carson C. Chow, MIT mathematician

The New York Times Science section has a fairly interesting conversation with Dr. Carson Chow, an MIT-trained mathematician who works for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). The article is titled A Mathematical Challenge to Obesity. He’s worked with other researchers in applying a mathematical model to help describe and answer questions related to our national obesity epidemic. Several key findings are important to note in addition to the quote at the top of this page:

Also, there’s a time constant that’s an important factor in weight loss. That’s because if you reduce your caloric intake, after a while, your body reaches equilibrium. It actually takes about three years for a dieter to reach their new “steady state.” Our model predicts that if you eat 100 calories fewer a day, in three years you will, on average, lose 10 pounds — if you don’t cheat.

Another finding: Huge variations in your daily food intake will not cause variations in weight, as long as your average food intake over a year is about the same. This is because a person’s body will respond slowly to the food intake.

Dr. Chow was hired to answer the question of what caused the obesity epidemic. He suggests that food overproduction is the culprit. And if we have too much food then we wind up eating too much food. He also says that changing our weight takes a very long time. He says:

Beginning in the 1970s, there was a change in national agricultural policy. Instead of the government paying farmers not to engage in full production, as was the practice, they were encouraged to grow as much food as they could. At the same time, technological changes and the “green revolution” made our farms much more productive. The price of food plummeted, while the number of calories available to the average American grew by about 1,000 a day.

Well, what do people do when there is extra food around? They eat it! This, of course, is a tremendously controversial idea. However, the model shows that increase in food more than explains the increase in weight.

Dr. Chow was asked about practical advice. His answer:

One of the things the numbers have shown us is that weight change, up or down, takes a very, very long time. All diets work. But the reaction time is really slow: on the order of a year.

People don’t wait long enough to see what they are going to stabilize at. So if you drop weight and return to your old eating habits, the time it takes to crawl back to your old weight is something like three years. To help people understand this better, we’ve posted an interactive version of our model at bwsimulator.niddk.nih.gov. People can plug in their information and learn how much they’ll need to reduce their intake and increase their activity to lose. It will also give them a rough sense of how much time it will take to reach the goal. Applied mathematics in action!

Dr. Chow’s final words regarding obesity may come as dreary news for people trying to lose weight and keep it off. He says, “It’s so easy for someone to go out and eat 6,000 calories a day. There’s no magic bullet on this. You simply have to cut calories and be vigilant for the rest of your life.”

That is a very honest observation from a well-trained scientist. Remember that the next time you see an ad for some sure-fire trendy diet or supplement.

Fairly Profound Stuff: How to Stand

Dr. of Physical Therapy Kelly Starrett continues to put out very useful information via his site MobilityWOD. Torque and Trunk Stability Part I: How to Stand is a recent post. It discusses trunk and hip mechanics with regard to standing. Does this sound to simple a topic? Standing? Perhaps not.

As I’ve mentioned before (here and here) we often don’t walk very well. Strangely, it’s not uncommon for us to stand incorrectly or less than optimally. As with walking, it so happens we stand a lot. And if we’re doing it improperly then we very likely are moving toward injury and pain or at the very least, poor performance.

The themes in this video appear in a lot of other MobilityWOD videos (like this one on the set up for the deadlift.) The concepts of trunk stability via glute and abdominal contraction are hugely important. As is the idea of torquing or twisting the legs out in order to create stiffness through the legs and hips. (Similarly for the upper body it’s a good idea to torque out or externally rotate the arms during pressing movements.)

I’ve been using these concepts in my own workouts as well as with my clients and I’ve seen some very good results: more strength, less knee pain and instability, better overall technique. All of this is good.

If you’re one of my clients then this stuff is homework. If you’re not one of my clients but you want to perform better. Go ahead and make it homework anyway. See if it helps your squat, deadlift or sitting to standing from a chair–or the ground preferably.

Running News

“That is, once the runners were tired, their form got sloppier, theoretically raising their risk for a tibial stress fracture.”
– Runner’s World

Running while fatigued increases stress fracture risk.

I’ve discussed several times (here, here and here) the idea that if we train too hard, we’re courting injury. An article in Runner’s World gives more evidence to support this idea. The article cites recent research from Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise. As the test subjects ran, researchers monitored several movement patterns that were indicative of tibial stress fractures. As the subjects ran and became more fatigued, these movement patterns became exacerbated.

To me, the messages are first pay attention to your running form. Running is a skill. That’s why I don’t wear headphones anymore when running. Pay attention to how you run! Second, finish your run when you still feel good. Don’t kill yourself (except during a race) when you’re training. Don’t be afraid to quit early or skip a day if you’re very fatigued.

“Liking to run, it seems, may have helped to make humans what they are.”
-NY Times Phys Ed

Running & evolution

Running for enjoyment is sort of a strange thing. Non-runners will agree with me. From an evolutionary perspective, doing something that uses up energy and exposes us to injury really doesn’t make sense. Yet many of us love it. Why? It’s this question that’s discussed in a recent New York Times Phys Ed section. Recent research in the Journal of Experimental Biology examines the matter. Turns out humans and dogs show increased circulating endocannabinoids post run. Walking however does not induce the same reaction. Nor, in this experiment did running have the same effect on ferrets. Seems that dogs and humans may have a deeply wired reward system that’s tied to running.

The question is then asked why don’t more of us run? Dr. David A. Raichlen, a professor of anthropology at the University of Arizona, who led the study answered, “That’s the million dollar question. It appears from our study that we have the evolutionary drive” to exercise. But modern man has learned to ignore it.

I absolutely believe we were meant to run. And running with a dog? There’s nothing like it in life.

I Know How to Walk and Run: Part II

In the previous post I discussed my difficulty in solving my running-related pain issues. Analyzing and changing one’s running technique is a challenging thing, but I’m going to attempt it. I’m mainly going to discuss running here but these concepts apply to walking as well. (Don’t think that poor walking mechanics don’t matter. We spend a lot of time walking. If we’re doing it wrong then we’re really hammering the body into a mangled mess.)

Really important thing #1: Let the foot drop right below you. Don’t reach out with your heel.

It’s vital to get the foot strike correct when running. I now realize that for years I was reaching forward with my leg, putting my heel out in front of me, and hitting the ground with my heel. This is bad. It promotes overuse of the hamstring muscles and de-emphasizes the glutes.

I then spent the past year to year-and-a-half trying a forefoot strike. I thought this was an effective correction of my heel strike but I was still doing several things wrong. First, I was still reaching out ahead of me. As a result I was still using my hamstrings too much and I wasn’t using my glutes enough. And though I was hitting with my forefoot and avoiding a heel strike, I wasn’t allowing my heel to settle to the ground.

Now I’m doing things a lot better. First, I drop my foot directly below me. In fact, it feels like my foot is dropping behind me. Let me emphasize the word “drop.” I passively let the leg unfold underneath me and let gravity pull my foot to the ground. I don’t actively try to do much of anything with my foot. I often pay attention to how things feel down there but I don’t try to pull my foot off the ground or push off in any particular way. Steve Magness discusses this process in is superb post How to run with proper biomechanics. I’ve bolded the key points:

Once the knee has cycled through, the lower leg should drop to the ground so that it hits close to under your center of gravity. When foot contact is made, it should be made where the lower leg is 90 degrees to the ground. This puts it in optimal position for force production. The leg does not extend outwards like is seen in most joggers and there is no reaching for the ground. Reaching out with the lower leg results in over striding and creates a braking action. Another common mistake is people extending the lower leg out slightly and then pulling it back in a paw like action before ground contact. They are trying to get quick with the foot and create a negative acceleration. This is incorrect and does not lead to shorter ground contact times or better positioning for force production. Instead the paw back motion simply engages the hamstrings and other muscles to a greater degree than necessary, thus wasting energy. The leg should simply unfold and drop underneath the runner.

I know I’m running well when it actually feels like the foot is dropping behind me. (It’s not actually behind me, it’s just dropping quite a bit further back than it used to.) I now focus on hip extension when I run, or using my glutes to drive my leg back. With this proper foot placement I can feel my glutes turn on and propel me forward. It helps to have a slight forward lean through this process.

Really important thing #2: Lengthen through the hip

This concept of what I call “lengthening through the hip” has had a massive impact on my walking and running technique and thus my pain issues as well. Denver-area physical therapist Rick Olderman helped me solve a strange little bodily riddle I’d had for years, and this hip lengthening process was right at the core of it.

For a long time I noticed that standing on my right leg was a lot different from standing on my left. When I would stand on my right leg I always sort of tipped or shifted to the right. It didn’t feel right. My balance would shift in a sort of exaggerated way. This was happening every step. Standing incorrectly on my right leg when walking and running also meant I would land badly on my left leg. Lengthening up and pressing my weight through my hip into my foot solved this issue.

This concept is a little tough to effectively describe in words but here goes: As my foot hits the ground below me, I think of lifting my trunk away from hip. In my mind the hip and the rib cage of the stance leg are separating–moving away from each other, and I’m sort of getting taller in the process. I don’t think of bounding or hopping though. I’m trying to make my leg longer below me and behind me as I move forward. A slight lean forward from the ankles helps me do this all correctly.

This movement is sort of a subtle kind of thing to grasp. Describing this process is sort of like describing chocolate to someone who’s never tasted it. It’s not like simply flexing your elbow or bending your knee. It’ll probably take a bit of practice to get a feel for this. The goal should be to take this strange-feeling novel movement and turn it into a habit. The video below should help explain this.

I Know How to Walk & Run: Part I

However, just like throwing a baseball or shooting a basketball, running is a skill that must be learned.
– Steve Magness, running coach

For almost 10 years now I’ve confronted various chronic aches and pains. I love to run but often my running efforts have been derailed by some extremely frustrating issues. My most recent battle has been with Achilles pain/heel pain/plantar fascitis/somesuch in my left foot. I’ve been dealing with these issues for about two years–and it’s driven me insane.

Of course the idea of quitting is nonsense. Humans should be able to run. I want to run and so I’ve searched for a solution. I can very happily report that it seems I have indeed found the key and I’ve spent the past eight weeks or so running almost daily. Seems up until recently I was walking and running incorrectly. Now I know what I’m doing!

Thanks to Rick Olderman

First I must thank Denver-area physical therapist Rick Olderman for helping me with this process. He’s by far the best physical therapist I’ve ever worked with–and I’ve worked with quite a few. Rick truly understands movement, not just muscles and joints. He’s helped me see and feel what I’ve been doing wrong and how to change my ways. If you’re battling with chronic pain and you’re in the Denver area, I highly recommend a visit to Rick.

Tough concepts to discuss

The idea of learning (or re-learning) how to walk and run is sort of a strange thing to consider. Most of us are able to use our legs to ambulate across the earth at various speeds. We typically don’t need to spend much time thinking about how to do this stuff, we just do it. But how well do we run or walk? In my case, I developed poor movement habits–but I didn’t know it. I never actually lost the ability to walk/run, I just lost the ability to do these things efficiently and properly. We know that habits are very hard to break, especially if we can’t identify them.

Identifying and dissecting poor walking/running habits is pretty tough. We’re talking about fairly complex processes that we do without thinking. It’s like blinking or breathing. Analyzing this stuff is challenging and then teaching someone a new method of walking or running is even tougher. As a strength coach and personal trainer, I can say that we rarely consider how to teach someone proper gait mechanics. At the Science of Running, big-time running coach Steve Magness discusses this issue in his excellent blog post titled How to run with proper biomechanics (This post is absolutely essential reading for any runner or running coach.):

“Distance runners and coaches seem to hate the topic of running form. Most subscribe to the idea that a runner will naturally find his best stride and that stride should not be changed. However, just like throwing a baseball or shooting a basketball, running is a skill that must be learned. The problem with learning how to run is that there are so many wrong ideas out there. This is partly due to the complexity of the process and partly due to a lack of understanding of biomechanics. It’s my belief that the wide range of “correct” ways to run has led to this apathetic attitude towards running form changes by most athletes and coaches.”

Over the next several posts I’m going to discuss my understanding of gait mechanics and how you can analyze and improve your gait.

More Hip Mobility

Recently I mentioned that you sit too much, and we looked at a hip mobility complex to help you combat the effects of sitting. Here’s another very good hip mobility process from Kelly Starrett at MobilityWOD.com.

I’ve been doing this drill myself and with other clients and we’ve been seeing very nice results from loosening tight low backs to improving squat performance and generally realizing that we’ve got all kinds of tight, gunked-up tissue in our hips. All this tightness and restriction can mean trouble for knees, ankles, low backs, shoulders–all sorts of parts. Try this drill. Keep working on it. Do it frequently especially after long bike rides or any long period of sitting and before your workouts.

Less Sleep = More Eat

A recent study from the Institute of Human Nutrition at Columbia University indicates that lack of sleep contributes to overeating and thus obesity. Here is the conclusion:

The findings of this study link restricted sleep and susceptibility to food stimuli and are consistent with the notion that reduced sleep may lead to greater propensity to overeat.

What’s happening here? Researchers found that, “Overall neuronal activity in response to food stimuli was greater after restricted sleep than after habitual sleep. In addition, a relative increase in brain activity in areas associated with reward… in response to food stimuli, was observed.”

So it seems that sleep restriction caused subjects to like food more. They found it more rewarding. Weird! The take home message is obvious: Get some sleep!

In this study subjects either slept about nine hours or were restricted to only four hours. How much sleep should you get? Ideal sleep time may vary from person to person. WebMD says, “Most adults need seven to eight hours a night for the best amount of sleep, although some people may need as few as five hours or as many as 10 hours of sleep each day.” If you’re a hard-training athlete then you probably need to be on the high side of those numbers.

A Questionable Case for Running Shoes

The New York Times Health section discusses a study from the University of Colorado in Boulder comparing the metabolic costs of running in shoes vs running barefoot. The results suggest that shod running is more energy efficient than unshod running. These results deserve a few questions. First some background on the study.

Subjects of the study were 12 barefoot runners–runners who knew how to run barefoot in contrast to novice barefooters. “It was important to find people who are used to running barefoot,” says Rodger Kram, a professor of integrative physiology, who oversaw the study.

These runners were then asked to run several times in a yoga sock on a treadmill or while wearing the 150 gram Nike Mayfly, a lightweight running shoe. Then the researchers taped 150 grams’ worth of thin lead strips to the top of runners’ sock feet. By adding an equal amount of weight to the bare foot, they could learn whether barefoot running or shod running was more efficient. The study reports these findings:

1. For every 100g (3.5oz) (the average weight of a deck of playing cards) added per foot, energy cost increases by approximately 1% whether running barefoot or shod.

2. Running barefoot and in lightweight shoes do not significantly differ in energy cost.

3. When controlling for shoe/foot mass, running in lightweight shoes requires ~3-4% less energy than running barefoot.

So it seems that wearing a shoe is a good idea if you want to conserve energy as you run. This would be important obviously during a race. Here are some questions and observations:

1. The positive result of wearing a shoe was seen in 8 of the 12 runners. That means 1/3 of the subjects saw no advantage from running in shoes. Extrapolated out to a large population that means a significant number of barefoot runners are at no disadvantage running in bare feet. I wonder if any of them are more efficient in bare feet?

2. The study was done on a treadmill. Treadmill running is quite different from real running. What if the study was done on a road or trail?

3. The study looked at the Nike Mayfly. What about other shoes? It’s a light shoe. Would even lighter shoes be better efficiency?

4. A commentator on the Times article made the following observation: “Flaw: the only way for the comparison to be valid is if the weight distribution of added weights were precisely the same as the weight distribution of the shoes themselves. Anyone who has ever studied the effects of mass distribution on movement would know that.”

So did the way the weight was added to the (mostly) bare feet affect the runners’ efficiency? What if the weight was distributed differently?

5. The study enlisted experienced barefoot runners as subjects. Alex Hutchinson of Sweat Science and Runner’s World discusses that issue:

Finally, all the runners were midfoot or forefoot strikers, both barefoot and in shoes. This condition was imposed to prevent confounding effects from comparing rearfoot to forefoot striking efficiency.

These conditions raise an important caveat. One of the proposed advantages of barefoot-minimalist running is that it automatically helps to correct overstriding — an extremely common problem among inexperienced runners. The fact that all these runners were already forefoot strikes suggests that none of them were likely overstriding, which would make them less likely to benefit from barefoot running. It’s possible that a truly ‘random’ group of runners might have been less efficient in the shod condition, because more of them would have been dramatically overstriding.

It’s good that someone has done this study. The debate isn’t over and it’s always good to have another view. There’s plenty more studying to be done.

One thing that I keep coming back to is the fact that the fastest runners in the world wear shoes–at least when racing. So from the performance standpoint there seems to be some benefit to putting something on your feet. Further, if you’re happy with you performance and enjoyment of running then you should probably stay with what you’re doing whether it’s shod or unshod.

Denver Fitness Journal

All Things Health and Fitness by Kyle Norman, MS, CSCS, FMS, RRCA Running Coach