19 ms·

We Evolved to Run But We're Doing It Wrong

387 points by thomyorkie 9y ago

donquichotte 9y ago
Barefoot running and even wearing thin soled shoes restricts you to a certain kind of terrain. I participated in an alpine marathon last weekend and the terrain was quite technical. Everybody was wearing trail running shoes. I have weak ankles which are prone to pronation (he he), so a good shoe is absolutely crucial to me for running in rugged terrain.
dingdongding 9y ago
The title says "We're doing it all wrong", but after reading the article it hardly says much about what we are doing wrong. The only wrong it talks about is treadmill and that's it.
- ZanyProgrammer 9y ago
  Well, he's sorta a zealot for the cult of barefoot running, and that running for everything other than meditation is horrible.
  - goatlover 9y ago
    Sounds a tad extremist.
- positivecomment 9y ago
  "Treadmill is bad because it was invented as a torture device and one famous person died three years after doing it excessively. It is like running without any of the good stuff". This is an actual argument from the article.
  - lawpoop 9y ago
    Can't say I disagree with him on that
    - Retra 9y ago
      You would agree, then, that drinking water is bad for the same reasons?
      - goodJobWalrus 9y ago
        Drinking water was invented as a torture device?
        Retra 9y ago
        I suppose this is as good a time as any to miss a point.
        lawpoop 9y ago
        Funny, my thoughts exactly
ck425 9y ago
This isn't really a new idea anymore. I'd be curious to read what the book covers beyond what Born to Run did.
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  Had the same thought. https://www.amazon.com/Born-Run-Hidden-Superathletes-Greatest/dp/0307279189 https://www.amazon.com/Born-Run-Hidden-Superathletes-Greates...
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
mlinksva 9y ago
I wish the interview was a bit more substantial, but I like the exercise should be free/gyms are bad (exaggeration mine) idea. Gyms are like skyways (eg in Minneapolis), or like mass transit stations surrounded by parking: they detract from the vibrancy of street life and subvert their purpose.
- vinay427 9y ago
  By that logic, tennis courts, swimming pools, and other recreational facilities do the same. Not everyone uses a gym to run on a treadmill, or even to do cardio-based exercises.
  - mlinksva 9y ago
    They do, to some small extent. I'm not claiming that indoor gyms should not exist at all or that on should never ever drive to one, nor that there is never a case for a skyway or parking at a transit station (though parking should never ever be gratis). Only that the costs exist and should be considered.
- nathancahill 9y ago
  Outdoor gyms have really taken off in Latin America (it's my understanding that they originally became popular in China). The social aspect is great. Quite often, they are in the center of parks and green space downtown. People hang out around them and work out together.
  - vinay427 9y ago
    I have seen these in some Indian cities as well, and it's definitely appreciated. However, much of the US has a winter weather problem, perhaps partly only in perception. No one where I live seems to be excited by outdoor infrastructure because of the lack of use during winter months.
    - magic_beans 9y ago
      LA has tons of public outdoor bodyweight gyms at its beaches. Good weather helps.
rosser 9y ago
The Fine Article doesn't really go into how we're doing it wrong, beyond a passing mention of barefoot running, and some dissing of treadmills (which is hyperbolic and orthogonal to reality; you can run "correctly" or "badly" on a treadmill or on the street or trail). I used to run a bit. Did an informal "couch to 5k" over a couple of months, before I'd even discovered that was a thing. The single most effective thing I did for my running was to buy a pair of Vibram Five-Fingers shoes. TL;DR, the gist of the "wrong" is that we've been trained by "trainers" (over-padded athletic shoes) to run in a straight-legged, heel-lands-first manner. When you do that, your knee is locked (or at least straight) as the foot lands, which transmits the force of the landing up your leg and into your lower back. When you run barefoot, or in a pair of ultra-light "shoes" like Vibrams, you learn very quickly not to do that, or you stop running. The "right" way is to land on the ball of the foot, with the knee slightly bent. The knee bends further to dissipate the force of the landing. This is how evolution "meant" for us to do it. I have a bum knee now, for unrelated reasons, so I can't run for the time being (or possibly ever again). I was, in fact, specifically warned against it by one of my array of bodyworkers just this past week. I kinda miss it sometimes, because it actually can be quite meditative, once you get into your rhythm. EDIT: phrasing. EDIT 2: The "wrong" under discussion in The Fine Article might have more to do with why we run than how. Though, if so, premising the argument in "evolution" is perhaps specious. Thanks, follow-ups, for pointing that out more clearly.
- WalterSear 9y ago
  >When you run barefoot, or in a pair of ultra-light "shoes" like Vibrams, you learn very quickly not to do that, or you stop running. The "right" way is to land on the ball of the foot, with the knee slightly bent. The knee bends further to dissipate the force of the landing. This is how evolution "meant" for us to do it. There's more to it than that. Please make sure that you are pushing off with your heel. Many people assume that barefoot running is the same as running on the balls of your feet, but if, after your toes touch, you aren't subsequently landing and pushing off with your heel, you are likely to injure yourself, and more seriously than if you didn't barefoot run at all. The small, delicate toes in the forefoot are not meant to handle the load of landing and takeoff. FYI: This movement doesn't feel natural or normal for most people until they have tried it a bunch - the muscles and flexibility for it aren't there. It took me about six weeks of practice, but I was not a particularly frequent runner - mostly because of the knee pain of running 'normally'. The pain was eliminated by running barefoot instead.
acconrad 9y ago
> On the phone from London, the author told National Geographic how he was inspired by his Irish uncle, who ran in the Olympics, and why he believes running barefoot is more natural—and less likely to result in injury. I stopped reading right here. Ask a podiatrist if they've seen a rise in plantar fasciitis as a result of barefoot running. Not everyone has the biomechanics to jump into barefoot running[1]. Not everyone who has the biomechanics can simply transition to barefoot running[2] - you have to ease into it[3]. As soon as you assign species-wide labels and claim something is wrong, assume it's a clickbaity title that will likely follow Betteridge's Law of Headlines. [1] http://www.menshealth.com/fitness/barefoot-running-problems http://www.menshealth.com/fitness/barefoot-running-problems [2] https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/2013/aug/22/barefoot-isnt-best-most-runners https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/20... [3] http://barefootrunning.fas.harvard.edu/6FAQ.html#Who%20should%20NOT%20run%20barefoot%20or%20in%20minimal%20shoes http://barefootrunning.fas.harvard.edu/6FAQ.html#Who%20shoul...?
- tshadley 9y ago
  A few sentences down: "Most beginners give up when they get injured because they’ve done too much, too soon. Most of the benefits from running derive from going very slowly."
will_brown 9y ago
Another recently published running book is about "The Raven" a streak runner running 8 miles everyday for over 42 years. 125,000 miles; 5x around the earth; to the moon and back. I'm lucky enough to live in Miami and run with him sometimes. When he started the streak he went barefoot and later began wearing shoes, if you can call them that, his favorite are NB with about 2,500 miles on them that seem to have more hole(s) than material left. If you can, do a run with the Raven and get a nickname, if not please get his book: https://www.amazon.com/Running-Raven-Amazing-Community-Inspired-ebook/dp/B01JEJC8L6 https://www.amazon.com/Running-Raven-Amazing-Community-Inspi...
- icantdrive55 9y ago
  This guy is interesting. Interesting on so many levels. His singing voice really surprised me. If the world was fair, he would have been a monetarily successful country singer. He's already a success in life, and that's probably more important. Then again, he might have never picked up running, if found too much success singing? Someone stole one of his songs, and sold it to Walen Jennings. The greed/unethical behavior of certain monetarily "successful" people disgusts me. Those shoes should end the footware debate. Just buy what feels right, and use them until they wear out. (There's a picture of him standing next to his pile of worn out shoes. Yes--he admits to being a bit of a horder. I get it. I'm that way with books. Just can't get rid of them, but might be forced too soon. Do I intuitively feel running eight miles a day is healthy. I don't know. It looks like his heart is taking a beating. Supposedly, his arteries are clear. Got off topic a bit. I just kinda related to this guy's life.
- noir_lord 9y ago
  Moon is ~239,000 miles away. 125,000 is about halfway.
- xaduha 9y ago
  > 8 miles everyday for over 42 years. 125,000 miles; 5x around the earth; to the moon and back. Huh?
peterwwillis 9y ago
How to do running right: 1. Walk. 2. Increase pace until uncomfortable. 3. Back off pace until comfortable. Everything else is yak shaving.
- goatlover 9y ago
  Not if you want to be a competitive runner. Then you need to be able to run through the uncomfortable pace (in the context of proper training).
  - agumonkey 9y ago
    I think he meant to bootstrap balancing learning period. Not as an effort.
- agumonkey 9y ago
  What barefoot forces you is to restart that process at very basic level. Your feet are sensitive, if you stomp on the ground as you do with shoes (especially amortizing running shoes) you'll quickly see the problem. It makes your movement way more subtle, soft, supple and also redistributes effort on the whole limb chain.
  - peterwwillis 9y ago
    Barefoot running is a lame fad for people who think there's secret value in the obscurity of old things. Modern societies have been running with various foot coverings (usually sandals) for thousands of years. So there's nothing wrong with running with shoes. If barefoot running is all about moving differently, you don't need to be barefoot to do that. Do Thai boxing conditioning for a few months. Learn to jump in all directions for two minutes with 60lbs on your back, and jump rope for 10 minutes straight, and crawl on all fours in various directions and positions. You will definitely be able to move differently, more efficiently, without injury. Does this have anything to do with running? No! Running is running. Moving differently is moving differently. If barefoot running pretends that the latter is what the former is all about, it's wrong. If you want to run, and you can run, and you do run, just keep doing what you're doing. Anything more and it turns from exercise (or a way to get somewhere) into a hobby.
krishicks 9y ago
Chris McDougall's book, "Born to Run", is another source that's been out for a while. It focuses on endurance running, but also heavily on barefoot or nearly-barefoot running. http://www.chrismcdougall.com/born-to-run/ http://www.chrismcdougall.com/born-to-run/
spodek 9y ago
The article mentions hunting by running as an evolutionary adaptation suggesting running distances, not necessarily sprinting. I have to imagine running like hell to escape predators as a major part of our evolutionary past. It would seem consistent with the effectiveness of high intensity interval training as well as how satisfying the feeling of exhaustion after running as fast as you can for a while.
- agumonkey 9y ago
  Maybe mitigated by senses to spot dangers coming toward you from afar. That said, I never run faster than when fleeing someone, boy do I go fast.
- Faint 9y ago
  Although, I don't know of any predators that hadn't the speed to catch a human. I think we always must have had the tools and smarts and friends around to make us a dangerous pray.
- Faint 9y ago
  Although, I don't know of any predators that hadn't the speed to catch a human. I think we always must have had the tools and smarts and friends around to make us a dangerous pray.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
slipslap 9y ago
what are your thoughts on https://www.vivobarefoot.com/us https://www.vivobarefoot.com/us?
- ValentineC 9y ago
  I own multiple pairs of Vivos for casual wear — most of them developed holes in the soles pretty quickly. I still buy them because they're affordable when on sale, and look fairly decent.
- drzaiusx11 9y ago
  I've had a several pairs of their EVOs (which seems to have been replaced by their Stealth and Primus lines) I loved them, even if they did wear them out fairly quickly (I went through a pair in a little under a year.) That is largely because they were very comfortable and I ended up wearing them for more than just running though. They're the only minimalist shoe I've tried that had an adequately sized toe box. I also recently got a pair of their canvas 'Mata' everyday shoes and can vouch for their comfort.
- nextos 9y ago
  Quality varies a lot across models. Their dessert boot, Gobi, is perhaps their best product.
- undersuit 9y ago
  I've used the Scott and Hiker models as my winter shoes for 5 years now. Walking 2-6 miles daily in Montana winters. Disliked the Hiker, the molding between the sole and the top was flimsy, the Scott is much better IMO but ice-salt will wreck their appearance if your don't take care of them. They can't handle smooth ice, but neither do most regular shoes without some assistance anyways.
austinjp 9y ago
So here's the deal. There is no absolute truth regarding running, footwear, and injuries. Anyone who says there is, well they're selling something. And that's the absolute truth.
- therealdrag0 9y ago
  I remember reading about a study that found correlation between footwear and injuries. Neither group had less injuries, but the types of injuries were different between the different shoe groups. So pick your poison I guess. (Sorry don't have source on me)
  - austinjp 9y ago
    Indeed. See Simspons's paradox, sub-grouping, and so on. There are deep problems in: the lessons we can learn from a population, vs how a specific individual will respond to a specific intervention; plus the filthy complexity of real life outside the lab. Basically it boils down to this: we don't know where you as an individual lie on any of a huge number of bell-curves. Statistically, you're likely to be in the middle of all of them -- and yet it would be impossible to find an individual who actually is. So the more complex an intervention (and running is a very complex situation) the more trial and error you'll probably have to go through. This is not a popular thing to say.
sndean 9y ago
> he calls treadmills the "junk food of exercise. > he believes running barefoot is more natural—and less likely to result in injury. This has always bothered me, and, even on HN, it still bothers me. Too many experts. I ran track and XC (HS, DIII, then DI for a season), did 100+ miles/week, won a half marathon, etc. Reasonably successful without any injuries, over ~15 years. Even I would get constant advice from everyone. Still do. "You're running too much." "Your back looks too stiff." "Your shoes don't fit." "Don't do that with your hands." "You're landing on your heel too much." Eventually you stop listening to everyone, even your coach. Running (and most sports) would do well to follow science and have a cited source following every statement. It's a little absurd when someone tells me I'm going to get injured if I don't do more barefoot running. I've been wearing this same model of Brooks shoe since I was 15. If you can give me a link to an article on Pubmed, I might read it.
- riku_iki 9y ago
  > I've been wearing this same model of Brooks shoe since I was 15. Which model exactly? :-)
  - sndean 9y ago
    I didn't see your comment for some reason. Brooks Adrenaline GTS :)
- rb808 9y ago
  Wait until you get into your 40's and 50's, that's often when lots of bad habits start to cause problems.
  - zzalpha 9y ago
    Where's your evidence? I assume you have a multi-decade longitudinal study to back up your claim?
    - freehunter 9y ago
      Everyone says "I'm paying for X behavior from my 20s" when they reach middle age. In reality, it's just that's when the body begins to wear down and people naturally want to blame it on something so we invented a euphemism for it. It's not science, there's no evidence. People in their 50s start to hurt more, and injuries that never healed right can be ignored when you're young, but start to hurt again later on. It's just a fact of life. If you tore your ACL in high school, when arthritis starts to kick in, you're going to feel that old injury again, because a torn ACL never really heals.
mcguire 9y ago
Obligatory Real Genius: "You still run?" "Only when chased."
geoffc 9y ago
55 yo and have run close to daily for 45 of them with minimal injuries. I land on my forefoot and then put the heel down softly, the shoe makes little difference other than an overly high heel prohibits that movement.
ErikAugust 9y ago
From the article: "The first thing I’d say is, you’re probably not doing it right. Most people dislike running because they have memories of things like running for a bus. That kind of running is usually deeply unpleasant, almost vomit-inducing. Most beginners give up when they get injured because they’ve done too much, too soon. Most of the benefits from running derive from going very slowly." I find this premise to be correct - and can get people who say "I could never run X miles" to do so, enjoyable sometimes, just by slowing down their pace. However, even as someone who is a running apparel ambassador who runs up to 80 miles per week, races multiple marathons and ultramarathons a year - I have a family, a full-time job, and occasional freelance work! So even I would love to go on 2-4 hour mountain trail runs daily, it is hard to find the time to do this. Hell, I have a treadmill in my garage to sneak in shorter runs and still be home around my family. And I'm more than happy to spread the gospel of long, slow distance running - as it is meditative, mood stabilizing, and underpins aerobic development and fat burning. But I am willing to suggest all sorts of activity: hiking, soccer, basketball, 5K run training, cycling, mountain biking, marathon training, track workouts, climbing, long urban walks, tennis, weight training with treadmill jogging for warmups and cool down, boxing workouts, etc. I do think the premise that it's wrong to treat running as a sport is flawed - I think we can treat it as a sport, or not treat it as a sport. Or both! That depends on the individual. If it gets you moving and your heart rate elevated into those aerobic ranges, do what works for you. Running barefeet in nature for hours at a time for the simple sake of running is great - but doing something that fits into your interests, geography, and time schedule can provide a great, long-term balance to the modern life.
- throwanem 9y ago
  Seconding long walks. It's easy! You just look around for something interesting, and let your feet carry you toward it - they know what to do, and they will if you let them. Repeat as necessary. When you start to run out of puff, look for interesting things nearer home than not. Stay away from roads and sidewalks, if you can. Trees give shade, and shade is cool and pleasant and helps you husband your energy for finding interesting things, rather than sweating. Keep your phone in your pocket. Keep your earbuds there, too. They put you somewhere other than where you are, and what's the point of that? Besides, you can't chat with people if your ears are blocked. Chat with people. Say hello. Make eye contact. Exercise the social skills that help you make unplanned interactions mutually enjoyable. We don't do that any more. We should. Many fear it. Do not blame them. Give them the opportunity to overcome that fear, if they so choose. If they don't, leave them in peace. Another time, perhaps. Pictures are okay, but be sparing. Use them when there's something you'll want to share. Don't use them so much that you forget why you want to share something. Me, I'm an amateur photographer. For me, pictures are often part of the point. Unless they are for you, too, use them as aide-memoire - not in place of it. Cut through the woods. Go up hills. Go down hills. Go through streams, or over if they're narrow enough. Remind yourself of the simple pleasure to be had in using your body - jumping, climbing, shifting your balance to go down a 45° slope on your feet instead of your face. Take chances. Don't shy away from decrepit buildings. Investigate them. There's always a way in, and it's amazing what's to be found there. Be aware of your environment, and be careful - not everyone you meet this way is friendly. But many are. Don't let fear hold you back, because you'll always wonder what you missed. And this life is transitory, anyway. Don't waste the opportunities that come along while you're living it. Wear shoes, sturdy and comfortable as you like. You don't want the thing that holds you back to be that you'll tear up your feet if you go that way, either. For buildings, I recommend eight- or nine-hole logger boots - welted full-grain leather with good, arch-supporting insoles. Take care of them. They'll take care of you. (I always wear boots like that. I may be biased in my recommendation. But they've stopped more holes than I can count from ending up in my feet. Wax polish, thinly applied, and buffed in long strokes with a damp - not wet - rag. No dress shoes ever looked so fine.) Above all, enjoy yourself. Enjoy meeting the people and places you meet. Enjoy your environment, and the changes you make in it over the course of a day's peregrination. Enjoy the changes your environment makes in you. Enjoy not giving a fuck about email and parking. Enjoy the feeling of using your body, instead of just inhabiting it. Enjoy being where you are. Enjoy the ache of well-worked muscles and the stretch of your ribs as you breathe deeper than you can when you spend all day sitting down. Enjoy the deep sleep that comes of exhaustion honestly earned. Enjoy the fresh eyes with which you wake. Enjoy a simple pleasure no longer forgotten. Enjoy!
thoughtexprmnt 9y ago
There are a lot of reasons to run, but if general fitness is the goal, I've found that sprinting, and in particular uphill sprinting, is the most effective and time-efficient.
- danieltillett 9y ago
  If you really want to go for efficiency sprints on an exercise bike are about as time efficient as you can get. 30 seconds flat out, 30 seconds slow x5 and you are 90% of the way there. The stress on your joints is way less than running too.
maxmcorp 9y ago
I find it interresting that no one questions the "we are born to run" claim. I have seen very little evidence for that. We are able to run, but that does not mean that running is a good way for us to move in general. Having reached 50+ my estimate is that only 1 in 20 of the people i have known and who has been running still do. Perhaps even less. You simply get too many injuries. Your cortisol levels rise. You destroy your joints etc. etc. I also find it very hard to imagine that running would have been better for some imaginable forefathers who had to run barefoot in nature with no roads.
- wyclif 9y ago
  I suspect that the cause of that is running on pavement. Doing that for decades is hard on the knees and joints. I wonder if there would be more people in the over-50 age group still running if they had spent their younger years running on grass or sand. I don't have any evidence that they would, but it's an interesting question.
  - maxmcorp 9y ago
    But nature is hardly better for running than pavement. Stones, grass, roots, mud etc. There are a lot more ways to get injuries in nature than on a gravel path.
    - Tade0 9y ago
      I guess people just don't take into account the fact that our ancestors usually didn't live to their 50s, so they couldn't experience most of the problems that nowadays middle-aged runners do.
- mapleoin 9y ago
  I find it interresting that no one questions the "we are born to run" claim. I have seen very little evidence for that. There is a link to a study in the first paragraph of the article: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/11/1117_041117_running_humans.html http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/11/1117_041117_... > The researchers identified a range of physical traits that suggest human ancestors evolved as distance runners. The adaptations helped them chase down prey and compete more effectively with the speedier carnivores on the open plains of Africa, the study says. > The researchers say adaptations for running stretch back more than two million years, allowing humans to evolve from our apelike ancestors Australopithecus. > "We think running is one of the most transforming events in human history," Bramble added. "We are arguing the emergence of humans is tied to the evolution of running."
k__ 9y ago
I think it's kinda funny that running is THE sport of the masses and most of them do it so wrong that it's actually bad for them.
anonymousDan 9y ago
These claims about how we're running in the wrong way because we should be running barefoot all seem to rest on the premise that that is how we evolved. The problem I have with that is they neglect to mention there weren't any concrete roads or sidewalks around when our running abilities evolved either, so who's to say our anatomy was ever designed to work on such hard surfaces? Sure if you can manage to run barefoot on only natural surfaces it might make sense, but this is never mentioned by anyone.
- undersuit 9y ago
  Our anatomy evolved to work on almost all surfaces. The early homo erectus that could not run on a surface was genetically less fit. Our gait changes slightly depending on what surfaces we run on; loose rock, sand, packed dirt, or concrete. Not being able to run on concrete would mean our ancestors would have avoided rocky areas... which they did not.
  - anonymousDan 9y ago
    Not convinced. I highly doubt there is any evidence of our ancestors running barefoot for long distances over rocky areas. From what I know the primary reason our running abilities evolved was to allow chasing grazing animals over long distances on grasslands. Be interested to see any evidence otherwise though!
titzer 9y ago
Something that I noticed recently is that if speed isn't a major goal, breathing through the nose is a lot more healthy. In through the nose, out through the nose. First, it filters incoming air of particulates like dust and pollen--gross stuff you don't want in your lungs. Over an hour of running, you can easily breathe 600L of air, in a city, that's a lot of pollution. Second, it calms you. Breathing through the nose is a meditation exercise that automatically calms your mind. Third, it reduces dehydration. Most of the water not lost through sweat and through the skin is lost through evaporation from the mouth. Through the nose instead, the same filtration system that keeps dust particles out serves as a condensation site for some of the moisture that would otherwise exit from your lungs. Problem is, you can't run super fast breathing through your nose because of the limitation in breath volume from the restricted pathway. The article is right; IMO you should not run faster than what you can manage through nose breathing alone.
soufron 9y ago
I used to buy into the "running naturally" argument sold from Vibram, but it's the same pseudo-science that justifies buying juicers and shit. I was used to run for years. I used vibrams for 3 or 4 months and ended up completely destroyed, unable to run for a while. This was like 10 years ago, and more and more people have been calling on their bullshit since then.
- rocqua 9y ago
  I had the same experience. I originally bought vibram to overcome my previous issues with running, it didn't work at all. Now, a few years later I might've found a better solution. Take it slow and give your legs time to recover.
lazyjones 9y ago
If we are born/evolved to run, why do we do it mostly when it's useless to us (i.e. running in circles)? Running as a sport is, in essence, forcing ourselves to do something we supposedly needed so much as a species that we evolved to be good at it. Our lifestyle has changed dramatically and we obviously don't need it much anymore. Perhaps we should be running instead of walking whenever possible? I used to do that when I was younger and more impatient (I hated taxis, too), but having sweaty clothes isn't socially acceptable in most cases. Perhaps some research to alleviate this problem would help? Edit: this looks like an interesting starting point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_Cooling_and_Ventilation_Garment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_Cooling_and_Ventilation...
- magic_beans 9y ago
  > If we are born/evolved to run, why do we do it mostly when it's useless to us (i.e. running in circles)? Because it's FUN. It's ok to have fun, even if it's not productive.
jbrl 9y ago
Barefoot on the natural concrete?
StevePerkins 9y ago
>> "You are not your typical jogger, are you? In fact, you hate the term." > "The fact is, I am a jogger, but it has connotations of pastel tracksuits and sweatbands from the 1980s and sort of stinks of Thatcherism and Reaganomics, and all that individualism. Runner just sounds cooler, doesn’t it?" I find this portion of the interview remarkable at a meta level. 1) Associating the word "jogger" with conservative politics and individualist philosophy is absolutely bizarre to me. Why? Because it happened to grow popular during the 1980's? Does that mean that the x86 computer revolution has conservative connotations also? I thought that JFK popularized jogging back in the 60's, anyway. I'm so confused here. 2) Feeling the need to rename things in order to avoid connotations, even if the renaming makes little sense, is a curious impulse. The word "jogging" has some distinct layers of meaning, that are lost when you simply collapse it into "running". If you DO somehow negatively link jogging to Ronald Reagan, then wouldn't it be better to try and coin a new term? 3) I find this sort of exchange more and more common on the Internet these days. Discussing jogging, or what one ate for breakfast that morning... and seamlessly segueing in and out of politics or culture war banter. Not so long ago, that would be considered awkward and jarring (quite frankly, it would still be considered awkward and jarring if the subject had expressed a pro-Reagan view instead). Until quite recently, basic social norms would have one tiptoe into such things more gingerly. An interesting shift.
pgeorgep 9y ago
I agree running has gotten to be muddied by the complications of technology. It's meant to be an archaic practice emphasizing a meditative state. The process should be focused solely on meditative benefits, with physical benefits coming as a secondary benefit.
wvh 9y ago
I don't think we're doing it wrong, not more than sitting down for more than 8 hours a day, at least. I'm an avid runner. I agree when the barefoot movement talks about using your legs, knees and ankles as springs, and that too cushioned shoes let you beat the road without having to adapt, replacing some short-term discomfort by perhaps long term injury caused by bashing your stiff legs on the road for long distances. But I also sit down most of the day on weekdays, and even though I stretch, that spring is mostly gone after a long workday. I run too heavily then, and I really prefer to have some protective footwear to compensate for my inflexibility on those days. Another problem is that our prehistoric selves didn't run on hard asphalt for hours, which many of us have to do in our current environment. So, even for those of us who are fit and athletic, this is more about getting the balance right considering our lifestyle and environment. We might have evolved to run, but not on asphalt and not after sitting down the whole day. Don't clock up miles barefoot if/when your core physical strength or muscle flexibility don't allow feline agility. You're at least as likely to get injured. Adapt to the situation and listen to your body.
given 9y ago
We didn't evolve. Anything more than micro-evolution is a lie and it's very easy to see that it's wrong - if you want to. But I have to admit it's a very popular lie and people swing words like scientific to make it impressive. Of course much depends on this lie for many people. They can do whatever they want because they are just a buch of random cells, right?
tkyjonathan 9y ago
Yeah, I really don't think we were made to outrun ostriches or any animal, really. Saying so set off a red light with me at the very start of the article. We can set traps and scavenge already dead bodies - thats pretty much it. Most of our actual calories were from plants/berries/corn/root vegetables. We were able to do very well for ourselves, calorically speaking, when we cooked/boiled those foods.

387 points by thomyorkie 9y ago

Barefoot running and even wearing thin soled shoes restricts you to a certain kind of terrain. I participated in an alpine marathon last weekend and the terrain was quite technical. Everybody was wearing trail running shoes. I have weak ankles which are prone to pronation (he he), so a good shoe is absolutely crucial to me for running in rugged terrain.

dingdongding 9y ago

The title says "We're doing it all wrong", but after reading the article it hardly says much about what we are doing wrong. The only wrong it talks about is treadmill and that's it.

ZanyProgrammer 9y ago
Well, he's sorta a zealot for the cult of barefoot running, and that running for everything other than meditation is horrible.
- goatlover 9y ago
  Sounds a tad extremist.
positivecomment 9y ago
"Treadmill is bad because it was invented as a torture device and one famous person died three years after doing it excessively. It is like running without any of the good stuff". This is an actual argument from the article.
- lawpoop 9y ago
  Can't say I disagree with him on that
  - Retra 9y ago
    You would agree, then, that drinking water is bad for the same reasons?
    - goodJobWalrus 9y ago
      Drinking water was invented as a torture device?
      - Retra 9y ago
        I suppose this is as good a time as any to miss a point.
        lawpoop 9y ago
        Funny, my thoughts exactly

ck425 9y ago

This isn't really a new idea anymore. I'd be curious to read what the book covers beyond what Born to Run did.

aaron-lebo 9y ago
Had the same thought. https://www.amazon.com/Born-Run-Hidden-Superathletes-Greatest/dp/0307279189 https://www.amazon.com/Born-Run-Hidden-Superathletes-Greates...

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

mlinksva 9y ago

I wish the interview was a bit more substantial, but I like the exercise should be free/gyms are bad (exaggeration mine) idea. Gyms are like skyways (eg in Minneapolis), or like mass transit stations surrounded by parking: they detract from the vibrancy of street life and subvert their purpose.

vinay427 9y ago
By that logic, tennis courts, swimming pools, and other recreational facilities do the same. Not everyone uses a gym to run on a treadmill, or even to do cardio-based exercises.
- mlinksva 9y ago
  They do, to some small extent. I'm not claiming that indoor gyms should not exist at all or that on should never ever drive to one, nor that there is never a case for a skyway or parking at a transit station (though parking should never ever be gratis). Only that the costs exist and should be considered.
nathancahill 9y ago
Outdoor gyms have really taken off in Latin America (it's my understanding that they originally became popular in China). The social aspect is great. Quite often, they are in the center of parks and green space downtown. People hang out around them and work out together.
- vinay427 9y ago
  I have seen these in some Indian cities as well, and it's definitely appreciated. However, much of the US has a winter weather problem, perhaps partly only in perception. No one where I live seems to be excited by outdoor infrastructure because of the lack of use during winter months.
  - magic_beans 9y ago
    LA has tons of public outdoor bodyweight gyms at its beaches. Good weather helps.

rosser 9y ago

The Fine Article doesn't really go into how we're doing it wrong, beyond a passing mention of barefoot running, and some dissing of treadmills (which is hyperbolic and orthogonal to reality; you can run "correctly" or "badly" on a treadmill or on the street or trail). I used to run a bit. Did an informal "couch to 5k" over a couple of months, before I'd even discovered that was a thing. The single most effective thing I did for my running was to buy a pair of Vibram Five-Fingers shoes. TL;DR, the gist of the "wrong" is that we've been trained by "trainers" (over-padded athletic shoes) to run in a straight-legged, heel-lands-first manner. When you do that, your knee is locked (or at least straight) as the foot lands, which transmits the force of the landing up your leg and into your lower back. When you run barefoot, or in a pair of ultra-light "shoes" like Vibrams, you learn very quickly not to do that, or you stop running. The "right" way is to land on the ball of the foot, with the knee slightly bent. The knee bends further to dissipate the force of the landing. This is how evolution "meant" for us to do it. I have a bum knee now, for unrelated reasons, so I can't run for the time being (or possibly ever again). I was, in fact, specifically warned against it by one of my array of bodyworkers just this past week. I kinda miss it sometimes, because it actually can be quite meditative, once you get into your rhythm. EDIT: phrasing. EDIT 2: The "wrong" under discussion in The Fine Article might have more to do with why we run than how. Though, if so, premising the argument in "evolution" is perhaps specious. Thanks, follow-ups, for pointing that out more clearly.

WalterSear 9y ago
>When you run barefoot, or in a pair of ultra-light "shoes" like Vibrams, you learn very quickly not to do that, or you stop running. The "right" way is to land on the ball of the foot, with the knee slightly bent. The knee bends further to dissipate the force of the landing. This is how evolution "meant" for us to do it. There's more to it than that. Please make sure that you are pushing off with your heel. Many people assume that barefoot running is the same as running on the balls of your feet, but if, after your toes touch, you aren't subsequently landing and pushing off with your heel, you are likely to injure yourself, and more seriously than if you didn't barefoot run at all. The small, delicate toes in the forefoot are not meant to handle the load of landing and takeoff. FYI: This movement doesn't feel natural or normal for most people until they have tried it a bunch - the muscles and flexibility for it aren't there. It took me about six weeks of practice, but I was not a particularly frequent runner - mostly because of the knee pain of running 'normally'. The pain was eliminated by running barefoot instead.

acconrad 9y ago

> On the phone from London, the author told National Geographic how he was inspired by his Irish uncle, who ran in the Olympics, and why he believes running barefoot is more natural—and less likely to result in injury. I stopped reading right here. Ask a podiatrist if they've seen a rise in plantar fasciitis as a result of barefoot running. Not everyone has the biomechanics to jump into barefoot running[1]. Not everyone who has the biomechanics can simply transition to barefoot running[2] - you have to ease into it[3]. As soon as you assign species-wide labels and claim something is wrong, assume it's a clickbaity title that will likely follow Betteridge's Law of Headlines. [1] http://www.menshealth.com/fitness/barefoot-running-problems http://www.menshealth.com/fitness/barefoot-running-problems [2] https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/2013/aug/22/barefoot-isnt-best-most-runners https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/20... [3] http://barefootrunning.fas.harvard.edu/6FAQ.html#Who%20should%20NOT%20run%20barefoot%20or%20in%20minimal%20shoes http://barefootrunning.fas.harvard.edu/6FAQ.html#Who%20shoul...?

tshadley 9y ago
A few sentences down: "Most beginners give up when they get injured because they’ve done too much, too soon. Most of the benefits from running derive from going very slowly."

will_brown 9y ago

Another recently published running book is about "The Raven" a streak runner running 8 miles everyday for over 42 years. 125,000 miles; 5x around the earth; to the moon and back. I'm lucky enough to live in Miami and run with him sometimes. When he started the streak he went barefoot and later began wearing shoes, if you can call them that, his favorite are NB with about 2,500 miles on them that seem to have more hole(s) than material left. If you can, do a run with the Raven and get a nickname, if not please get his book: https://www.amazon.com/Running-Raven-Amazing-Community-Inspired-ebook/dp/B01JEJC8L6 https://www.amazon.com/Running-Raven-Amazing-Community-Inspi...

icantdrive55 9y ago
This guy is interesting. Interesting on so many levels. His singing voice really surprised me. If the world was fair, he would have been a monetarily successful country singer. He's already a success in life, and that's probably more important. Then again, he might have never picked up running, if found too much success singing? Someone stole one of his songs, and sold it to Walen Jennings. The greed/unethical behavior of certain monetarily "successful" people disgusts me. Those shoes should end the footware debate. Just buy what feels right, and use them until they wear out. (There's a picture of him standing next to his pile of worn out shoes. Yes--he admits to being a bit of a horder. I get it. I'm that way with books. Just can't get rid of them, but might be forced too soon. Do I intuitively feel running eight miles a day is healthy. I don't know. It looks like his heart is taking a beating. Supposedly, his arteries are clear. Got off topic a bit. I just kinda related to this guy's life.
noir_lord 9y ago
Moon is ~239,000 miles away. 125,000 is about halfway.
xaduha 9y ago
> 8 miles everyday for over 42 years. 125,000 miles; 5x around the earth; to the moon and back. Huh?

peterwwillis 9y ago

How to do running right: 1. Walk. 2. Increase pace until uncomfortable. 3. Back off pace until comfortable. Everything else is yak shaving.

goatlover 9y ago
Not if you want to be a competitive runner. Then you need to be able to run through the uncomfortable pace (in the context of proper training).
- agumonkey 9y ago
  I think he meant to bootstrap balancing learning period. Not as an effort.
agumonkey 9y ago
What barefoot forces you is to restart that process at very basic level. Your feet are sensitive, if you stomp on the ground as you do with shoes (especially amortizing running shoes) you'll quickly see the problem. It makes your movement way more subtle, soft, supple and also redistributes effort on the whole limb chain.
- peterwwillis 9y ago
  Barefoot running is a lame fad for people who think there's secret value in the obscurity of old things. Modern societies have been running with various foot coverings (usually sandals) for thousands of years. So there's nothing wrong with running with shoes. If barefoot running is all about moving differently, you don't need to be barefoot to do that. Do Thai boxing conditioning for a few months. Learn to jump in all directions for two minutes with 60lbs on your back, and jump rope for 10 minutes straight, and crawl on all fours in various directions and positions. You will definitely be able to move differently, more efficiently, without injury. Does this have anything to do with running? No! Running is running. Moving differently is moving differently. If barefoot running pretends that the latter is what the former is all about, it's wrong. If you want to run, and you can run, and you do run, just keep doing what you're doing. Anything more and it turns from exercise (or a way to get somewhere) into a hobby.

krishicks 9y ago

Chris McDougall's book, "Born to Run", is another source that's been out for a while. It focuses on endurance running, but also heavily on barefoot or nearly-barefoot running. http://www.chrismcdougall.com/born-to-run/ http://www.chrismcdougall.com/born-to-run/

spodek 9y ago

The article mentions hunting by running as an evolutionary adaptation suggesting running distances, not necessarily sprinting. I have to imagine running like hell to escape predators as a major part of our evolutionary past. It would seem consistent with the effectiveness of high intensity interval training as well as how satisfying the feeling of exhaustion after running as fast as you can for a while.

agumonkey 9y ago
Maybe mitigated by senses to spot dangers coming toward you from afar. That said, I never run faster than when fleeing someone, boy do I go fast.
Faint 9y ago
Although, I don't know of any predators that hadn't the speed to catch a human. I think we always must have had the tools and smarts and friends around to make us a dangerous pray.
Faint 9y ago
Although, I don't know of any predators that hadn't the speed to catch a human. I think we always must have had the tools and smarts and friends around to make us a dangerous pray.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

slipslap 9y ago

what are your thoughts on https://www.vivobarefoot.com/us https://www.vivobarefoot.com/us?

ValentineC 9y ago
I own multiple pairs of Vivos for casual wear — most of them developed holes in the soles pretty quickly. I still buy them because they're affordable when on sale, and look fairly decent.
drzaiusx11 9y ago
I've had a several pairs of their EVOs (which seems to have been replaced by their Stealth and Primus lines) I loved them, even if they did wear them out fairly quickly (I went through a pair in a little under a year.) That is largely because they were very comfortable and I ended up wearing them for more than just running though. They're the only minimalist shoe I've tried that had an adequately sized toe box. I also recently got a pair of their canvas 'Mata' everyday shoes and can vouch for their comfort.
nextos 9y ago
Quality varies a lot across models. Their dessert boot, Gobi, is perhaps their best product.
undersuit 9y ago
I've used the Scott and Hiker models as my winter shoes for 5 years now. Walking 2-6 miles daily in Montana winters. Disliked the Hiker, the molding between the sole and the top was flimsy, the Scott is much better IMO but ice-salt will wreck their appearance if your don't take care of them. They can't handle smooth ice, but neither do most regular shoes without some assistance anyways.

austinjp 9y ago

So here's the deal. There is no absolute truth regarding running, footwear, and injuries. Anyone who says there is, well they're selling something. And that's the absolute truth.

therealdrag0 9y ago
I remember reading about a study that found correlation between footwear and injuries. Neither group had less injuries, but the types of injuries were different between the different shoe groups. So pick your poison I guess. (Sorry don't have source on me)
- austinjp 9y ago
  Indeed. See Simspons's paradox, sub-grouping, and so on. There are deep problems in: the lessons we can learn from a population, vs how a specific individual will respond to a specific intervention; plus the filthy complexity of real life outside the lab. Basically it boils down to this: we don't know where you as an individual lie on any of a huge number of bell-curves. Statistically, you're likely to be in the middle of all of them -- and yet it would be impossible to find an individual who actually is. So the more complex an intervention (and running is a very complex situation) the more trial and error you'll probably have to go through. This is not a popular thing to say.

sndean 9y ago

> he calls treadmills the "junk food of exercise. > he believes running barefoot is more natural—and less likely to result in injury. This has always bothered me, and, even on HN, it still bothers me. Too many experts. I ran track and XC (HS, DIII, then DI for a season), did 100+ miles/week, won a half marathon, etc. Reasonably successful without any injuries, over ~15 years. Even I would get constant advice from everyone. Still do. "You're running too much." "Your back looks too stiff." "Your shoes don't fit." "Don't do that with your hands." "You're landing on your heel too much." Eventually you stop listening to everyone, even your coach. Running (and most sports) would do well to follow science and have a cited source following every statement. It's a little absurd when someone tells me I'm going to get injured if I don't do more barefoot running. I've been wearing this same model of Brooks shoe since I was 15. If you can give me a link to an article on Pubmed, I might read it.

riku_iki 9y ago
> I've been wearing this same model of Brooks shoe since I was 15. Which model exactly? :-)
- sndean 9y ago
  I didn't see your comment for some reason. Brooks Adrenaline GTS :)
rb808 9y ago
Wait until you get into your 40's and 50's, that's often when lots of bad habits start to cause problems.
- zzalpha 9y ago
  Where's your evidence? I assume you have a multi-decade longitudinal study to back up your claim?
  - freehunter 9y ago
    Everyone says "I'm paying for X behavior from my 20s" when they reach middle age. In reality, it's just that's when the body begins to wear down and people naturally want to blame it on something so we invented a euphemism for it. It's not science, there's no evidence. People in their 50s start to hurt more, and injuries that never healed right can be ignored when you're young, but start to hurt again later on. It's just a fact of life. If you tore your ACL in high school, when arthritis starts to kick in, you're going to feel that old injury again, because a torn ACL never really heals.

mcguire 9y ago

Obligatory Real Genius: "You still run?" "Only when chased."

geoffc 9y ago

55 yo and have run close to daily for 45 of them with minimal injuries. I land on my forefoot and then put the heel down softly, the shoe makes little difference other than an overly high heel prohibits that movement.

ErikAugust 9y ago

From the article: "The first thing I’d say is, you’re probably not doing it right. Most people dislike running because they have memories of things like running for a bus. That kind of running is usually deeply unpleasant, almost vomit-inducing. Most beginners give up when they get injured because they’ve done too much, too soon. Most of the benefits from running derive from going very slowly." I find this premise to be correct - and can get people who say "I could never run X miles" to do so, enjoyable sometimes, just by slowing down their pace. However, even as someone who is a running apparel ambassador who runs up to 80 miles per week, races multiple marathons and ultramarathons a year - I have a family, a full-time job, and occasional freelance work! So even I would love to go on 2-4 hour mountain trail runs daily, it is hard to find the time to do this. Hell, I have a treadmill in my garage to sneak in shorter runs and still be home around my family. And I'm more than happy to spread the gospel of long, slow distance running - as it is meditative, mood stabilizing, and underpins aerobic development and fat burning. But I am willing to suggest all sorts of activity: hiking, soccer, basketball, 5K run training, cycling, mountain biking, marathon training, track workouts, climbing, long urban walks, tennis, weight training with treadmill jogging for warmups and cool down, boxing workouts, etc. I do think the premise that it's wrong to treat running as a sport is flawed - I think we can treat it as a sport, or not treat it as a sport. Or both! That depends on the individual. If it gets you moving and your heart rate elevated into those aerobic ranges, do what works for you. Running barefeet in nature for hours at a time for the simple sake of running is great - but doing something that fits into your interests, geography, and time schedule can provide a great, long-term balance to the modern life.

throwanem 9y ago
Seconding long walks. It's easy! You just look around for something interesting, and let your feet carry you toward it - they know what to do, and they will if you let them. Repeat as necessary. When you start to run out of puff, look for interesting things nearer home than not. Stay away from roads and sidewalks, if you can. Trees give shade, and shade is cool and pleasant and helps you husband your energy for finding interesting things, rather than sweating. Keep your phone in your pocket. Keep your earbuds there, too. They put you somewhere other than where you are, and what's the point of that? Besides, you can't chat with people if your ears are blocked. Chat with people. Say hello. Make eye contact. Exercise the social skills that help you make unplanned interactions mutually enjoyable. We don't do that any more. We should. Many fear it. Do not blame them. Give them the opportunity to overcome that fear, if they so choose. If they don't, leave them in peace. Another time, perhaps. Pictures are okay, but be sparing. Use them when there's something you'll want to share. Don't use them so much that you forget why you want to share something. Me, I'm an amateur photographer. For me, pictures are often part of the point. Unless they are for you, too, use them as aide-memoire - not in place of it. Cut through the woods. Go up hills. Go down hills. Go through streams, or over if they're narrow enough. Remind yourself of the simple pleasure to be had in using your body - jumping, climbing, shifting your balance to go down a 45° slope on your feet instead of your face. Take chances. Don't shy away from decrepit buildings. Investigate them. There's always a way in, and it's amazing what's to be found there. Be aware of your environment, and be careful - not everyone you meet this way is friendly. But many are. Don't let fear hold you back, because you'll always wonder what you missed. And this life is transitory, anyway. Don't waste the opportunities that come along while you're living it. Wear shoes, sturdy and comfortable as you like. You don't want the thing that holds you back to be that you'll tear up your feet if you go that way, either. For buildings, I recommend eight- or nine-hole logger boots - welted full-grain leather with good, arch-supporting insoles. Take care of them. They'll take care of you. (I always wear boots like that. I may be biased in my recommendation. But they've stopped more holes than I can count from ending up in my feet. Wax polish, thinly applied, and buffed in long strokes with a damp - not wet - rag. No dress shoes ever looked so fine.) Above all, enjoy yourself. Enjoy meeting the people and places you meet. Enjoy your environment, and the changes you make in it over the course of a day's peregrination. Enjoy the changes your environment makes in you. Enjoy not giving a fuck about email and parking. Enjoy the feeling of using your body, instead of just inhabiting it. Enjoy being where you are. Enjoy the ache of well-worked muscles and the stretch of your ribs as you breathe deeper than you can when you spend all day sitting down. Enjoy the deep sleep that comes of exhaustion honestly earned. Enjoy the fresh eyes with which you wake. Enjoy a simple pleasure no longer forgotten. Enjoy!

thoughtexprmnt 9y ago

There are a lot of reasons to run, but if general fitness is the goal, I've found that sprinting, and in particular uphill sprinting, is the most effective and time-efficient.

danieltillett 9y ago
If you really want to go for efficiency sprints on an exercise bike are about as time efficient as you can get. 30 seconds flat out, 30 seconds slow x5 and you are 90% of the way there. The stress on your joints is way less than running too.

maxmcorp 9y ago

I find it interresting that no one questions the "we are born to run" claim. I have seen very little evidence for that. We are able to run, but that does not mean that running is a good way for us to move in general. Having reached 50+ my estimate is that only 1 in 20 of the people i have known and who has been running still do. Perhaps even less. You simply get too many injuries. Your cortisol levels rise. You destroy your joints etc. etc. I also find it very hard to imagine that running would have been better for some imaginable forefathers who had to run barefoot in nature with no roads.

wyclif 9y ago
I suspect that the cause of that is running on pavement. Doing that for decades is hard on the knees and joints. I wonder if there would be more people in the over-50 age group still running if they had spent their younger years running on grass or sand. I don't have any evidence that they would, but it's an interesting question.
- maxmcorp 9y ago
  But nature is hardly better for running than pavement. Stones, grass, roots, mud etc. There are a lot more ways to get injuries in nature than on a gravel path.
  - Tade0 9y ago
    I guess people just don't take into account the fact that our ancestors usually didn't live to their 50s, so they couldn't experience most of the problems that nowadays middle-aged runners do.
mapleoin 9y ago
I find it interresting that no one questions the "we are born to run" claim. I have seen very little evidence for that. There is a link to a study in the first paragraph of the article: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/11/1117_041117_running_humans.html http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/11/1117_041117_... > The researchers identified a range of physical traits that suggest human ancestors evolved as distance runners. The adaptations helped them chase down prey and compete more effectively with the speedier carnivores on the open plains of Africa, the study says. > The researchers say adaptations for running stretch back more than two million years, allowing humans to evolve from our apelike ancestors Australopithecus. > "We think running is one of the most transforming events in human history," Bramble added. "We are arguing the emergence of humans is tied to the evolution of running."

k__ 9y ago

I think it's kinda funny that running is THE sport of the masses and most of them do it so wrong that it's actually bad for them.

anonymousDan 9y ago

These claims about how we're running in the wrong way because we should be running barefoot all seem to rest on the premise that that is how we evolved. The problem I have with that is they neglect to mention there weren't any concrete roads or sidewalks around when our running abilities evolved either, so who's to say our anatomy was ever designed to work on such hard surfaces? Sure if you can manage to run barefoot on only natural surfaces it might make sense, but this is never mentioned by anyone.

undersuit 9y ago
Our anatomy evolved to work on almost all surfaces. The early homo erectus that could not run on a surface was genetically less fit. Our gait changes slightly depending on what surfaces we run on; loose rock, sand, packed dirt, or concrete. Not being able to run on concrete would mean our ancestors would have avoided rocky areas... which they did not.
- anonymousDan 9y ago
  Not convinced. I highly doubt there is any evidence of our ancestors running barefoot for long distances over rocky areas. From what I know the primary reason our running abilities evolved was to allow chasing grazing animals over long distances on grasslands. Be interested to see any evidence otherwise though!

titzer 9y ago

Something that I noticed recently is that if speed isn't a major goal, breathing through the nose is a lot more healthy. In through the nose, out through the nose. First, it filters incoming air of particulates like dust and pollen--gross stuff you don't want in your lungs. Over an hour of running, you can easily breathe 600L of air, in a city, that's a lot of pollution. Second, it calms you. Breathing through the nose is a meditation exercise that automatically calms your mind. Third, it reduces dehydration. Most of the water not lost through sweat and through the skin is lost through evaporation from the mouth. Through the nose instead, the same filtration system that keeps dust particles out serves as a condensation site for some of the moisture that would otherwise exit from your lungs. Problem is, you can't run super fast breathing through your nose because of the limitation in breath volume from the restricted pathway. The article is right; IMO you should not run faster than what you can manage through nose breathing alone.

soufron 9y ago

I used to buy into the "running naturally" argument sold from Vibram, but it's the same pseudo-science that justifies buying juicers and shit. I was used to run for years. I used vibrams for 3 or 4 months and ended up completely destroyed, unable to run for a while. This was like 10 years ago, and more and more people have been calling on their bullshit since then.

rocqua 9y ago
I had the same experience. I originally bought vibram to overcome my previous issues with running, it didn't work at all. Now, a few years later I might've found a better solution. Take it slow and give your legs time to recover.

lazyjones 9y ago

If we are born/evolved to run, why do we do it mostly when it's useless to us (i.e. running in circles)? Running as a sport is, in essence, forcing ourselves to do something we supposedly needed so much as a species that we evolved to be good at it. Our lifestyle has changed dramatically and we obviously don't need it much anymore. Perhaps we should be running instead of walking whenever possible? I used to do that when I was younger and more impatient (I hated taxis, too), but having sweaty clothes isn't socially acceptable in most cases. Perhaps some research to alleviate this problem would help? Edit: this looks like an interesting starting point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_Cooling_and_Ventilation_Garment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_Cooling_and_Ventilation...

magic_beans 9y ago
> If we are born/evolved to run, why do we do it mostly when it's useless to us (i.e. running in circles)? Because it's FUN. It's ok to have fun, even if it's not productive.

jbrl 9y ago

Barefoot on the natural concrete?

StevePerkins 9y ago

>> "You are not your typical jogger, are you? In fact, you hate the term." > "The fact is, I am a jogger, but it has connotations of pastel tracksuits and sweatbands from the 1980s and sort of stinks of Thatcherism and Reaganomics, and all that individualism. Runner just sounds cooler, doesn’t it?" I find this portion of the interview remarkable at a meta level. 1) Associating the word "jogger" with conservative politics and individualist philosophy is absolutely bizarre to me. Why? Because it happened to grow popular during the 1980's? Does that mean that the x86 computer revolution has conservative connotations also? I thought that JFK popularized jogging back in the 60's, anyway. I'm so confused here. 2) Feeling the need to rename things in order to avoid connotations, even if the renaming makes little sense, is a curious impulse. The word "jogging" has some distinct layers of meaning, that are lost when you simply collapse it into "running". If you DO somehow negatively link jogging to Ronald Reagan, then wouldn't it be better to try and coin a new term? 3) I find this sort of exchange more and more common on the Internet these days. Discussing jogging, or what one ate for breakfast that morning... and seamlessly segueing in and out of politics or culture war banter. Not so long ago, that would be considered awkward and jarring (quite frankly, it would still be considered awkward and jarring if the subject had expressed a pro-Reagan view instead). Until quite recently, basic social norms would have one tiptoe into such things more gingerly. An interesting shift.

pgeorgep 9y ago

I agree running has gotten to be muddied by the complications of technology. It's meant to be an archaic practice emphasizing a meditative state. The process should be focused solely on meditative benefits, with physical benefits coming as a secondary benefit.

wvh 9y ago

I don't think we're doing it wrong, not more than sitting down for more than 8 hours a day, at least. I'm an avid runner. I agree when the barefoot movement talks about using your legs, knees and ankles as springs, and that too cushioned shoes let you beat the road without having to adapt, replacing some short-term discomfort by perhaps long term injury caused by bashing your stiff legs on the road for long distances. But I also sit down most of the day on weekdays, and even though I stretch, that spring is mostly gone after a long workday. I run too heavily then, and I really prefer to have some protective footwear to compensate for my inflexibility on those days. Another problem is that our prehistoric selves didn't run on hard asphalt for hours, which many of us have to do in our current environment. So, even for those of us who are fit and athletic, this is more about getting the balance right considering our lifestyle and environment. We might have evolved to run, but not on asphalt and not after sitting down the whole day. Don't clock up miles barefoot if/when your core physical strength or muscle flexibility don't allow feline agility. You're at least as likely to get injured. Adapt to the situation and listen to your body.

given 9y ago

We didn't evolve. Anything more than micro-evolution is a lie and it's very easy to see that it's wrong - if you want to. But I have to admit it's a very popular lie and people swing words like scientific to make it impressive. Of course much depends on this lie for many people. They can do whatever they want because they are just a buch of random cells, right?

tkyjonathan 9y ago

Yeah, I really don't think we were made to outrun ostriches or any animal, really. Saying so set off a red light with me at the very start of the article. We can set traps and scavenge already dead bodies - thats pretty much it. Most of our actual calories were from plants/berries/corn/root vegetables. We were able to do very well for ourselves, calorically speaking, when we cooked/boiled those foods.