9 ms·

How We're Wrecking Our Feet With Every Step We Take

62 points by kareemm 16y ago

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
awakeasleep 16y ago
I read up about this theory a few years abo and decided to test it out with some Vibrams Five-Fingers shoes. I declare total bullshit. You might as well say that human skin has been evolving for 2 billion years (from primordial soup) and clothing ruins it. It's interesting because of how plausible it seems, and it made me think about how many people follow astrologers or feel cured of something by acupuncture.
sonnym 16y ago
Single page: http://nymag.com/print/?/health/features/46213/index1.html http://nymag.com/print/?/health/features/46213/index1.html
julius_geezer 16y ago
Barefoot walking is great. But I live in a climate where we get a snow or two most winters, and enough cold weather even without snow that a Zulu might be willing to risk his pedal health and put on shoes. I live in city that has broken glass on its concrete pavements, and plenty of stones on its park trails. I think I'll keep my shoes for now.
- tomjen3 16y ago
  If you haven't do try to walk barefoot in the snow, just a couple of steps. After that you will be glad you did it, and you will be glad that you have a pair of shoes.
  - pyre 16y ago
    Why do you shoes need to have soles though, vs being something like a moccasin?
- matwood 16y ago
  You should try some Nike Frees. They are very flexible and have the flattest sole of most athletic shoes. Other than the Five Fingers talked about above the Frees are the closest thing to barefoot without being barefoot.
Chris_Newton 16y ago
For what it's worth, I think MBTs are great. I first tried them a few years ago, before they were trendy and available in mainstream stores, while I was having some therapy for a recurring knee problem. My physio had suggested that the cause might be turning out more with one foot than the other, and since MBTs encourage a better walking action, they seemed like they might help. I can't say whether it was the specialist physio exercises or the MBTs that did more to help my immediate problem at the time, but I can vouch for many of the claims that MBT marketing tends to make. They do reduce that nasty impact on each step (which you probably don't notice until you have another problem, but then you really do). They did encourage me to walk with both feet aligned properly, and on the odd occasions that I've had a similar problem again over the years, switching back to MBTs for a while has rapidly cured it. You definitely feel the more active use of certain muscle groups when you first switch to them, but in my case I found that after using them for a few days, all kinds of minor irritations that might be explained by relative weakness/imbalance in those muscle groups started to clear up. They are expensive shoes, but if the pairs I've had are at all representative, the quality means they last way longer than expensive-but-not-that-expensive regular shoes anyway. I always have at least one pair in good condition now, and at the first sign of any irritation in my legs (usually if I haven't been doing much physical training for a few weeks and I'm getting out of condition) on they go. The only major downside I've found is that because of the curved sole, MBTs aren't particularly comfortable to stand around in for extended periods. These shoes are made for walking, not standing (or running/sports). For the record, I have no commercial interest related to MBTs, I'm just a very satisfied customer.
tomjen3 16y ago
And if you don't wear shoes, you end up with cuts from glass and stones. Pick the less of the evils.
- hugh3 16y ago
  Glass and stones, thorns, various disgusting substances, surfaces that are too hot, surfaces that are too cold, and my personal favourite, bees. Too much time spent walking outside barefoot as a kid led me to step on a lot of bees. Get stung by enough bees and eventually you'll probably develop a bee sting allergy, like I have. Now, the next bee I step on could kill me. Anyway, there's a lot of things on the ground which suck in one way or another. Our ancestors invented shoes for a reason, and it wasn't because Nike marketing told them to.
  - staktrace 16y ago
    > Our ancestors invented shoes for a reason, and it wasn't because Nike marketing told them to. Agreed, but only partially. Our ancestors invented shoes because they provided a benefit, and continued using shoes because of that benefit. What they didn't (and couldn't really) know was the cost that came along with it. Now we have the science to find out exactly what that cost is. Ignoring that cost isn't going to make it go away. That being said, if, with full knowledge of the costs and the benefits, you decide to wear shoes anyway, then that's your choice and I can respect that.
- Devilboy 16y ago
  Shoes outside, barefoot inside.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- pyre 16y ago
  How about we find ways to encourage people not to smash broken glass all over the place instead?
kemayo 16y ago
I bought some Vibram Five Fingers recently, and I have to admit that they are ridiculously comfortable, despite being essentially toe-socks with a thin-but-strong sole. I've been walking around inner-city Saint Louis in them, over broken glass and gravel, and my feet hurt less than when I was wearing my previous lightweight walking shoes. It's honestly a little weird, getting rid of all those things like arches and padding that seem so necessary, and discovering that they're actually doing nothing for you. Edit: Of course, in a few weeks I'll have to switch back to big waterproof boots for the winter. Alas.
- ojbyrne 16y ago
  Hmmm, waterproof "toe-socks with a thin-but-strong sole" and a flexible bit that goes halfway up your calves. Sounds like an idea.
  - kemayo 16y ago
    The real problem would be the cold, I'd think. I'm not sure how easy it would be to insulate them sufficiently to let you walk in the snow, while keeping the form-fitting flexibility that's their appeal.
    - Shamiq 16y ago
      Cold is typically manageable. Cold and wet on the other hand is a totally different story. Was a complete pain when we got rained on while camping.
      - ojbyrne 16y ago
        Being from Canada, and having spent a winter on the prairies, all I can say is - it depends. There's cold and then there's COLD.
        deleted 16y ago
        [deleted]
      - 16y ago
rogermugs 16y ago
i've been a runner for about 10 years. i bought vibram five fingers 6 months ago. i used to run for mental stability, but it was a painful exercise that only paid off in well... mental stability. vff's may not be fully barefoot (but i live in a country where i wouldn't dare run fully barefoot), but i've never enjoyed running so much in my life. when i switched it took a good 2 months to adjust, but now i run 7 miles on average per time as opposed to 4 before.... i just cant help myself.... its SO much fun to run. who knew? edit: p.s. everything they say about it is true. there is a very noticeable difference in the amount of wear on my body after a long run in shoes and VFFs. my calves and feet take the brunt of the impact, not my hips/knees/back. This is the biggest change to my physical life in the last 5 years.
hugh3 16y ago
I remain skeptical of anyone trying to tell me that I'm suffering from a horrendous disease for which there are no symptoms. The whole thing smacks of pseudoscience. Back problems are very common. Digestive problems are very common. Foot problems? Not so much. Most old people have feet which are still perfectly functional and comfortable, and the shoes they wore most of their lives are less comfortable than shoes are now. Even women who have spent most of their lives in high heels do not, for the most part, seem to suffer from serious foot problems. So where's the horrendous downside, that I seem to be missing, of shoes?
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  Even women who have spent most of their lives in high heels do not, for the most part, seem to suffer from serious foot problems. I don't think this is true. All the women I know who wear high heels routinely complain of foot or knee pain (at least, the women I know well enough who would complain to me). I know of at least two women with permanent knee injuries caused (in large part) from wearing high heels. If you ride the subway in NYC, you'll see plenty of ads for podiatrists typically featuring an unhappy looking woman (call 1-800-???-FOOT).
  - TGJ 16y ago
    http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/sep/14/costs-of-wearing-heels/ http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/sep/14/costs-of-wearin... "Curious, they used MRI and saw that the Achilles’ tendon compensated for muscle fiber length. The tendon was significantly thicker and stiffer in high-heel wearers."
- staktrace 16y ago
  > Back problems are very common. Digestive problems are very common. They are in the civilized world, where everybody wears shoes with fat heels, and eats garbage. Take a look at places where people have to walk barefoot and you'll see a huge difference. More relevant links: http://mtkfitness.typepad.com/mtk-fitness/2009/07/more-antishoe-rhetoric.html http://mtkfitness.typepad.com/mtk-fitness/2009/07/more-antis... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1170253/The-painful-truth-trainers-Are-expensive-running-shoes-waste-money.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1170253/The-...
slackline 16y ago
I started running regularly in VFFs. Previously I didn't run much at all. After a couple months I started running in my old sneakers (I forgot the VFFs when traveling). The transition back was unpleasant (ie knee and ankle pain), to the point where I kicked off my sneakers and ran barefoot on the treadmill, which stopped the pain. This doesn't imply the VFFs are better for me, as the reverse transition could have caused pain as well. FWIW I'll probably buy another pain though.
joe_the_user 16y ago
I got a pair of super-flimsy canvas shoes for $20 from Payless Shoes on Market street two weeks ago. I've noticed that my calves aren't sore anymore and I have generally more energy. So the solution can be pretty easy.
- hugh3 16y ago
  Counterpoint: when I walk six hours in my flimsy canvas Converse, my feet hurt a lot. When I walk for six hours in my fancypants Saucony running shoes, they don't. I could try walking around for six hours in my bare feet, but I'm pretty sure I'd slice my foot open on something.
  - c0riander 16y ago
    I'm not sure how flimsy Converse are, actually. The top of the shoe is canvas and flexible, sure, but bending the sole (at least on mine, which are relatively new) is pretty difficult, and that's what impedes "proper" foot motion. I get pain if I walk a long time in Converse, as well, but for me I'm pretty sure it's because the toe box in them is rather narrow and doesn't let me spread my toes enough. When life calls for sneakers, I usually pick other shoes -- but sometimes, vanity wins. For a really flimsy canvas shoe, I'm imagining something along the lines of the cheapest Keds.
bootload 16y ago
"... One of the lead researchers, Dr. Bernhard Zipfel, when commenting on his findings, lamented that the American Podiatric Medical Association does not 'actively encourage outdoor barefoot walking for healthy individuals. This flies in the face of the increasing scientific evidence, including our study, that most of the commercially available footwear is not good for the feet' ..." Lots of expert & product placement in this article. I call a Sub ~ http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html
- silentbicycle 16y ago
  Same here. This at least the third time I've seen this kind of article in the last couple years, and that same brand of shoes has eventually been mentioned each time. (I remember the articles because those shoes are really ugly.) It's sneaky, because by even bringing the issue of running barefoot up, they get to look like the pragmatic choice, unlike all those members of the Evil Shodding Conspiracy.
  - kemayo 16y ago
    This article is from back in 2008, and does go through waves of popularity, so you might have seen the same brand of shoes each time because it's this same article each time. :)
    - silentbicycle 16y ago
      You're right - I missed the date. It's been different articles before, but the time sounds about right.
  - terrym 16y ago
    It's likely you keep seeing the brand because they were the first to market, and everyone else has been so slow to follow that they're the only serious game in town right now. That doesn't stop this article or any of the others you've seen mentioning them from being a PR piece they wrote or promoted, however. As far as conspiracies go, you don't actually need to buy their product to try it for yourself - just take off your shoes, run for a bit, then try to maintain the same stride when you strap your shoes back on. The only reason you'd need "barefoot shoes" is if you like it and end up wanting to run barefoot often enough to warrant wearing them to protect your feet from glass and other dangers.
WalterBright 16y ago
I find it curious that it's impossible to find simple leather moccasins to buy. Most of these "barefoot" shoes seem way overengineered and overpriced.
- kemayo 16y ago
  Moccasins certainly do meet many of the same goals as these shoes. But the area they're missing in is having enough of a sole to feel confident while walking through an urban area. There's enough random broken glass on the ground that I wouldn't entirely feel comfortable knowing that there's just leather between me and it. I'll agree that the "barefoot" shoes are on the more expensive side, but I'd expect that's a function of being in a relatively niche market.
phr 16y ago
I spent this spring and summer walking about an hour a day, first in Vibram Five-fingers. I have a funny twist in my step on the left side which wore holes in a couple toes in the first 30 miles, so I switched to cheap Wal-Mart sneakers (it's hard to find ones with no arch-support), and eventually flip-flops. Once I got used to the flip-flops, I started taking them off on a smooth asphalt road that climbs a gentle hill near my house. I keep an eye out for obvious dirty spots, and figure several hours of Eastern Washington summer sun probably kills most of the really nasty stuff. Once my feet toughened up a bit, I added another stretch of asphalt that's quite a bit rougher. My feet feel better than they have in years, and I now seem to have arches! Both feet were pretty flat, but I now have a nice arch on the right side, and some on the left.
crazydiamond 16y ago
I had a similar experience as the guy who began to play tennis barefoot. In the 80's I was a long distance runner, had innumerable injuries running with best running shoes money could buy, and expensive orthotics. Finally, i began to run barefoot and never had an injury again. Barefoot running also encourages you to land your feet softly on the ground, in addition to the major benefit of not weakening tendons and ligaments etc by supporting/raising them.
expeditious 16y ago
Long article. Would've liked to see video clips showing, "walk like this", and, "instead of this".
DrStalker 16y ago
A Terra Plana store opened up near me so I went in to try the vibro barefoot shoes, since I needed new footwear. I bought a pair as soon as I tried them on because they are so immensly comfortable; it feels less like a shoe and more like a snug, high-tech sock. Any health benefits are a bonus. (It may have improved my posture slightly, but I never paid attention to this before so can't be sure)
brianbreslin 16y ago
as someone who switched to vibrams 6 months ago, and not having been an avid runner before (I do play soccer a lot) due to knee and ankle pains from heel-strike running, I've noticed distance running has become infinitely more enjoyable than it used to. That aside. I think people are missing the point of this article. The point is more about the WAY we are walking/running than what we are wearing. The solutions out there (thick soled running/walking shoes) are merely trying to alleviate the pressure caused by this poor WAY of walking (heel strikes, etc). The fact is, when we were kids running around barefoot, we ran on the balls of our feet, because that is the instinctual way to run.
- Mz 16y ago
  The fact is, when we were kids running around barefoot, we ran on the balls of our feet, because that is the instinctual way to run. Funny, I belong to some autism boards. "Toe walking" is considered indicative of ASD -- ie it is viewed as pathological. Makes me wonder if that view is partly a product of a culture where we are so used to shoes that we simply don't know how to walk/run without them. My oldest son sometimes runs the trash down barefoot -- roughly a quarter of a mile -- and he runs on the balls of his feet when he is barefoot. I have read this is the norm with barefoot runners.
  - brianbreslin 16y ago
    well is toe walking like walking on your tip toes? thats not the same as walking on your balls of your feet/forefoot. interesting though, i'd never heard of a link between autism and "toe walking," but i suspect you are right, this is one of those situations where society has shoe-style-walking so heavily ingrained in our minds that we see something else (even if its natural) and think something must be wrong.
    - Mz 16y ago
      Oh, I'm sure it can be indicative of something. But I have two ASD kids and they are doing well in part because I was careful to not pathologize every little thing they did. Lots of things "normal" people do get viewed as pathological once someone qualifies for some label or other. I think that is extremely harmful. I really can't say for sure what they mean by "toe walking". I filter out a lot of what gets said as "noise".

62 points by kareemm 16y ago

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

I read up about this theory a few years abo and decided to test it out with some Vibrams Five-Fingers shoes. I declare total bullshit. You might as well say that human skin has been evolving for 2 billion years (from primordial soup) and clothing ruins it. It's interesting because of how plausible it seems, and it made me think about how many people follow astrologers or feel cured of something by acupuncture.

sonnym 16y ago

Single page: http://nymag.com/print/?/health/features/46213/index1.html http://nymag.com/print/?/health/features/46213/index1.html

julius_geezer 16y ago

Barefoot walking is great. But I live in a climate where we get a snow or two most winters, and enough cold weather even without snow that a Zulu might be willing to risk his pedal health and put on shoes. I live in city that has broken glass on its concrete pavements, and plenty of stones on its park trails. I think I'll keep my shoes for now.

tomjen3 16y ago
If you haven't do try to walk barefoot in the snow, just a couple of steps. After that you will be glad you did it, and you will be glad that you have a pair of shoes.
- pyre 16y ago
  Why do you shoes need to have soles though, vs being something like a moccasin?
matwood 16y ago
You should try some Nike Frees. They are very flexible and have the flattest sole of most athletic shoes. Other than the Five Fingers talked about above the Frees are the closest thing to barefoot without being barefoot.

Chris_Newton 16y ago

For what it's worth, I think MBTs are great. I first tried them a few years ago, before they were trendy and available in mainstream stores, while I was having some therapy for a recurring knee problem. My physio had suggested that the cause might be turning out more with one foot than the other, and since MBTs encourage a better walking action, they seemed like they might help. I can't say whether it was the specialist physio exercises or the MBTs that did more to help my immediate problem at the time, but I can vouch for many of the claims that MBT marketing tends to make. They do reduce that nasty impact on each step (which you probably don't notice until you have another problem, but then you really do). They did encourage me to walk with both feet aligned properly, and on the odd occasions that I've had a similar problem again over the years, switching back to MBTs for a while has rapidly cured it. You definitely feel the more active use of certain muscle groups when you first switch to them, but in my case I found that after using them for a few days, all kinds of minor irritations that might be explained by relative weakness/imbalance in those muscle groups started to clear up. They are expensive shoes, but if the pairs I've had are at all representative, the quality means they last way longer than expensive-but-not-that-expensive regular shoes anyway. I always have at least one pair in good condition now, and at the first sign of any irritation in my legs (usually if I haven't been doing much physical training for a few weeks and I'm getting out of condition) on they go. The only major downside I've found is that because of the curved sole, MBTs aren't particularly comfortable to stand around in for extended periods. These shoes are made for walking, not standing (or running/sports). For the record, I have no commercial interest related to MBTs, I'm just a very satisfied customer.

tomjen3 16y ago

And if you don't wear shoes, you end up with cuts from glass and stones. Pick the less of the evils.

hugh3 16y ago
Glass and stones, thorns, various disgusting substances, surfaces that are too hot, surfaces that are too cold, and my personal favourite, bees. Too much time spent walking outside barefoot as a kid led me to step on a lot of bees. Get stung by enough bees and eventually you'll probably develop a bee sting allergy, like I have. Now, the next bee I step on could kill me. Anyway, there's a lot of things on the ground which suck in one way or another. Our ancestors invented shoes for a reason, and it wasn't because Nike marketing told them to.
- staktrace 16y ago
  > Our ancestors invented shoes for a reason, and it wasn't because Nike marketing told them to. Agreed, but only partially. Our ancestors invented shoes because they provided a benefit, and continued using shoes because of that benefit. What they didn't (and couldn't really) know was the cost that came along with it. Now we have the science to find out exactly what that cost is. Ignoring that cost isn't going to make it go away. That being said, if, with full knowledge of the costs and the benefits, you decide to wear shoes anyway, then that's your choice and I can respect that.
Devilboy 16y ago
Shoes outside, barefoot inside.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
pyre 16y ago
How about we find ways to encourage people not to smash broken glass all over the place instead?

kemayo 16y ago

I bought some Vibram Five Fingers recently, and I have to admit that they are ridiculously comfortable, despite being essentially toe-socks with a thin-but-strong sole. I've been walking around inner-city Saint Louis in them, over broken glass and gravel, and my feet hurt less than when I was wearing my previous lightweight walking shoes. It's honestly a little weird, getting rid of all those things like arches and padding that seem so necessary, and discovering that they're actually doing nothing for you. Edit: Of course, in a few weeks I'll have to switch back to big waterproof boots for the winter. Alas.

ojbyrne 16y ago
Hmmm, waterproof "toe-socks with a thin-but-strong sole" and a flexible bit that goes halfway up your calves. Sounds like an idea.
- kemayo 16y ago
  The real problem would be the cold, I'd think. I'm not sure how easy it would be to insulate them sufficiently to let you walk in the snow, while keeping the form-fitting flexibility that's their appeal.
  - Shamiq 16y ago
    Cold is typically manageable. Cold and wet on the other hand is a totally different story. Was a complete pain when we got rained on while camping.
    - ojbyrne 16y ago
      Being from Canada, and having spent a winter on the prairies, all I can say is - it depends. There's cold and then there's COLD.
      - deleted 16y ago
        [deleted]
    - 16y ago

rogermugs 16y ago

i've been a runner for about 10 years. i bought vibram five fingers 6 months ago. i used to run for mental stability, but it was a painful exercise that only paid off in well... mental stability. vff's may not be fully barefoot (but i live in a country where i wouldn't dare run fully barefoot), but i've never enjoyed running so much in my life. when i switched it took a good 2 months to adjust, but now i run 7 miles on average per time as opposed to 4 before.... i just cant help myself.... its SO much fun to run. who knew? edit: p.s. everything they say about it is true. there is a very noticeable difference in the amount of wear on my body after a long run in shoes and VFFs. my calves and feet take the brunt of the impact, not my hips/knees/back. This is the biggest change to my physical life in the last 5 years.

hugh3 16y ago

I remain skeptical of anyone trying to tell me that I'm suffering from a horrendous disease for which there are no symptoms. The whole thing smacks of pseudoscience. Back problems are very common. Digestive problems are very common. Foot problems? Not so much. Most old people have feet which are still perfectly functional and comfortable, and the shoes they wore most of their lives are less comfortable than shoes are now. Even women who have spent most of their lives in high heels do not, for the most part, seem to suffer from serious foot problems. So where's the horrendous downside, that I seem to be missing, of shoes?

yummyfajitas 16y ago
Even women who have spent most of their lives in high heels do not, for the most part, seem to suffer from serious foot problems. I don't think this is true. All the women I know who wear high heels routinely complain of foot or knee pain (at least, the women I know well enough who would complain to me). I know of at least two women with permanent knee injuries caused (in large part) from wearing high heels. If you ride the subway in NYC, you'll see plenty of ads for podiatrists typically featuring an unhappy looking woman (call 1-800-???-FOOT).
- TGJ 16y ago
  http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/sep/14/costs-of-wearing-heels/ http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/sep/14/costs-of-wearin... "Curious, they used MRI and saw that the Achilles’ tendon compensated for muscle fiber length. The tendon was significantly thicker and stiffer in high-heel wearers."
staktrace 16y ago
> Back problems are very common. Digestive problems are very common. They are in the civilized world, where everybody wears shoes with fat heels, and eats garbage. Take a look at places where people have to walk barefoot and you'll see a huge difference. More relevant links: http://mtkfitness.typepad.com/mtk-fitness/2009/07/more-antishoe-rhetoric.html http://mtkfitness.typepad.com/mtk-fitness/2009/07/more-antis... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1170253/The-painful-truth-trainers-Are-expensive-running-shoes-waste-money.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1170253/The-...

slackline 16y ago

I started running regularly in VFFs. Previously I didn't run much at all. After a couple months I started running in my old sneakers (I forgot the VFFs when traveling). The transition back was unpleasant (ie knee and ankle pain), to the point where I kicked off my sneakers and ran barefoot on the treadmill, which stopped the pain. This doesn't imply the VFFs are better for me, as the reverse transition could have caused pain as well. FWIW I'll probably buy another pain though.

joe_the_user 16y ago

I got a pair of super-flimsy canvas shoes for $20 from Payless Shoes on Market street two weeks ago. I've noticed that my calves aren't sore anymore and I have generally more energy. So the solution can be pretty easy.

hugh3 16y ago
Counterpoint: when I walk six hours in my flimsy canvas Converse, my feet hurt a lot. When I walk for six hours in my fancypants Saucony running shoes, they don't. I could try walking around for six hours in my bare feet, but I'm pretty sure I'd slice my foot open on something.
- c0riander 16y ago
  I'm not sure how flimsy Converse are, actually. The top of the shoe is canvas and flexible, sure, but bending the sole (at least on mine, which are relatively new) is pretty difficult, and that's what impedes "proper" foot motion. I get pain if I walk a long time in Converse, as well, but for me I'm pretty sure it's because the toe box in them is rather narrow and doesn't let me spread my toes enough. When life calls for sneakers, I usually pick other shoes -- but sometimes, vanity wins. For a really flimsy canvas shoe, I'm imagining something along the lines of the cheapest Keds.

bootload 16y ago

"... One of the lead researchers, Dr. Bernhard Zipfel, when commenting on his findings, lamented that the American Podiatric Medical Association does not 'actively encourage outdoor barefoot walking for healthy individuals. This flies in the face of the increasing scientific evidence, including our study, that most of the commercially available footwear is not good for the feet' ..." Lots of expert & product placement in this article. I call a Sub ~ http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html

silentbicycle 16y ago
Same here. This at least the third time I've seen this kind of article in the last couple years, and that same brand of shoes has eventually been mentioned each time. (I remember the articles because those shoes are really ugly.) It's sneaky, because by even bringing the issue of running barefoot up, they get to look like the pragmatic choice, unlike all those members of the Evil Shodding Conspiracy.
- kemayo 16y ago
  This article is from back in 2008, and does go through waves of popularity, so you might have seen the same brand of shoes each time because it's this same article each time. :)
  - silentbicycle 16y ago
    You're right - I missed the date. It's been different articles before, but the time sounds about right.
- terrym 16y ago
  It's likely you keep seeing the brand because they were the first to market, and everyone else has been so slow to follow that they're the only serious game in town right now. That doesn't stop this article or any of the others you've seen mentioning them from being a PR piece they wrote or promoted, however. As far as conspiracies go, you don't actually need to buy their product to try it for yourself - just take off your shoes, run for a bit, then try to maintain the same stride when you strap your shoes back on. The only reason you'd need "barefoot shoes" is if you like it and end up wanting to run barefoot often enough to warrant wearing them to protect your feet from glass and other dangers.

WalterBright 16y ago

I find it curious that it's impossible to find simple leather moccasins to buy. Most of these "barefoot" shoes seem way overengineered and overpriced.

kemayo 16y ago
Moccasins certainly do meet many of the same goals as these shoes. But the area they're missing in is having enough of a sole to feel confident while walking through an urban area. There's enough random broken glass on the ground that I wouldn't entirely feel comfortable knowing that there's just leather between me and it. I'll agree that the "barefoot" shoes are on the more expensive side, but I'd expect that's a function of being in a relatively niche market.

phr 16y ago

I spent this spring and summer walking about an hour a day, first in Vibram Five-fingers. I have a funny twist in my step on the left side which wore holes in a couple toes in the first 30 miles, so I switched to cheap Wal-Mart sneakers (it's hard to find ones with no arch-support), and eventually flip-flops. Once I got used to the flip-flops, I started taking them off on a smooth asphalt road that climbs a gentle hill near my house. I keep an eye out for obvious dirty spots, and figure several hours of Eastern Washington summer sun probably kills most of the really nasty stuff. Once my feet toughened up a bit, I added another stretch of asphalt that's quite a bit rougher. My feet feel better than they have in years, and I now seem to have arches! Both feet were pretty flat, but I now have a nice arch on the right side, and some on the left.

crazydiamond 16y ago

I had a similar experience as the guy who began to play tennis barefoot. In the 80's I was a long distance runner, had innumerable injuries running with best running shoes money could buy, and expensive orthotics. Finally, i began to run barefoot and never had an injury again. Barefoot running also encourages you to land your feet softly on the ground, in addition to the major benefit of not weakening tendons and ligaments etc by supporting/raising them.

expeditious 16y ago

Long article. Would've liked to see video clips showing, "walk like this", and, "instead of this".

DrStalker 16y ago

A Terra Plana store opened up near me so I went in to try the vibro barefoot shoes, since I needed new footwear. I bought a pair as soon as I tried them on because they are so immensly comfortable; it feels less like a shoe and more like a snug, high-tech sock. Any health benefits are a bonus. (It may have improved my posture slightly, but I never paid attention to this before so can't be sure)

brianbreslin 16y ago

as someone who switched to vibrams 6 months ago, and not having been an avid runner before (I do play soccer a lot) due to knee and ankle pains from heel-strike running, I've noticed distance running has become infinitely more enjoyable than it used to. That aside. I think people are missing the point of this article. The point is more about the WAY we are walking/running than what we are wearing. The solutions out there (thick soled running/walking shoes) are merely trying to alleviate the pressure caused by this poor WAY of walking (heel strikes, etc). The fact is, when we were kids running around barefoot, we ran on the balls of our feet, because that is the instinctual way to run.

Mz 16y ago
The fact is, when we were kids running around barefoot, we ran on the balls of our feet, because that is the instinctual way to run. Funny, I belong to some autism boards. "Toe walking" is considered indicative of ASD -- ie it is viewed as pathological. Makes me wonder if that view is partly a product of a culture where we are so used to shoes that we simply don't know how to walk/run without them. My oldest son sometimes runs the trash down barefoot -- roughly a quarter of a mile -- and he runs on the balls of his feet when he is barefoot. I have read this is the norm with barefoot runners.
- brianbreslin 16y ago
  well is toe walking like walking on your tip toes? thats not the same as walking on your balls of your feet/forefoot. interesting though, i'd never heard of a link between autism and "toe walking," but i suspect you are right, this is one of those situations where society has shoe-style-walking so heavily ingrained in our minds that we see something else (even if its natural) and think something must be wrong.
  - Mz 16y ago
    Oh, I'm sure it can be indicative of something. But I have two ASD kids and they are doing well in part because I was careful to not pathologize every little thing they did. Lots of things "normal" people do get viewed as pathological once someone qualifies for some label or other. I think that is extremely harmful. I really can't say for sure what they mean by "toe walking". I filter out a lot of what gets said as "noise".