4 ms·

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

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.
- silentbicycle 16y ago
  See my previous comment (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1799531 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1799531) about hookworm elsewhere in the thread. I'm not a runner, but I'm an avid cyclist, and given how much broken glass (and metal shards, etc.) I've pulled out of my tires over the years, it gives me pause. Plus, I live in Michigan - it gets COLD here.
  - olliesaunders 16y ago
    Yes. We weren't designed for any of those problems: glass, metal, cold.

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.

silentbicycle 16y ago
See my previous comment (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1799531 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1799531) about hookworm elsewhere in the thread. I'm not a runner, but I'm an avid cyclist, and given how much broken glass (and metal shards, etc.) I've pulled out of my tires over the years, it gives me pause. Plus, I live in Michigan - it gets COLD here.
- olliesaunders 16y ago
  Yes. We weren't designed for any of those problems: glass, metal, cold.