Topic: www.runningbarefootisbad.com - UGHH

[Mr.WWII]

First off, I am a firm believer in the barefoot philosophy. I also know plenty of the science behind it, so it goes without saying that this website pisses me off.

I'm looking for critiques from more knowledgeable people. This site claims many things and they seem to have their share of evidence from journal articles and studies, which I don't want to believe, but I also don't want to just blindly ignore. It's an overwhelming amount of stuff and I don't have the time to seek out all the studies and figure out exactly what is wrong with what they are saying all by myself. I'm hoping that other people may already be aware of a lot of their claims and the studies they use...

So lets rip this site apart together

http://www.runningbarefootisbad.com

[Steven Low]

i've writen some on this:

http://www.eatmoveimprove.com/2009/11/shoes-sitting-and-lower-body-dysfunctions/
http://www.eatmoveimprove.com/2010/10/a-firm-foundation-focusing-on-the-feet/

[Chris Salvato]

None of his references go to reputable sites...in fact, every link I clicked on went back to his own site.  Where is the science?

[wlf]

that website is total bull shit! i've run way way way way way better with VFFs than i have any other shoe! annd VFFs got rid of the foot pain i had when running in the shoes. RUNNING BAREFOOT IS GOOD.

[Mr.WWII]

i've writen some on this:

http://www.eatmoveimprove.com/2009/11/shoes-sitting-and-lower-body-dysfunctions/
http://www.eatmoveimprove.com/2010/10/a-firm-foundation-focusing-on-the-feet/

Yea I've read your articles thoroughly Steven, it's where I got started with my barefoot learning. I guess I'm looking for specific critiques of how they are using studies and journal articles to support their claims. Maybe you referenced some of the same articles and I just didn't notice though... In other words, how do we discount their evidence? not their claims, because I understand why their claims are wrong, I just don't know how their evidence backs them up

[Alec Furtado]

Well just the fact that he says ALL the evidence points to barefoot being bad and NONE of the evidence points to running shoes being bad is absolute garbage, both separately and combined.


With the voracity of how this guy is attacking it, he certainly has some vendetta against it. Or he just has the worst "Internet people skills" I've ever seen.



Plus, people seem to always leave out the idea that the barefoot problem is actually due to the shoe problem, i.e. how we have all grown up in shoes. Thus when we try to get rid of them and our feet are left to fend for themselves, we experience injuries. I'd love to see studies analyzing the same stuff except with people that have never used anything but barefoot and minimalist shoes. Oh wait...

None of his references go to reputable sites...in fact, every link I clicked on went back to his own site.  Where is the science?

Seriously! I was going in circles the whole time... all of the different pages seem to link back to the same 2-3 pages.

[Mr.WWII]

None of his references go to reputable sites...in fact, every link I clicked on went back to his own site.  Where is the science?

well he posted a lot of journal articles and studies. That's what I'm interested in. From what I've seen before there is TONS of evidence supporting the barefoot view, so then how is he using studies to discount that? When I have more time I'll track down the articles and read em myself, since he didn't provide links for many of them, and who knows whether or not they're even available online.

[Mr.WWII]

Plus, people seem to always leave out the idea that the barefoot problem is actually due to the shoe problem, i.e. how we have all grown up in shoes. Thus when we try to get rid of them and our feet are left to fend for themselves, we experience injuries. I'd love to see studies analyzing the same stuff except with people that have never used anything but barefoot and minimalist shoes. Oh wait...

Seriously! I was going in circles the whole time... all of the different pages seem to link back to the same 2-3 pages.

Oh I agree man, and it seems to be the one thing he ignore most, the fact that wearing shoes our entire lives is what messes up our feet bodies and feet in the first place, thus lending itself to injury when barefoot running is overdone too fast.

And yes, all those links revert back to the website. But im talking about the studies he references as you go further down with no links. I havn't gotten the chance to read them yet for myself, but I want to know how those studies are backing him up and whether or not he is simply twisting the findings to suit his belief

[Alec Furtado]

Indeed. Here's a list of all the articles and the website's associated claims:

Motion Control Shoe Delays Fatigue of Shank Muscles in Runners With Overpronating Feet
-[link] Specificity of the study has no good translation to the rest of runners using motion control shoes

The Effect of Running Shoes on Lower Extremity Joint Torques
-[link] "The study was looking at ankle and knee torques running with and without shoes. It was not even a study on osteoarthritis."

Umm, no. The conclusion of the study was that running shoes cause increased torques. It also says it is known that increased pressures in these areas are known to cause osteoarthritis. THUS, any person who can hold two or more thoughts at once would know that running shoes CAN increase risk of osteoarthritis. The journal literally says that.

Foot motion in children shoes: a comparison of barefoot walking with shod walking in conventional and flexible shoes.
-[link] The study was on kids, thus is totally irrelevant to adults

Incidence and determinants of lower extremity running injuries in long distance runners: a systematic review
-[link] Resource used to show that impact causes injury has nothing that actually claims that

Running-related injury prevention through barefoot adaptations.
-[link] "no one in the biomechanics community is taking this work seriously because of flaws that underpinned the methodology and the ‘editorializing’ of the research done by the authors."

Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot versus shod runners
-[link] They just talked about it... they didn't say one was better than the other.

Barefoot Running
-[link] Article is full of unsupported claims

Here, he does not have anything to show that what is said is wrong, it's just that the article claiming them does not back up the statements.

The Influence of Muscle Fatigue on Electromyogram and Plantar Pressure Patterns as an Explanation for the Incidence of Metatarsal Stress Fractures
-[link] Shod runners get less stress fractures, thus "barefoot runners must get more stress fractures in comparison."

Absolute nonsense. The study has nothing to do with more stress fractures. All it says is that when you use your forefoot more for running, your forefoot experiences more pressure (DUH!). The author even says that the speculation on stress fractures is just that, yet he goes ahead and claims it for truth later on.

Effects of short-term treatment strategies over 4 weeks in Achilles tendinopathy
-[link] "actually showed an increase in calf muscle strength with custom foot orthotic use"



That's about it (I might have missed one), the rest just reference the same pages and studies. This quicklist should help us break it down in less of an extremist fashion than he chooses to take. Attack! Lol.

[Dan Elric]

well he posted a lot of journal articles and studies. That's what I'm interested in. From what I've seen before there is TONS of evidence supporting the barefoot view, so then how is he using studies to discount that? When I have more time I'll track down the articles and read em myself, since he didn't provide links for many of them, and who knows whether or not they're even available online.

Not that much.

---

He's misguided and as Chris pointed out, there was no science.

[Alec Furtado]

He's misguided and as Chris pointed out, there was no science.

I'm pretty sure Mr. WWII wants ACTUAL examples of what he is misguided on. He wants ammunition.



Clearly from the breakdown of sources I posted, his main argument that runningbarefootisbad is wrong. He has some reason to argue against some of the claims that barefoot runners use, but eliminating an argument does nothing to invalidate the practice, IMO.

[FastGuppy]

There’s a difference from a claim and a scientific study. All the elements of a proper study must be there. This requires very specific notes on how it was done. Many articles on the internet become just guess work. Squats are bad is a conclusion many studies have came to, but they never tried full squats. Professors are typically suspect to this kind of ignorance typically because they under appreciate the importance of other areas of knowledge. A professor in nutrition might not use the typical athlete and instead used an untrained male. So of course that male subject will produce results. You must be specific and detail oriented in a study.

And with that, I see so many studies without control groups. I mean wtf? That's not even a study if you just think about it. It's just shiza.

[Mr.WWII]

Wow, after looking through some of those articles it seemed like nearly all of them had findings to support barefoot running and that it was a good thing to prevent injury. All the guy had to say was that the biomechanics world wasn't taking these things seriously and that "if the article is about children then it is meaningless to adults." Basically, he seems to have no ammunition so far.

[Steven Low]

99% of injuries barefoot are because of overuse.

99% of injuries shod are overuse AND poor biomechanics

Would you rather have two potential problems to deal with or one?

[Mr.WWII]

99% of injuries barefoot are because of overuse.

99% of injuries shod are overuse AND poor biomechanics

Would you rather have two potential problems to deal with or one?

good point

[redoctober]

Some of his arguments don't even make sense. Impact Injuries in Runners
In this article he talks about how no one if providing scientific proof that higher impacts are causing injuries. On one hand, I can understand if he just wants people to provide actual proof for their claims, but on the other hand, it's common knowledge that higher impact causes injuries. I'm pretty sure a 5 year old could tell you that. He tries to say that these higher impacts aren't causing stress fractures, but that's exactly what a stress fracture is: an incomplete fracture caused by unusual and/or repeated stress.

Also, did anyone else notice that the auto-advertisements on his site were for Vibrams?

[Alec Furtado]

Also, did anyone else notice that the auto-advertisements on his site were for Vibrams?

What would be hilarious is if this was like reverse-psychology advertising or something. I'm sure it's all randomly chosen by the advertisers tho according to page content.



And no, I didn't see it thanks to Adblock Plus

[Joe Brock]

Informative hate site...I think not.  I have a personal issue with running shoes, and it's my own fault that I hadn't tried out minimalistic shoes before I got into parkour training.  I actually crushed the second, third, and fourth metatarsals in my left foot in combination to outward fractures of the first and fifth due to a motorcycle accident.  After surgery and rehab, I tried to get back into running only to find that most running shoes caused me pretty chronic pain in the area that was once an arch in my foot.  I can't thank people enough for suggesting that I switch to Feiyues, because I haven't been so comfortable running in any shoes since my injury.  I had noticed that when I was practicing martial arts and kickboxing that running barefoot didn't have as adverse of a reaction as jogging in fancy jogging shoes, and leave it to me to take so long to come around.  Sure, I have a very accurate indicator of when I'm overworking them, because my foot still tells me pretty quickly, but I'll take that as a good sign.

I'm not really adding a great deal to this post, except to say that "for me personally, there really isn't any argument.  Barefoot is better."

[Jerrel]

Well guys its on the internet so it must be true ...

I almost went to the website full of malarkey, but decided not too.

Question :
Does this Guy happen to sell anything such as shoes or (God forbid) a book? Why would someone lie to people like this.
Jk

[Andrew Mumu Trahum]

Well guys its on the internet so it must be true ...

Kid's gotta point