Barefoot Running Vs. Traditional Running - Research Paper Example

? 3 April Barefoot Running Vs. Traditional Running The Pros and Cons Barefoot running, as opposed to traditional running in shoes (shod running) is now an emerging trend among leisure as well as professional runners. The idea of running barefoot or in minimalist footwear that mimic barefoot running is being popularized by minimalist shoe manufacturers like Vibram FiveFingers and is gaining scientific backing from medical communities and research groups, some of which are partly sponsored by the shoe companies themselves. While some dismiss the growing trend of barefoot running as a mere fad, some believe it will be a new wave in the history of sports. Innumerable debates have ensued in popular media over which one, barefoot running or shod running, is better, more beneficial and safer. However, scientific evidence is not yet enough to settle the debate. A lot of research has gone into analyzing the biomechanics, impact characteristics, etc of traditional and barefoot running and based on the findings of these studies, the pros and cons of both types of running have been weighed. The use of cushioned and protective footwear for running began in the 1970s with the invention of modern running shoes (Lieberman et al. 531). Prior to this invention, humans ran with none or minimal footwear. Human ancestors used simple and minimal foot coverings such as moccasins made of leather (Jenkins and Cauthon 231). Earlier dogmas claim that human feet are “evolutionarily unsuccessful” and that they are fragile because of which protective cushioning for the feet is vital (Jenkins and Cauthon 231). However, this dogma was refuted by a study in Nature, which argues that human ancestors, who practiced barefoot running, were remarkably good at endurance running and that it may have been “instrumental in the evolution of the human body form” (Bramble and Lieberman 345). The introduction of modern footwear with enhanced dynamics, protection and cushioning offer no evolutionary advantage and they have rather emerged as a need for protection from modern man-made terrains apart from vanity and stylistic considerations (Jenkins and Cauthon 231). The present paper discusses the pros and cons of barefoot running versus traditional running or shod running based on the findings of various studies and latest evidence available from research papers. As most of the present research on this subject is yet inconclusive and is still in progress, it cannot be ascertained as to whether barefoot running is better than shod running, but the pros and cons can however be weighed based on currently available evidence. I. Pros of Barefoot Running vs. Traditional Running A. Less susceptibility to injury in barefoot running The surging interest in barefoot running has been largely because the rates of running-related injuries are high amongst shod runners as compared to barefoot runners (Robillard 13; Edwards, Foster and Wallack 150). Kerrigan et al. (2009) have shown that the hip, knee and ankle joints are more prone to injury in shod runners than in barefoot runners, making them more susceptible to disorders such as knee osteoarthritis. In another study, Hamill et al. (2011) found that the footfall patterns in shod running and barefoot running are different, and therefore, the impact patterns of the two types of running vary from one another. The differences in impact patterns are responsible for varying extents of injury caused by both types of running. Robbins and Hanna have also shown that barefoot running populations report an extremely low frequency of running related injury (148). They further state that the human foot has developed adaptations that result in shock absorption and these adaptations are non-functional in traditional running. Many other studies such as those by Warburton have found that barefoot running is associated with a significantly low rate of acute ankle injuries and chronic lower leg injuries. Scientific data as to the level of protection of athletic shoes is lacking and their “deceptive advertising” leads people to believe that their cushioning is designed to protect from high impacts while running (Robbins and Waked 299). However, it is apparent that athletic footwear is associated with a high rate of running-related injuries. B. Better biomechanics and gait in barefoot running Research has shown that barefoot running improves the natural gait. It will result in quicker strides with shorter stride length, leading to lesser flight time and lower contact with the ground (Jenkins and Cauthon 234). Moreover, barefoot running promotes forefoot strike and midfoot strike, unlike traditional shod running, which promotes heel strike. The increase in running-related injuries due to shod running is largely attributed to the heel strikes that result because of the excess padding in athletic shoes. In barefoot running, people tend to land on the forefoot or the midfoot, which leads to lower impact forces as the foot’s natural shock absorption mechanism comes into play (Edwards, Foster and Wallack 150). Lower impact forces lead to lower stress related injuries such as fractures on the lower limbs and feet, runner's knee and plantar fasciitis (Lieberman et al. 531). C. Running barefoot increases the economy of running Studies have shown that the energy consumed while running is 4% less in the barefoot condition than in the shod condition (Warburton). This is because there is lesser energy consumed in the forefoot strike because of the natural springing motion of the calf muscles (Leiberman et al.). In the barefoot condition, there is lesser mass at the end of the leg to be accelerated with each stride. Therefore, there is an increased economy in the barefoot running condition (Jenkins and Cauthon 234). One particular study by Flaherty (qtd Jenkins and Cauthon 234) has found that oxygen consumption by those running in athletic shoes weighing 700g was 4.7% higher than those running barefoot. This increased oxygen and energy consumption may also be attributed to the repetitive deformation of shoes in each stride (Flaherty qtd Jenkins and Cauthon 234). D. Barefoot running strengthens the leg muscles Another important advantage of barefoot running is that it leads to a natural strengthening of the muscles of the foot, especially those in the arch of the foot (Lieberman et al.). Healthy feet as a result of barefoot running and walking pronate less and do not have a collapsed arch. Anthropometric studies have shown that the pliability of the feet is higher in barefoot runners than in shod runners (Jenkins and Cauthon 235). The musculature of certain intrinsic muscles in the foot is found to be greatly improved in the barefoot running condition. E. Improved foot health A study in Germany reported that wearing inadequate footwear in childhood increases the susceptibility to disorders such as hallux valgus and flatfoot (Rome, Hancock and Poratt 109). This study also reported that the best development of a healthy foot occurs in the barefoot condition. Moreover, it also states that running and walking barefoot on various surfaces such as grass, artificial tracks, sand etc. enhances the development of healthy feet. According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, children should not be made to wear shoes until it is necessitated by the environment (Jenkins and Cauthon 235). It is stated that the natural motion and development of the foot’s intrinsic musculature is inhibited while wearing rigid shoes. Shoes are also found to promote pathologic conditions of the metatarsals in the foot (Jenkins and Cauthon 235). F. Better proprioception It is also believed that barefoot running improves the proprioceptive abilities of the runner, apart from improving balance and coordination. Until date, there are no studies on the proprioceptive abilities of barefoot runners, but various studies have investigated the proprioceptive abilities of the barefoot condition while in a static position (Jenkins and Cauthon 235). It is seen that there is a decline in proprioceptive abilities because of wearing shoes. Studies have shown that barriers between the foot’s plantar mechanoreceptors and the surface of the support inhibit the position awareness of the foot, and shoe thickness and softness affects balance (Robbins et al. qtd Jenkins and Cauthon 235). G. Cost reduction It is estimated that a professional runner requires about four pairs of athletic shoes a year (Jenkins and Cauthon 236). Barefoot running would save significant amounts of footwear costs annually, unless the runner opts for minimal shoes, which mimic barefoot running, offered by shoe manufacturers such as Nike and Vibram FiveFingers. II. Cons of Barefoot Running vs. Traditional Running A. Hazards of barefoot running There are several hazards of barefoot running especially while switching from shod running to barefoot running. Thick soled and cushioned shoes protect from rough, hard, and dangerous terrain, and from objects such as glass and nails (Lieberman et al.). Although barefoot running protects from many injuries that result from stress and impact, it may make the person susceptible to puncture wounds, apart from other stress fractures in the metatarsals (Collier E37). Moreover, it may also increase the risk of exposure to infectious agents and microorganisms. Unprotected feet may have minor injuries and nicks that when exposed to non sterile surfaces may get inoculated with microorganisms (Jenkins and Cauthon 236). Moreover, there is risk of infections such as plantar verrucae and tinea pedis (Jenkins and Cauthon 237). Being barefoot also exposes the feet thermal injury due to extreme temperatures (Collier E37; Jenkins and Cauthon 236). Barefoot running on very hot or very cold surfaces may pose health risks. B. High shock during impact It is seen that those who run barefoot take shorter strides and land on their forefoot or midfoot. As stated earlier, this form of running leads to less severity of impact, causing lesser injuries. However, some critics argue that shorter strides in barefoot running mean that the foot is hitting the ground more often. Therefore, while the impact of the hit is reduced, its frequency is increased (Collier E37). Therefore, according to these critics, the risk of injury remains the same in barefoot and shod condition. Evidence on this aspect is lacking and research is still underway. C. Increase in transmission of shock to the back muscles Research conducted by Ogon et al. (qtd Jenkins and Cauthon 237) found that there is an increase in the rate of transmission of shock to the back muscles erector spinae in barefoot running condition as opposed to shod condition. Moreover, the study also found that there is a delayed muscle response in the L3 vertebrae in the barefoot running condition. This study however has several limitations and more scientific evidence is warranted. D. Alteration of foot biomechanics Studies have shown that the barefoot walking or running on hard surfaces may alter the foot biomechanics of running and walking, leading to potential disorders such as arthritis, apart from inducing loss of foot function (Rome, Hancock and Poratt 109). Another worrying concern is that barefoot walking or running may alter the function of the arches of the feet in obese and overweight children, which may not only cause problems during childhood but may also continue in adulthood (Rome, Hancock and Poratt 109). E. Other risk factors Barefoot walking or running also poses other risk factors and complications. Studies have shown that barefoot running leads to loss of “protective sensation” (Jenkins and Cauthon 237). Diabetic individuals are more prone to puncture wounds in the barefoot condition. The risk of diabetic foot disease is greatly increased in these individuals. Long-term complications on the foot resulting from diabetes include infections, ulcerations, and even the loss of peripheral sensation (Rome, Hancock and Poratt 109). A UK study has shown that adolescents with Type 2 diabetes are more susceptible to weak posterior tibial pulses apart from peripheral neuropathy (Rome, Hancock and Poratt 109). There is also an increased rate of foot ulcers due to barefoot running. Some studies have also shown that plantar pressure, i.e. the pressure on the sole of the foot, is higher in the barefoot condition compared to the shod condition. This is because wearing shoes in the shod condition increases the contact area of the foot, leading to lower peak pressures (qtd Jenkins and Cauthon 237). It is believed that shoes evenly distribute forces across the foot and walking or running in the barefoot condition may lead to plantar damage because of uneven distribution of pressure on the sole. III. Conclusion The barefoot running trend has taken over the sports community by storm and has also gained a high mileage in the media. Debates and discussions both for and against the trend have cropped up online and in other media hot spots. The trend gained momentum after the publishing of Christopher McDougall’s book, Born to Run. This books details his experiences with the Tarahumara tribe in the deserts of North America. People of this tribe run long distances barefoot without any injuries that commonly plague athletic runners. The book seeks to explore the benefits of barefoot running and compares it with traditional shod running. The benefits of barefoot running are being hyped by shoe companies that manufacture minimalist shoes that mimic barefoot running. Most of the facts used to create the hype or to dismiss the hype are based more on assumptions than on sound scientific evidence. Both critics as well as supporters of the barefoot running trend are fast in jumping to conclusions. Research on the subject is currently underway and there are no results yet available on whether shod running actually induces running-related injuries. Most of the studies that have already been concluded either have several limitations or are biased. Based on the data and scientific evidence available until date, it can be said that barefoot running does have certain advantages over traditional running. These advantages include lesser running-related injuries such as stress fractures and arthritis due to lesser impact forces caused due to the forefoot strike and midfoot strike in barefoot running as opposed to the heel strike in shod running. Other advantages include improved biomechanics of the foot and the development of a better natural gait, apart improving the health of the foot. Barefoot running is also found to improve intrinsic musculature of the foot and in strengthening the calves, which is otherwise not possible in shod running. Barefoot runners are found to consume lesser energy and oxygen, leading to better efficiency of running. It is also found to lead to improved proprioceptive abilities of the foot, apart from enhancing balance and coordination. While barefoot running has so many advantages over shod running on the one hand, it does have other disadvantages. It increases the susceptibility to puncture wounds and other injuries to the sole as a result of hard and rough terrain. It makes the feet prone to extreme and unsafe temperatures. It is also found to increase shock transmission to the back apart from causing complications in diabetic individuals. The recent interest in barefoot running has led many individuals to shift from shod running to barefoot running. There has been a sudden spate of people reporting injuries because of suddenly shifting from shod to barefoot running. The increase in injuries is not because of the shift to barefoot condition but because it takes time for the foot to transition from heel strikes to forefoot and midfoot strikes, until the calf muscles are strong enough. Shifting from shod to barefoot running needs professional guidance and needs to be done under the supervision of a podiatric or a coach. Until there is enough scientific evidence to prove that one is better than the other, the decision as to choose barefoot running or traditional running lies at the behest of the runner. Works Cited Bramble, Dennis, and Daniel Lieberman. “Endurance running and the evolution of Homo.” Nature 432.18 (2004): 345-52. Collier, Roger. “The rise of barefoot running.” CMAJ 183.1 (2010): E37-E38. Edwards, Sally, Carl Foster, and Roy Wallack. Be a Better Runner. Massachusetts: Quayside Publishing Group, 2011. Hamill, Joseph, Elizabeth Russell, Allison Gruber, and Ross Miller. “Impact characteristics in shod and barefoot running.” Footwear Science 3.1 (2011): 33-40. Jenkins, David, and David Cauthon. “Barefoot Running Claims and Controversies: A Review of the Literature.” Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association 101.3 (2011): 231-46. Kerrigan, Casey, Jason Franz, Geoffrey Keenan, Jay Dicharry, Ugo Croce, and Robert Wilder. “The Effect of Running Shoes on Lower Extremity Joint Torques.” PM&R 1.12 (2009): 1058-63. Lieberman, Daniel, Madhusudhan Venkadesan, Adam Daoud, and William Werbel . Biomechanics of Foot Strikes & Applications to Running Barefoot or in Minimal Footwear. N.d. Web. 2 April. 2012. . Lieberman, Daniel, Madhusudhan Venkadesan, William Werbel, Adam Daoud, Susan D’Andrea, Irene Davis, Robert Mang’Eni, and Yannis Pitsiladis. “Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot versus shod runners.” Nature 463 (2010): 531-5. Robbins, S, and E Waked. “Hazard of deceptive advertising of athletic footwear.” British Journal of Sports Medicine 31 (1997): 299-303. Robbins, Steven, and Adel Hanna. “Running related injury prevention through barefoot adaptations.” Medicine and science in sports and exercise 19.2 (1987): 148-156. Robillard, Jason. The Barefoot Running Book. Michigan: Barefoot Running University, 2010. Rome, Keith, Dene Hancock, and Daniel Poratt. “Barefoot running and walking: the pros and cons based on current evidence.” The New Zealand Medical Journal 121.1272 (2008): 109-10. Warburton, Michael. “Barefoot Running.” Sportscience 5.3 (2001). Web. . Read More