A quick guide to barefoot running
For as long as human beings have been upright, we have run. The exact date at which we began doing the ol’ left-right-left is impossible to say, but evolutionary biologists suggest it to be between 2 to 3 million years ago.
It’s fair to say that, for much of that period, human beings would have been running sans shoes, for the simple reason that footwear had yet to be invented.
And we would have been doing a lot of running, too – probably to catch our dinner. That’s the view of Dan Lieberman, professor of evolutionary biology at Harvard University, who believes early human beings were persistence hunters.
He’s far from alone in that view, too. A recent paper found ethnographic evidence of over 400 accounts of persistence hunting being practiced all around the world – and not by people wearing the latest Nike Vaporflys.
Why the history lesson? Because the argument in favour of barefoot running is rooted in the idea that human beings are, and always have been, born to run.
The barefoot boom
Speaking of which, the barefoot running boom of the early 21st century can be traced, to some extent, to the publishing of Chris McDougall’s Born To Run. Released in 2009, the book was on The New York Times Best-Seller list for more than four months and continues to inspire runners to go barefoot today.
It tells the story of the Tarahumara (or Raramuri) of Mexico’s Copper Canyons, people who routinely run ultramarathon distances wearing ‘huaraches’ minimalist sandals constructed from a car tyre. McDougall investigates what allows the Tarahumara to do this, while people like himself are hopelessly injured running only a fraction of such distances.
One of the problems, concludes McDougall, is the intervention of modern running shoes. These are typically padded at the heel, thus encouraging the wearer to heel-strike, as opposed to land on the forefoot or midfoot as you would naturally do if running barefoot. And so the barefoot running boom was born.
Is less really more?
In principle, it makes a lot of sense: human beings are born to run; manmade running shoes lead us to unlearn this innate skill; therefore, we should return to nature, cast off our kicks, and resume running like a member of the Tarahumara.
Plenty of shoe brands were keen jump on the bandwagon, too. Everyone from Nike to New Balance brought out minimalist shoes, while some brands tried to get even closer to shoeless running – none more so than Vibram Fivefingers. Looking like a glove for the feet, Vibrams became the go-to barefoot shoe for committed minimalists the world over.
However, the bubble burst in 2012, when Vibram had to settle a class-action lawsuit to the tune of £2.2m over false health claims made about its FiveFingers shoes. The firm continues to deny any wrongdoing but, as part of the settlement, agreed to remove claims that the shoes are effective in strengthening muscles or reducing injury.
Should you bare all?
Let’s first look at some of the purported benefits of barefoot running. It’s certainly the case that overstriding, a running term for when your foot lands ahead of your centre of gravity instead of underneath it, is inefficient and potentially injurious. And it’s also true that those doing so will mostly be landing heavily on their heel. Running barefoot, or in a minimalist shoe, can decrease the chances of this, simply because to overstride and heavily heel strike while wearing no shoes or a barely-there shoe, is painful.
On the other hand, runners can learn to avoid overstriding in other ways. One of the easiest is trying to run with a quicker cadence – the term for how many times a minute each foot strikes the ground while running. Most biomechanists encourage runners to aim for a cadence of somewhere between 170-185 steps per minute, and there are now metronome apps that can be downloaded to help with this.
Let’s now look at the injury argument. In Born to Run, McDougall is fairly convinced that most common running injuries can be traced to padded shoes that encourage heel-striking. It’s easy to see how one might come to this conclusion. Imagine, for instance, if you were to jump off a step. Would you instinctively land on your heel or forefoot? Then why should your running landing be any different? Isn’t it obvious that a landing that utilises the achilles and calves rather than one that puts so much force through the knees is going to result in fewer injuries?
Actually, the science is a little more complicated. While midfoot or forefoot running may, indeed, reduce the likelihood of certain injuries – for example, runner’s knee – it may, in turn, make more likely other injuries such as achilles tendinopathy or calve strains. The bottom line? Barefoot running is not the silver bullet some have made it out to be.
A sensible middle ground
Over the past decade, the backlash against barefoot running has been pretty vicious. You could, in fact, look at the advent of super shoes as being the anti-minimalist movement. After all, there’s nothing natural about putting a carbon plate between your foot and the ground – yet doing so seems to make people better at running, not worse. However, some of the principles of barefoot running still hold true. (And it’s also worth noting that in East Africa, a hotbed of the best distance runners on the planet, lots of runners spend their formative years running barefoot.)
A strong, pliant foot is a runner’s friend. While it’s a moot point how you go about creating such a foot, certainly time spent walking in a minimalist shoe can be a good place to start. There are several brands now creating stylish, well built ‘barefoot’ lifestyle shoes, and the motto ‘walk before you can run’ keenly applies here.
Minimalist or barefoot running also makes more sense on certain surfaces. Early humans may have covered many miles barefoot, but they weren’t doing so on tarmac. Think natural surfaces – grass, hard-packed trails, even sand – when running barefoot. Also, rein in the miles. If you’re new to minimalist running, there’s a fairly lengthy adjustment period that should not be rushed. At the start, just aim for one short session a week.
Finally, minimalism is not an all-or-nothing affair. Road and trail shoes exist that combine the cornerstones of minimalism – a low or zero-drop platform, a flexible midsole and a spacious forefoot – while offering a more pragmatic level of protection. Three examples include the Altra Lone Peak 9, New Balance Minimus and Inov-8 Trailtalon Speed. On the road, meanwhile, the Altra Escalante 4 and New Balance Rebel v4 have lots more cushioning while remaining flexible and low-drop.
You Might Also Like
