
We Evolved to Run But We're Doing It Wrong - thomyorkie
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/07/running-books-jogging-health-science/
======
rosser
The Fine Article doesn't really go into _how_ we're doing it wrong, beyond a
passing mention of barefoot running, and some dissing of treadmills (which is
hyperbolic and orthogonal to reality; you can run "correctly" or "badly" on a
treadmill or on the street or trail).

I used to run a bit. Did an informal "couch to 5k" over a couple of months,
before I'd even discovered that was a thing. The single most effective thing I
did for my running was to buy a pair of Vibram Five-Fingers shoes.

TL;DR, the gist of the "wrong" is that we've been trained by "trainers" (over-
padded athletic shoes) to run in a straight-legged, heel-lands-first manner.
When you do that, your knee is locked (or at least straight) as the foot
lands, which transmits the force of the landing up your leg and into your
lower back.

When you run barefoot, or in a pair of ultra-light "shoes" like Vibrams, you
learn very quickly not to do that, or you stop running. The "right" way is to
land on the ball of the foot, with the knee slightly bent. The knee bends
further to dissipate the force of the landing. This is how evolution "meant"
for us to do it.

I have a bum knee now, for unrelated reasons, so I can't run for the time
being (or possibly ever again). I was, in fact, specifically warned against it
by one of my array of bodyworkers just this past week. I kinda miss it
sometimes, because it actually can be quite meditative, once you get into your
rhythm.

EDIT: phrasing.

EDIT 2: The "wrong" under discussion in The Fine Article might have more to do
with _why_ we run than _how_. Though, if so, premising the argument in
"evolution" is perhaps specious. Thanks, follow-ups, for pointing that out
more clearly.

~~~
zzalpha
_TL;DR, the gist of the "wrong" is that we've been trained by "trainers"
(over-padded athletic shoes) to run in a straight-legged, heel-lands-first
manner._

Any reputable running clinic will teach you to make contact with the ground at
the middle of your foot with a slightly bent knee. That's just well
understood, proper technique, regardless of footwear.

The real problem is people hitting the pavement without learning the basics of
good technique because they think we're somehow "evolved" to just "do it
right", which may be technically true but it's meaningless in practice.

Edit: cleaned up the tone a bit.

~~~
Fordrus
Having been to a run clinic, I can absolutely call bull on the claim "Footwear
is irrelevant, here.". At least the run clinic I went to assured me multiple
times that my impression that wearing "trainers" specifically and greatly
increases the difficulty of running "correctly" by striking with the middle of
your foot with slightly bent knee. The large heel of virtually all training
shoes makes landing in the middle of your foot extremely difficult -
especially if you're unfamiar with that way of landing your foot.

Footwear does matter, at least until you know intuitively how to do the
motions. I never did master a mid foot strike, the closest I was ever able to
get was not landing on my heel quite as hard, essentially rolling off it
quickly.

I liked the pair of vibrams I wore until I wore through the rubber sole, but
they are a bit expensive, and my foot shape means me pinky toe doesn't really
fit up into the to things, I rather thought it unnecessary overall to separate
the toes. I've been on the lookout for good places to run entirely barefoot as
well, but I'm not as daring as some. :)

~~~
zzalpha
Was the clinic run by a store selling overpriced Vibrams by any chance?

I've run on regular runners for years. Nothing about them makes good technique
harder. There may be less feedback you're doing it wrong (in the form of less
pain and discomfort), but the designs themselves don't stop you from running
properly.

That said, it's not _easy_. It requires real self-awareness and a willingness
to fight the urge to overrun your stride length.

~~~
benesch
Out of curiosity, have you ever tried running barefoot? I spent four years of
cross country practice in high school desperately fighting my tendency to
overstride. At the start, my stride rate tended towards the high 70s (a
healthy stride rate is high 80s, low 90s), and I barely got to the low 80s by
the time I graduated.

The first time I went running barefoot, my stride rate was over 90. Instantly.
If someone had told me, I would have been spared four years of stride rate
exercises.

You might be right to claim that someone who's run barefoot their whole life
will have no trouble running properly in standard runners, but if you don't
already have perfect form cushioned shoes are not doing you any favors.

~~~
ArlenBales
As a ball of the foot runner for 15+ years, I have worn Vibram for short
distances comfortably but they were always too painful for long distances (15+
miles). My most comfortable non-racing shoe for long distance are ASICS
Kayano. I can finish a 15 mile run on those without any pain in my body.

------
sndean
> he calls treadmills the "junk food of exercise.

> he believes running barefoot is more natural—and less likely to result in
> injury.

This has always bothered me, and, even on HN, it still bothers me. Too many
experts.

I ran track and XC (HS, DIII, then DI for a season), did 100+ miles/week, won
a half marathon, etc. Reasonably successful without any injuries, over ~15
years. Even I would get constant advice from everyone. Still do.

"You're running too much." "Your back looks too stiff." "Your shoes don't
fit." "Don't do that with your hands." "You're landing on your heel too much."

Eventually you stop listening to everyone, even your coach. Running (and most
sports) would do well to follow science and have a cited source following
every statement. It's a little absurd when someone tells me I'm going to get
injured if I don't do more barefoot running. I've been wearing this same model
of Brooks shoe since I was 15. If you can give me a link to an article on
Pubmed, I might read it.

~~~
rb808
Wait until you get into your 40's and 50's, that's often when lots of bad
habits start to cause problems.

~~~
zzalpha
Where's your evidence? I assume you have a multi-decade longitudinal study to
back up your claim?

~~~
freehunter
Everyone says "I'm paying for X behavior from my 20s" when they reach middle
age. In reality, it's just that's when the body begins to wear down and people
naturally want to blame it on something so we invented a euphemism for it.

It's not science, there's no evidence. People in their 50s start to hurt more,
and injuries that never healed right can be ignored when you're young, but
start to hurt again later on. It's just a fact of life. If you tore your ACL
in high school, when arthritis starts to kick in, you're going to feel that
old injury again, because a torn ACL never really heals.

~~~
zzalpha
Is this meant to agree with my point or rebut it?

This all started when sndean wrote the following:

 _Eventually you stop listening to everyone, even your coach. Running (and
most sports) would do well to follow science and have a cited source following
every statement. It 's a little absurd when someone tells me I'm going to get
injured if I don't do more barefoot running. I've been wearing this same model
of Brooks shoe since I was 15. If you can give me a link to an article on
Pubmed, I might read it._

rb808 replied with:

 _Wait until you get into your 40 's and 50's, that's often when lots of bad
habits start to cause problems._

I noted (obliquely, a bit snarkily) that this type of claim is _literally_
exactly what sndean was talking about: that people make all kinds of claims
with no evidence to back them up. And then rb808 demonstrated exactly that:
"Oh, there may not be evidence now, but trust me, you'll pay some day..."

Your comment... I'm not even sure where it fits in, exactly. Yes, obviously
people's body's age and don't heal as fast. No one is disputing that (and as a
person approaching 40, I'm living it).

But what does that have to do with this specific, unsupported claim: that
barefoot running is healthier in the long run as measured over decades.

~~~
freehunter
It's meant to say "chill out man". Far too often someone on HN says something
that's just common knowledge or off-the-cuff and someone else responds with
"where's your evidence and peer reviewed study?". It's nonsense. Actually it's
worse than that, it's rude.

I'm not arguing for or against anyone's specific claims, just telling you that
you don't need a scientific study to say that as people get older, their
bodies tend to hurt more and areas they've injured but never let heal hurt
more than other parts. I don't think rb808 was necessarily arguing that
either, just pointing out that bodily damage isn't always immediately
noticeable. But you apparently need scientific proof of that?

Some days I think if I said "the sun rose over the horizon this morning" I'd
get a follow-up saying "show me your sources or delete your comment". Science
isn't a cult or a religion. If you need a peer reviewed study to tell you that
improperly healed injuries will hurt more as you get older, you should talk to
the elderly more often.

~~~
zzalpha
I feel like we're talking past each other...

 _I 'm not arguing for or against anyone's specific claims, just telling you
that you don't need a scientific study to say that as people get older, their
bodies tend to hurt more_

Yeah, but... no one disputed that! It wasn't the subject of the argument.

To be clear, the argument is: Is barefoot running better for you over the long
term?

That's it. That's the argument. My follow-up comment was specifically intended
to explain that to you, since you seemed to have misunderstood.

Unfortunately, it seems like my follow-up wasn't clear enough.

It's all very puzzling. For all I know we're in violent agreement, here, if we
could just align on what's being discussed...

------
ErikAugust
From the article:

"The first thing I’d say is, you’re probably not doing it right. Most people
dislike running because they have memories of things like running for a bus.
That kind of running is usually deeply unpleasant, almost vomit-inducing. Most
beginners give up when they get injured because they’ve done too much, too
soon. Most of the benefits from running derive from going very slowly."

I find this premise to be correct - and can get people who say "I could never
run X miles" to do so, enjoyable sometimes, just by slowing down their pace.

However, even as someone who is a running apparel ambassador who runs up to 80
miles per week, races multiple marathons and ultramarathons a year - I have a
family, a full-time job, and occasional freelance work!

So even I would love to go on 2-4 hour mountain trail runs daily, it is hard
to find the time to do this. Hell, I have a treadmill in my garage to sneak in
shorter runs and still be home around my family.

And I'm more than happy to spread the gospel of long, slow distance running -
as it is meditative, mood stabilizing, and underpins aerobic development and
fat burning.

But I am willing to suggest all sorts of activity: hiking, soccer, basketball,
5K run training, cycling, mountain biking, marathon training, track workouts,
climbing, long urban walks, tennis, weight training with treadmill jogging for
warmups and cool down, boxing workouts, etc. I do think the premise that it's
wrong to treat running as a sport is flawed - I think we can treat it as a
sport, or not treat it as a sport. Or both! That depends on the individual.

If it gets you moving and your heart rate elevated into those aerobic ranges,
do what works for you. Running barefeet in nature for hours at a time for the
simple sake of running is great - but doing something that fits into your
interests, geography, and time schedule can provide a great, long-term balance
to the modern life.

~~~
throwanem
Seconding long walks. It's easy! You just look around for something
interesting, and let your feet carry you toward it - they know what to do, and
they will if you let them. Repeat as necessary. When you start to run out of
puff, look for interesting things nearer home than not.

Stay away from roads and sidewalks, if you can. Trees give shade, and shade is
cool and pleasant and helps you husband your energy for finding interesting
things, rather than sweating.

Keep your phone in your pocket. Keep your earbuds there, too. They put you
somewhere other than where you are, and what's the point of that? Besides, you
can't chat with people if your ears are blocked.

Chat with people. Say hello. Make eye contact. Exercise the social skills that
help you make unplanned interactions mutually enjoyable. We don't do that any
more. We should. Many fear it. Do not blame them. Give them the opportunity to
overcome that fear, if they so choose. If they don't, leave them in peace.
Another time, perhaps.

Pictures are okay, but be sparing. Use them when there's something you'll want
to share. Don't use them so much that you forget why you want to share
something. Me, I'm an amateur photographer. For me, pictures are often part of
the point. Unless they are for you, too, use them as _aide-memoire_ \- not in
place of it.

Cut through the woods. Go up hills. Go down hills. Go through streams, or over
if they're narrow enough. Remind yourself of the simple pleasure to be had in
using your body - jumping, climbing, shifting your balance to go down a 45°
slope on your feet instead of your face.

Take chances. Don't shy away from decrepit buildings. Investigate them.
There's always a way in, and it's amazing what's to be found there. Be aware
of your environment, and be careful - not everyone you meet this way is
friendly. But many are. Don't let fear hold you back, because you'll always
wonder what you missed. And this life is transitory, anyway. Don't waste the
opportunities that come along while you're living it.

Wear shoes, sturdy and comfortable as you like. You don't want the thing that
holds you back to be that you'll tear up your feet if you go that way, either.
For buildings, I recommend eight- or nine-hole logger boots - welted full-
grain leather with good, arch-supporting insoles. Take care of them. They'll
take care of you.

(I always wear boots like that. I may be biased in my recommendation. But
they've stopped more holes than I can count from ending up in my feet. Wax
polish, thinly applied, and buffed in long strokes with a damp - not wet -
rag. No dress shoes ever looked so fine.)

Above all, enjoy yourself. Enjoy meeting the people and places you meet. Enjoy
your environment, and the changes you make in it over the course of a day's
peregrination. Enjoy the changes your environment makes in you. Enjoy not
giving a fuck about email and parking. Enjoy the feeling of using your body,
instead of just inhabiting it. Enjoy being where you are. Enjoy the ache of
well-worked muscles and the stretch of your ribs as you breathe deeper than
you can when you spend all day sitting down. Enjoy the deep sleep that comes
of exhaustion honestly earned. Enjoy the fresh eyes with which you wake. Enjoy
a simple pleasure no longer forgotten.

Enjoy!

~~~
rimliu

      > Chat with people. Say hello. Make eye contact.
      > Exercise the social skills that help you make
      > unplanned interactions mutually enjoyable.
    

But please, do not do it with me. I _love_ walking and long walks (just this
month I've done three ~40km walks). I fully agree with a few of your points
(like keeping phone and earbuds away), but why does not concept of consent
apply to chat? When I am walking it is kind of meditation for me and the last
thing I want it for some random guy to start small talk. If one wants to
improve social skills, why not to start by learning where small talk is
appropriate and expected and where one should not do it?

"Unplanned interactions" is very annoying thing, and I guess that is true not
only for me but for other introverts too.

~~~
ForRealsies
>"Unplanned interactions" is very annoying thing

Most on HN would find the most fulfillment in improving their social muscle,
not their calves.

~~~
throwanem
Improving your calves is not nothing, though. Every day is leg day when you
commute by foot!

(Now if only it were so effective for one's core and upper body...)

------
StevePerkins
>> " _You are not your typical jogger, are you? In fact, you hate the term._ "

> " _The fact is, I am a jogger, but it has connotations of pastel tracksuits
> and sweatbands from the 1980s and sort of stinks of Thatcherism and
> Reaganomics, and all that individualism. Runner just sounds cooler, doesn’t
> it?_ "

I find this portion of the interview remarkable at a meta level.

1) Associating the word "jogger" with conservative politics and individualist
philosophy is absolutely bizarre to me. Why? Because it happened to grow
popular during the 1980's? Does that mean that the x86 computer revolution has
conservative connotations also? I thought that JFK popularized jogging back in
the 60's, anyway. I'm so confused here.

2) Feeling the need to rename things in order to avoid connotations, even if
the renaming makes little sense, is a curious impulse. The word "jogging" has
some distinct layers of meaning, that are lost when you simply collapse it
into "running". If you DO somehow negatively link jogging to Ronald Reagan,
then wouldn't it be better to try and coin a _new_ term?

3) I find this sort of exchange more and more common on the Internet these
days. Discussing jogging, or what one ate for breakfast that morning... and
seamlessly segueing in and out of politics or culture war banter. Not so long
ago, that would be considered awkward and jarring (quite frankly, it would
_still_ be considered awkward and jarring if the subject had expressed a pro-
Reagan view instead). Until quite recently, basic social norms would have one
tiptoe into such things more gingerly. An interesting shift.

------
will_brown
Another recently published running book is about "The Raven" a streak runner
running 8 miles everyday for over 42 years. 125,000 miles; 5x around the
earth; to the moon and back.

I'm lucky enough to live in Miami and run with him sometimes. When he started
the streak he went barefoot and later began wearing shoes, if you can call
them that, his favorite are NB with about 2,500 miles on them that seem to
have more hole(s) than material left.

If you can, do a run with the Raven and get a nickname, if not please get his
book:

[https://www.amazon.com/Running-Raven-Amazing-Community-
Inspi...](https://www.amazon.com/Running-Raven-Amazing-Community-Inspired-
ebook/dp/B01JEJC8L6)

~~~
noir_lord
Moon is ~239,000 miles away.

125,000 is about halfway.

------
dingdongding
The title says "We're doing it all wrong", but after reading the article it
hardly says much about what we are doing wrong. The only wrong it talks about
is treadmill and that's it.

~~~
positivecomment
"Treadmill is bad because it was invented as a torture device and one famous
person died three years after doing it excessively. It is like running without
any of the good stuff".

This is an actual argument from the article.

~~~
lawpoop
Can't say I disagree with him on that

~~~
Retra
You would agree, then, that drinking water is bad for the same reasons?

~~~
goodJobWalrus
Drinking water was invented as a torture device?

~~~
Retra
I suppose this is as good a time as any to miss a point.

~~~
lawpoop
Funny, my thoughts exactly

------
austinjp
So here's the deal. There is no absolute truth regarding running, footwear,
and injuries. Anyone who says there is, well they're selling something.

And that's the absolute truth.

~~~
therealdrag0
I remember reading about a study that found correlation between footwear and
injuries. Neither group had less injuries, but the types of injuries were
different between the different shoe groups. So pick your poison I guess.
(Sorry don't have source on me)

~~~
austinjp
Indeed. See Simspons's paradox, sub-grouping, and so on. There are deep
problems in: the lessons we can learn from a population, vs how a specific
individual will respond to a specific intervention; plus the filthy complexity
of real life outside the lab.

Basically it boils down to this: we don't know where you as an individual lie
on any of a huge number of bell-curves. Statistically, you're likely to be in
the middle of all of them -- and yet it would be impossible to find an
individual who actually _is_. So the more complex an intervention (and running
is a very complex situation) the more trial and error you'll probably have to
go through.

This is not a popular thing to say.

------
krishicks
Chris McDougall's book, "Born to Run", is another source that's been out for a
while. It focuses on endurance running, but also heavily on barefoot or
nearly-barefoot running.

[http://www.chrismcdougall.com/born-to-
run/](http://www.chrismcdougall.com/born-to-run/)

------
peterwwillis
How to do running right:

    
    
      1. Walk.
      2. Increase pace until uncomfortable.
      3. Back off pace until comfortable.
    

Everything else is yak shaving.

~~~
goatlover
Not if you want to be a competitive runner. Then you need to be able to run
through the uncomfortable pace (in the context of proper training).

~~~
agumonkey
I think he meant to bootstrap balancing learning period. Not as an effort.

------
mlinksva
I wish the interview was a bit more substantial, but I like the exercise
should be free/gyms are bad (exaggeration mine) idea. Gyms are like skyways
(eg in Minneapolis), or like mass transit stations surrounded by parking: they
detract from the vibrancy of street life and subvert their purpose.

~~~
vinay427
By that logic, tennis courts, swimming pools, and other recreational
facilities do the same. Not everyone uses a gym to run on a treadmill, or even
to do cardio-based exercises.

~~~
mlinksva
They do, to some small extent. I'm not claiming that indoor gyms should not
exist at all or that on should never ever drive to one, nor that there is
never a case for a skyway or parking at a transit station (though parking
should never ever be gratis). Only that the costs exist and should be
considered.

------
wvh
I don't think we're doing it wrong, not more than sitting down for more than 8
hours a day, at least.

I'm an avid runner. I agree when the barefoot movement talks about using your
legs, knees and ankles as springs, and that too cushioned shoes let you beat
the road without having to adapt, replacing some short-term discomfort by
perhaps long term injury caused by bashing your stiff legs on the road for
long distances.

But I also sit down most of the day on weekdays, and even though I stretch,
that spring is mostly gone after a long workday. I run too heavily then, and I
really prefer to have some protective footwear to compensate for my
inflexibility on those days.

Another problem is that our prehistoric selves didn't run on hard asphalt for
hours, which many of us have to do in our current environment.

So, even for those of us who are fit and athletic, this is more about getting
the balance right considering our lifestyle and environment. We might have
evolved to run, but not on asphalt and not after sitting down the whole day.

Don't clock up miles barefoot if/when your core physical strength or muscle
flexibility don't allow feline agility. You're at least as likely to get
injured. Adapt to the situation and listen to your body.

------
titzer
Something that I noticed recently is that if speed isn't a major goal,
breathing through the nose is a lot more healthy. In through the nose, out
through the nose.

First, it filters incoming air of particulates like dust and pollen--gross
stuff you don't want in your lungs. Over an hour of running, you can easily
breathe 600L of air, in a city, that's a lot of pollution.

Second, it calms you. Breathing through the nose is a meditation exercise that
automatically calms your mind.

Third, it reduces dehydration. Most of the water not lost through sweat and
through the skin is lost through evaporation from the mouth. Through the nose
instead, the same filtration system that keeps dust particles out serves as a
condensation site for some of the moisture that would otherwise exit from your
lungs.

Problem is, you can't run super fast breathing through your nose because of
the limitation in breath volume from the restricted pathway. The article is
right; IMO you should not run faster than what you can manage through nose
breathing alone.

------
maxmcorp
I find it interresting that no one questions the "we are born to run" claim. I
have seen very little evidence for that. We are able to run, but that does not
mean that running is a good way for us to move in general.

Having reached 50+ my estimate is that only 1 in 20 of the people i have known
and who has been running still do. Perhaps even less.

You simply get too many injuries. Your cortisol levels rise. You destroy your
joints etc. etc.

I also find it very hard to imagine that running would have been better for
some imaginable forefathers who had to run barefoot in nature with no roads.

~~~
mapleoin
_I find it interresting that no one questions the "we are born to run" claim.
I have seen very little evidence for that._

There is a link to a study in the first paragraph of the article:

[http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/11/1117_041117_...](http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/11/1117_041117_running_humans.html)

> The researchers identified a range of physical traits that suggest human
> ancestors evolved as distance runners. The adaptations helped them chase
> down prey and compete more effectively with the speedier carnivores on the
> open plains of Africa, the study says.

> The researchers say adaptations for running stretch back more than two
> million years, allowing humans to evolve from our apelike ancestors
> Australopithecus.

> "We think running is one of the most transforming events in human history,"
> Bramble added. "We are arguing the emergence of humans is tied to the
> evolution of running."

~~~
maxmcorp
Yes, but it is all just speculation. And when you compare it to how poorly our
bodies handles running now I would say it is a weak argument.

Also the "we can run the prey tired" argument clashes with the observations of
hunter gatherers where large animals plays a very small role in day to day
diet.

Also there is a _very_ large opportunity cost for running after large pray.

Imagine 5-10 hunters running after a big pray, and not catching it. Now they
have been running a half marathon. They might be far from water. They have
expended a lot of energy and will be hungry and tired and will have to walk
home to camp. With nothing to eat.

I think there is a good reason that hunting aminal usually just sprints for
short durations. The other approach is simply too risky.

Nope. Walking it is.

------
ck425
This isn't really a new idea anymore. I'd be curious to read what the book
covers beyond what Born to Run did.

~~~
aaron-lebo
Had the same thought.

[https://www.amazon.com/Born-Run-Hidden-Superathletes-
Greates...](https://www.amazon.com/Born-Run-Hidden-Superathletes-
Greatest/dp/0307279189)

------
soufron
I used to buy into the "running naturally" argument sold from Vibram, but it's
the same pseudo-science that justifies buying juicers and shit. I was used to
run for years. I used vibrams for 3 or 4 months and ended up completely
destroyed, unable to run for a while. This was like 10 years ago, and more and
more people have been calling on their bullshit since then.

~~~
rocqua
I had the same experience. I originally bought vibram to overcome my previous
issues with running, it didn't work at all.

Now, a few years later I might've found a better solution. Take it slow and
give your legs time to recover.

------
spodek
The article mentions hunting by running as an evolutionary adaptation
suggesting running distances, not necessarily sprinting.

I have to imagine running like hell to escape predators as a major part of our
evolutionary past. It would seem consistent with the effectiveness of high
intensity interval training as well as how satisfying the feeling of
exhaustion after running as fast as you can for a while.

~~~
Faint
Although, I don't know of any predators that hadn't the speed to catch a
human. I think we always must have had the tools and smarts and friends around
to make us a dangerous pray.

------
lazyjones
If we are born/evolved to run, why do we do it mostly when it's useless to us
(i.e. running in circles)?

Running as a sport is, in essence, forcing ourselves to do something we
supposedly needed so much as a species that we evolved to be good at it. Our
lifestyle has changed dramatically and we obviously don't need it much
anymore.

Perhaps we should be running instead of walking whenever possible? I used to
do that when I was younger and more impatient (I hated taxis, too), but having
sweaty clothes isn't socially acceptable in most cases. Perhaps some research
to alleviate this problem would help?

Edit: this looks like an interesting starting point:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_Cooling_and_Ventilation...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_Cooling_and_Ventilation_Garment)

~~~
magic_beans
> If we are born/evolved to run, why do we do it mostly when it's useless to
> us (i.e. running in circles)?

Because it's FUN. It's ok to have fun, even if it's not productive.

------
acconrad
> _On the phone from London, the author told National Geographic how he was
> inspired by his Irish uncle, who ran in the Olympics, and why he believes
> running barefoot is more natural—and less likely to result in injury._

I stopped reading right here. Ask a podiatrist if they've seen a rise in
plantar fasciitis as a result of barefoot running. Not everyone has the
biomechanics to jump into barefoot running[1]. Not everyone who has the
biomechanics can simply transition to barefoot running[2] - you have to ease
into it[3].

As soon as you assign species-wide labels and claim something is wrong, assume
it's a clickbaity title that will likely follow Betteridge's Law of Headlines.

[1] [http://www.menshealth.com/fitness/barefoot-running-
problems](http://www.menshealth.com/fitness/barefoot-running-problems)

[2] [https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-
blog/20...](https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-
blog/2013/aug/22/barefoot-isnt-best-most-runners)

[3]
[http://barefootrunning.fas.harvard.edu/6FAQ.html#Who%20shoul...](http://barefootrunning.fas.harvard.edu/6FAQ.html#Who%20should%20NOT%20run%20barefoot%20or%20in%20minimal%20shoes)?

~~~
tshadley
A few sentences down:

"Most beginners give up when they get injured because they’ve done too much,
too soon. Most of the benefits from running derive from going very slowly."

------
thoughtexprmnt
There are a lot of reasons to run, but if general fitness is the goal, I've
found that sprinting, and in particular uphill sprinting, is the most
effective and time-efficient.

~~~
danieltillett
If you really want to go for efficiency sprints on an exercise bike are about
as time efficient as you can get. 30 seconds flat out, 30 seconds slow x5 and
you are 90% of the way there. The stress on your joints is way less than
running too.

------
tkyjonathan
Yeah, I really don't think we were made to outrun ostriches or any animal,
really. Saying so set off a red light with me at the very start of the
article. We can set traps and scavenge already dead bodies - thats pretty much
it. Most of our actual calories were from plants/berries/corn/root vegetables.
We were able to do very well for ourselves, calorically speaking, when we
cooked/boiled those foods.

------
donquichotte
Barefoot running and even wearing thin soled shoes restricts you to a certain
kind of terrain. I participated in an alpine marathon last weekend and the
terrain was quite technical. Everybody was wearing trail running shoes. I have
weak ankles which are prone to pronation (he he), so a good shoe is absolutely
crucial to me for running in rugged terrain.

------
pgeorgep
I agree running has gotten to be muddied by the complications of technology.
It's meant to be an archaic practice emphasizing a meditative state. The
process should be focused solely on meditative benefits, with physical
benefits coming as a secondary benefit.

------
geoffc
55 yo and have run close to daily for 45 of them with minimal injuries. I land
on my forefoot and then put the heel down softly, the shoe makes little
difference other than an overly high heel prohibits that movement.

------
anonymousDan
These claims about how we're running in the wrong way because we should be
running barefoot all seem to rest on the premise that that is how we evolved.
The problem I have with that is they neglect to mention there weren't any
concrete roads or sidewalks around when our running abilities evolved either,
so who's to say our anatomy was ever designed to work on such hard surfaces?
Sure if you can manage to run barefoot on only natural surfaces it might make
sense, but this is never mentioned by anyone.

~~~
undersuit
Our anatomy evolved to work on almost all surfaces. The early homo erectus
that could not run on a surface was genetically less fit. Our gait changes
slightly depending on what surfaces we run on; loose rock, sand, packed dirt,
or concrete. Not being able to run on concrete would mean our ancestors would
have avoided rocky areas... which they did not.

~~~
anonymousDan
Not convinced. I highly doubt there is any evidence of our ancestors running
barefoot for long distances over rocky areas. From what I know the primary
reason our running abilities evolved was to allow chasing grazing animals over
long distances on grasslands. Be interested to see any evidence otherwise
though!

------
k__
I think it's kinda funny that running is THE sport of the masses and most of
them do it so wrong that it's actually bad for them.

------
mcguire
Obligatory _Real Genius:_

"You still run?"

"Only when chased."

------
jbrl
Barefoot on the natural concrete?

------
slipslap
what are your thoughts on
[https://www.vivobarefoot.com/us](https://www.vivobarefoot.com/us)?

~~~
drzaiusx11
I've had a several pairs of their EVOs (which seems to have been replaced by
their Stealth and Primus lines)

I loved them, even if they did wear them out fairly quickly (I went through a
pair in a little under a year.) That is largely because they were very
comfortable and I ended up wearing them for more than just running though.
They're the only minimalist shoe I've tried that had an adequately sized toe
box.

I also recently got a pair of their canvas 'Mata' everyday shoes and can vouch
for their comfort.

------
given
We didn't evolve. Anything more than micro-evolution is a lie and it's very
easy to see that it's wrong - if you _want_ to. But I have to admit it's a
very popular lie and people swing words like _scientific_ to make it
impressive. Of course much depends on this lie for many people. They can do
whatever they want because they are just a buch of random cells, right?

