The New York Times’ Gretchen Reynolds recently blogged about whether or not barefoot running is really all that it’s cracked up to be. Apparently, there is a series of new studies that indicate this may be the case.
The Journal of Applied Physiology looked into whether or not landing near the front of your foot (what tends to happen when one runs barefoot or in minimalist footwear) is physiologically efficient.
Researchers from the University of Amherst recruited 37 experienced runners — 19 heel strikers and 18 who tend to land near the front of the foot.
All the volunteers were equipped with neutral running flats and put on a treadmill while being told to run as they normally do.
On the treadmill, they ran at three different speeds: easy, middle, and fast.
Throughout those runs, the researchers studied the oxygen uptake, heart rates and how carbohydrates were providing energy to the runners.
As a separate experiment, the same group was asked to switch styles.
The post Is Barefoot Running The Best Way To Go? appeared first on Competitor.com.
Speedygeese Results
YCRC Symonston 9k Saturday 1 June
12. Andrew Matthews M50 45:36
18 finishers
YCRC Symonston 4.5k Saturday 1 June
12. Ewen Thompson M55 25:32
16 finishers
Casting doubts on the study
I wonder how heavy the experienced runners were in the above study? Being light in weight and getting up "on the toes" is surely the way to run faster over long distances? Worked for me! These guys were Americans, hmmm. And another factor, wouldn't it help to have run barefoot as a youth and beyond if you want to stay comfortable with mid-foot fore-foot? And if they "burned fewer carbs" when heel striking, wouldn't they go faster if they burnt more "carbs"? Just thinking aloud. But running economy isn't everything.
