latest News
"Barefoot Sandal" Start-up Hires Former Crocs Exec
“Barefoot Sandal” Start-up Xero Shoes Brings On Former Crocs Exec and Avia Co-founderBoulder, CO, October 2, 2012 – Dennis Driscoll, a 35-year footwear industry veteran who co-founded Avia Footwear and most recently worked as Global Design Director for Crocs, has joined Boulder-based barefoot running shoe start-up, Feel The World, Inc., the makers of Xero Shoes • Original Barefootware.Driscoll's roll at the bestselling "barefoot sandal" manufacturer is Chief Development Officer. Asked what attracted him to the product, he answers, "Xero Shoes are genuine, legitimate. We don't have to create ways to differentiate our product, because it is actually different."Regarding the company, and its co-founders, Steven Sashen and wife Lena Phoenix, Driscoll adds, "They are a smart team who've already proven themselves and their business. I like that my experience with all aspects of the footwear business can have a big impact here."Sashen and Phoenix reciprocate the admiration. "It’s highly unusual for someone of Dennis’s skills and caliber to work for a company at our stage. We're thrilled to have Dennis help take our product, and our company, to the levels we know they can attain."Dennis Driscoll started in the footwear business in 1978 with Osaga Athletic Footwear as the Director of Product Development. In 1981 he co-founded Avia Athletic Footwear as the VP of Product. Ten years later Dennis joined Wilson Sporting Goods as the Global Business Unit Director of Footwear. After a 7-year stint at Converse in senior product roles, Driscoll took a position at Doc Martens Footwear and moved to London as the Global Director of Product. In 2010, he went to work for Crocs as Global Design Director where he had a fourteen member design team in the US office and design centers in Padova, Italy and Tokyo, JapanABOUT:Feel The World, Inc. of Boulder, CO, manufactures Xero Shoes®, a high-tech upgrade on the traditional huaraches running sandal of the Tarahumara Indians of Mexico. Durable, stylish and affordable — Xero Shoes supply the fun and benefits of being barefoot, but with a layer of protection. Feel The World, Inc. launched in December 2009. To date, over 25,000 customers, ages 1 to 91, in more than 73 countries wear Xero Shoes for walking, hiking, yoga and gym-going, Crossfit, kayaking, jogging, and even running hundred-mile ultra marathons.
Xero Shoes Barefoot Sandals in COLOR!
Houston, we have color! I am extremely happy and proud to announce that you can now get Xero Shoes in 4 WAY COOL colors. And to celebrate, you can also save 20% if you order by October 2nd! In addition to our Coal Black, you can now get Mocha Earth, Electric Mint, Boulder Sky, and Hot Salmon. Combine those with our different lace colors... Well, here are a few combinations that you'll see around our office: Lena in her Mocha Earth with matching brown laces and a bunch of Brass Beads. Our office ultra-runner (and customer service manager), Bill, in Electric Mint with Purple laces (he puts 80-100 miles a week on these!) Steven, taking inspiration from an 8 year old customer who was the first one to wear non-matching laces, in Boulder Sky with White laces and a Hand Pendant (on the left) and Hot Salmon with Red laces (right). These new colors come in both Connect 4mm and Contact 6mm styles. And you can get them as kits or custom-made. Click here to order your Xero Shoes Colored Barefoot Sandals
How to think like a shoe company
You know the saying "when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail"?Well, it's true for shoe companies, too. When all you have is padding and motion-control, everything looks like it pronates and lands too hard!Check out this video about the "secret" Adidas development center. Especially watch at the 2:10 mark where the "best people in the world" analyze Ben's sprinting gait and conclude:a) That he pronates and heel-strikes (NOTE: He over pronates BECAUSE he heel-strikes since, when you land on your heel, the ankle muscles can't can hold the foot/ankle/lower leg in place).b) The solution: Making a shoe with padding and motion control!Uh...First of all, if you heel strike when you sprint, you are not sprinting! Sprinters do not heel strike. And when you land on your forefoot or midfoot, the entire musculature of the lower leg, ankle, and foot, can be "pre-loaded" and engage when you land.The cure for Ben is to STOP HEEL STRIKING, not get a shoe that lets him continue to run incorrectly. Duh.My next comment falls into the "maybe it's just me" category: Notice how large, spacious and expensive this place is. Ben mentions that Adidas does over a BILLION euros in sales.Look, I'm the last guy to deny any company the right to make money, and I'd love to have a billion dollar company.But am I the only one who sees a direct connection between a massive, pricey research lab and shoes that cost $150-200, and "hi-tech" shirts that cost $100+. This is like a thought I had at the Outdoor Retailer trade show, where some of the bigger companies have booths that easily cost over $1,000,000, "Oh, now I know why they charge so much for their products! They need to support the booth."Honestly, I find it unlikely that the "amazing" research they're doing actually pays for itself. I think it makes them feel good about themselves, and makes naive reporters think, "Oh, wow, they're doing something really special here."I don't doubt for a second that they could drop the price of their shoes to something more reasonable, not waste money on "research" that's iffy at best, and still make the same profit.Again, maybe that's just me.The content of this post does not constitute and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Always seek the advice of a physician or other qualified health provider with any questions or concerns you may have about your health or a medical condition.
University of Colorado Barefoot Running Study
The media is having an anti-barefoot running field day thanks to a study published by some people right up the street from me at the University of Colorado (BTW, I've been living in Boulder for 19 years and nobody has been able to explain why they call the university CU instead of UC.).Each of the dozens of articles about the study has a distinct flavor of elementary school playground taunting, "Nah, nah, nah, nah, boo, boo… barefoot running isn't good for you!"I mean, check out some of the headlines: Debunking the Barefoot Running Myth - Sydney Morning Herald (barefoot running isn't like bigfoot!) Here's Proof Barefoot Isn't Better -- Running Times (Ha! So there!)It almost feels like the press is enjoying creating a backlash to all the "pro" barefoot articles of the last two years, even though in every barefoot article I've read the media insists on publishing "both sides of the story," and includes some doctor who's never run a meter in bare feet and wouldn't know decent barefoot running form if it ran him over, claiming that running without shoes will hurt you, bring shame on your family, and accelerate the coming apocalypse.So, let's take a deep belly breath or two and have a chat about the study. In fact, let's start by talking about studies, in general:Designing a biomechanics study is not easy. Aside from deciding exactly what you want to explore and the best design of the study itself (how you can test it), finding enough of the right kind of participants is often tricky, if not impossible.It's even more difficult to design a study that isn't artificial in some way. That is, it's showing effects in a lab that may not be relevant in the real world.And, even more, many studies, while interesting, may not be relevant to the broader population. (Whenever someone quotes a study, or even just the habits, of elite marathoners, I respond "Unless you're 5'5" and weigh 105 pounds and run at 13 miles per hour for two hours... WHO CARES what those guys do?)Finally, the way the media picks up a study -- this one or any of the previous barefoot studies -- often adds some spin that isn't in the actual study.All of the issues I just raised are relevant as we take a gander at the CU study. BTW, if you want to see a lively and cogent critical look at the study, you can't go wrong with reading the comments on the New York Times article about it. Frankly, this post probably won't be as lucid as some of the comments there.Okay, let's jump into it… The gist of the study:"In the study, 12 subjects with substantial barefoot running experience ran at 7.5 MPH with a mid-foot strike pattern on a motorized treadmill, both barefoot and in lightweight cushioned shoes (~150 g/shoe, 5.4 oz). In additional trials, they attached small lead strips to each foot/shoe (~150, ~300, ~450 g). For each condition, they measured the subjects’ rates of oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production as an index of metabolic cost.”And the results:a) For every 100g (3.5oz) (the average weight of a deck of playing cards) added per foot, energy cost increases by approximately 1% whether running barefoot or shod.b) Running barefoot and in lightweight shoes do not significantly differ in energy cost.c) When controlling for shoe/foot mass, running in lightweight shoes requires ~3-4% less energy than running barefoot."Now, let the fun begin. Can you find the "confounds" (the factors in the study that might affect the results, or the interpretation of the results)?I'll start. Let me know if you find more.1) How did they determine that the 12 subjects had "substantial barefoot experience?" Well, the study says, “8 km/week barefoot or in minimal running footwear (e.g. Vibram Five Fingers) for at least 3 months out of the last year.”Does 3 months out of the last 12 really equal "substantial?" I've been barefoot for 3 years, and I'm STILL improving my form.And if that three months was wearing VFFs or minimalist shoes, that counts as "barefoot experience" Uh…As I've commented, and as the American Council on Exercise showed, and as Pete Larsen from www.runblogger.com captured on video: VFFs are not the same as barefoot.Now the researchers did verify that the subjects all ran with a "midfoot or forefoot" landing. I know that Lee Saxby, the spokesman and coach from Vivobarefoot would have an issue with that. He doesn't think midfoot is proper barefoot form (there's some debate about that, but it's besides the point at the moment).2) They ran on a treadmill. Look, I get that testing runners on an actual track is hard and expensive, but running on a treadmill is not the same as running on the ground, end of story. It may give some useful data, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, but the duck is on a treadmill… hmmm, that analogy isn't quite working, but you know what I mean.I did some high-speed video analysis of my running at the Monfort Human Performance Lab. I hit 21 mph on that treadmill. I can tell you that when I'm on a treadmill, my stride is different than on the track. I overstride so I can "catch" the treadmill belt, for example.3) To simulate a running shoe's weight, the researchers put lead weights on the top surface of the runners' feet. Do you think some small weights pressing down on your foot is different than having that same amount of weight distributed evenly, and mostly under your foot, thanks to the design of the shoe? I do. Does that matter? Could be. Is there a way to check… not easily.4) The runners were at 7.5 miles per hour. That's slow for an elite runner -- about 200 meters in a minute, a quarter mile in 2 minutes, a mile in 8 minutes -- but fast for most casual runners. This raises a few questions:a) How was that pace compared to the runners' usual training pace? b) Does speed make a difference? c) What about turnover, or cadence? Were those controlled and the same when the runners were barefoot vs. shod?Got me. But, suffice it to say, we're seeing the artificial quality of the study.5) Oh, this wasn't mentioned above, but I'll give it to you now: the runners were wearing yoga socks. "“For the duration of the experiment, subjects wore very thin, slip-resistant yoga socks for safety and hygienic purposes.”Hygienic purposes? Uh, some 409 and a paper towel would handle any "hygiene issues." And "safety"? If you read the study, one aspect of "safety" is "avoiding blisters."Boy, where to start on that one? We know that socks does not equal barefoot, and we also know that if you get blisters when you run barefoot, you're doing something wrong. So, this brings us back to number 1 -- how experienced were these runners really?6) The study measured oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production. Okay, that's a fine way to measure efficiency, based on the idea that using less oxygen and producing less CO2 means you're using less effort, and that equals being more efficient.But here's a question: So what?For one: does using less energy equate to faster times? It seems like it might, but that's not a given.Does the amount of extra energy being used by *some* of the barefoot runners have any relevance to the average runner? Someone for whom 7.5 mph is too fast… or even too slow?7) Oh, here's a favorite. The runners in the study wore an ultra-lighweight racing flat. Most runners wouldn't wear those. And most runners with no barefoot experience wouldn't find those any friendlier than being shoe-free.8) One other thing: A hallmark of the scientific method is reproducibility. Just because one lab gets a result, that doesn't mean the question is resolved. When a study is reproduced in independent labs and the same (or very similar) result is obtained... then you know you've got something.What if the study is correct, though? What if barefoot running is less efficient than shod running?The only answer I can come up with is: Who cares?I don't mean that it's not important to know. I mean, literally, who should care?If you never race, you'll never notice any difference in efficiency (assuming, again that "decreased efficiency" = slower times).Besides, there are MANY other reasons to run with bare feet than the idea that it's more efficient... many that have barely been touched on (Dr. Michael Merzenich and I have had some interesting chats about how being barefoot could help the elderly in various ways). Personally, I didn't make the switch for efficiency's sake. In fact, for me, as a sprinter, I know I'm more effective in spikes than barefoot. I switched because it helped me correct some form problems, eliminated injuries I was getting, turned running from a chore into an enthralling discovery, and, more importantly... WAS FUN.Don't get me wrong, I'm thrilled that my Boulder neighbors are researching barefoot running. And while this is the first published study, I know they have more coming and I'm looking forward to those.And I'm certainly not blaming them for how the media is handling the story.My only interest is the continued exploration, conversation, and understanding of efficient movement, running for speed and/or distance, and the ways of teaching and exploring barefoot running (and walking and hiking).No one study can perfectly address all of the open questions. But the almost combative attitude where everyone wants to jump on some one-sided "We're better!" bandwagon certainly doesn't help.Suffice it to say, this study is not the death knell of barefoot running that many media outlets are portraying it to be (because, you know, controversy is more important than truth if you're trying to sell papers).Now, if you'll pardon me, I have to burn off some of my frustration by putting on some yoga socks and minimalist shoes and going for a barefoot run.p.s. (added on 4/4/2012):I just realized that the conclusion of the study was WAY off base!Here's whyThe researchers think that the improved efficiency of the shoes came from the PADDING absorbing some of the stress that the muscles have to handle when you're barefoot.In other words, the ENTIRE efficiency effect could be ALL about the padding and have nothing to do with weight. The weight issue would only be valid if they tested multiple shoes of the same weight with different types of padded outsoles and got the same results.The content of this post does not constitute and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Always seek the advice of a physician or other qualified health provider with any questions or concerns you may have about your health or a medical condition.
Harvard Barefoot Running Studies Support Xero Shoes
What are the benefits of barefoot running? Well, Harvard's Dr. Daniel Lieberman has another answer. His studies from 2 years ago showed how barefoot runners who forefoot strike put less force into the ground and, therefore, less force into their joints. Now he has 2 new studies that have just come out that support how proper barefoot running form and minimalist running shoes can result in fewer injuries and more efficient running. "Foot Strike and Injury Rates in Endurance Runners: a retrospective study" looked at college cross-country runners and found that those who heel-strike (landing on their heels first) had approximately twice the rate of injury than those who forefoot strike. For those of you who've been exploring barefoot running know, proper barefoot form involves landing on the forefoot first. BTW, that doesn't mean you "run on your toes" -- your heel can naturally drop to the ground after the forefoot meets the ground first. In fact, letting your ankle relax is part of the natural spring mechanism of the leg. You may also know that the easiest way to help train yourself to forefoot strike is to go barefoot or wear something genuinely minimalist, like Xero Shoes. The more you can feel the ground when you run, the less you'll want to land on your heel... because IT HURTS! Be careful, though, many shoes that call themselves "minimalist" still have enough padding and protection between you and the ground that you lose the barefoot feel and can still heel strike. In fact a recent barefoot running study by ACE and some video of barefoot runners made by Pete Larson of runblogger.com showed that a majority of Vibram Fivefinger wearers still heel strike as they run. In my experience, this is probably because the VFFs have enough padding (especially the ones made for running, ironically) that the wearers can't tell they're still heel striking. Dr. Lieberman's other study, "Effects of Footwear and Strike Type on Running Economy" demonstrated that runners in minimal footwear have increased efficiency than those in traditional running shoes. Specifically, the study concluded that "Minimally shod runners are modestly but significantly more economical than traditionally shod runners regardless of strike type, after controlling for shoe mass and stride frequency. The likely cause of this difference is more elastic energy storage and release in the lower extremity during minimal shoe running." If minimal shoes make you more efficient, that's good news for us, since Xero Shoes are about the most minimalist running shoe you can find. :-)
4 Reasons NOT to Run Barefoot
[This post is guest-authored by our friend Rob Raux from www.shodless.com]Being barefoot and running barefoot is a blissful and consciousness-expanding endeavor. The feedback supplied from the ground is powerful enough to force even experienced runners to try it for only a mile or so, if they make it that far. Barefoot running, however wonderful, should not be subscribed to dogmatically.There are myriad resources available expounding on the benefits of being barefoot. Most of their reasons, methods, and warnings have merit. Unfortunately many of them sway to heavily towards the one-size-fits-all solution.Experiencing life unshod isn’t always the best option. Putting on a pair of huaraches or other minimalist shoes can serve a number of beneficial purposes: Technical Trail Running. Many people worry that the rocks, twigs, and roots on a trail make barefoot trail running impossible. Not true. First, you use your eyes and avoid what worries you. Second, your feet aren't rigid and can grab and grip and mold around many "obstacles."That said, while there’s nothing better than feeling the grass beneath your feet, having your heel land on an embedded rock leaves something to be desired. To be more specific, it could leave behind a bruise that will take at least a week to heal.That doesn’t include the chance of damaging the fatty tissue which protects your heel bone from impacting the ground. If any of this sounds painful, trust me, it’s worse than you’re picturing.A trail has hazards which you may not wish to risk if you're still an inexperienced barefooter. When a single false step means a week of no running, it’s just not worth it to be ideological about keeping yourself unshod. Additional mileage Your body may be able to take additional mileage, but the bottoms of your feet may not be ready to support it yet barefoot. Now, if you're looking to become a better barefoot runner, this is good news -- when your skin tells you to stop... STOP! Over time it'll adapt (not callous) and you'll be able to put in more miles.Until then, there’s nothing wrong with protecting your precious footsies, but only if you know your form is correct. If you are transitioning from shoes to barefoot and have yet to perfect the change from heel strike to mid foot strike or a forefoot strike, don’t ask for trouble by adding more miles in a minimalist shoe. You’ll find yourself injured promptly and thoroughly.If you are comfortable in your stride, you will find that your feet hit a natural point where further barefoot running may only lead to blisters (that usually means your form has broken down and you're pulling/pushing the ground, instead of placing/lifting). In these cases, adding a protective covering will give you the opportunity to add those additional miles you crave. Racing A foot covering increases your margin for error while running. Proponents of barefoot running tout the pain feedback loop as a beneficial aspect. Any foot covering blocks the pain receptors, which allow you to cause more damage to your body.In a race, this can be a necessary evil. A reduced pain feedback loop allows you to run a longer duration of more intensity. The covering may also absorb some of the mistakes you may have made barefoot (stepping on that rock in your mental fatigue).There’s obviously a very fine line to be ridden here, and one that you can certainly go too far with. Go with the least amount of covering possible and you should be able to dampen and absorb just the minimal amount of error to improve your results.I'd love to say, "If you're not comfortable running that distance, don't race that distance." But I know how some of us... I mean, YOU... can be ;-) The bitter cold Mother nature yields to no man. Don’t even think about getting the best of father winter.If you live in a climate that has a true winter, you know what frostbite feels like. Now try running barefoot.Amazingly, there are folks who do it, and enjoy it. And check out Steven shoveling snow in his huaraches. Frankly, I’ve tried it and even I think that’s crazy. Most people are going to need something to keep their feet protected from the elements (wind, snow, slush, etc.). Each person has a different tolerance, which will adapt as they get more comfortable with the colder weather.When dealing with the elements it’s best to be safer than pull up limp 3 miles from your house and walk the rest of the way home. The content of this post does not constitute and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Always seek the advice of a physician or other qualified health provider with any questions or concerns you may have about your health or a medical condition.
Barefoot Running Sandals vs. Running Shoes
A barefoot running vs. running shoes "infographic" I'm get all geeky over well-presented information, and the graphic about barefoot running and regular running shoes from XRayTechnicianSchoools.net is a pleasure. Whenever someone says to me "Barefoot running can cause injuries" I remind them of the fact in 1/3 of the infographic: 90% (I heard 80%) of marathoners get injured each year. When people ask me about wearing barefoot running shoes in the winter, I remind them of that big squiggly time line showing that for hundreds of thousands of years, we would walk and run barefoot, without shoes, in some pretty cold places (in other words, your body, given time, will acclimate). And, I agree that being barefoot is not appropriate all the time... like when you want to get into a restaurant. Hence the value of our high-tech upgrade on the Tarahumara huarache-inspired shoes and sandals, where you still get a great barefoot feel, but can get into restaurants. I also got a great flashback from the 1974 timeline: I vividly remember getting my first pair of Nike Waffle Trainers. What's funny is that most people remember that it allowed you to land on your heel. I remember that it had such a large amount of "toe spring" (a curve up from the ball of your foot to your toes) that it kept me on my toes! (I was, and still am, a sprinter, so I don't spend much time running on my heels). AMAZING to see that barefoot running shoes are a $1.7 billion industry, in part because the market has grown MUCH faster than anyone imagined it would. But also because most of the barefoot running shoes are SO expensive. Minimalist shoes clearly doesn't mean minimalist prices, it seems ;-) And, of course, I agree about the best way to start barefoot running (there's no rush to make the transition out of running shoes and over to barefoot) Created by: X Ray Technician Schools The content of this post does not constitute and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Always seek the advice of a physician or other qualified health provider with any questions or concerns you may have about your health or a medical condition.
How Barefoot is Barefoot, Really?
Okay, Pop Quiz time: Which of the following fictitious barefoot running shoes gives you more of a barefoot feel: a.) ASICs Nuttin’-2C with a 10mm thick sole b.) Brooks Zilch-City with a 1mm thick sole If you answered B, you’re mistaken. But if you answered A, you’re also wrong. Yes, my apologies, but this was a trick question. In the barefoot/minimalist footwear world, there are several concepts buzzing around, ideas upon which runners make buying decisions, that are potentially red herrings. In other words, these concepts can be used to inform or mislead, depending on how they’re used and how much other information comes along for the ride. And “sole thickness” is a biggie. If you look at ads for various minimalist and barefoot footwear products, sole thickness is highlighted. Sometimes bragged about. Thinner soles, some believe, are inherently better than thicker. Unless you’re a trail runner, then slightly thicker is better. Confused yet? You should be. Because, it’s not that simple. Let’s go back to my trick question.. The reason neither answer is correct is that I didn’t tell you what the soles are made of. If the 10mm sole was made of cotton candy, you may as well be running on the ground. But if the 1mm sole was made stainless steel, or carbon nanotubes, you wouldn’t be able to tell if you were on the ground at all. I’m exaggerating for effect — both comic and practical. But looking out in the market, you’ll see sole thickness used as a seeming shorthand for “barefootedness.” In other words, “thinner” means closer to barefoot. I recently had an Xero Shoes customer call me and tell me about his particular brand of minimalist shoe and how it advertised a 3mm sole. He wanted to know whether I thought his shoe was “more barefoot” than our 4mm Connect barefoot sandal. “Great,” I said, knowing the shoe in question. “It’s only 3mm thick. But is it flexible? Can you roll it into a tube?” “Well, no,” he said, clearly trying. “It’s pretty rigid.” “And if you put on that shoe and you stepped on a nail, how similar would that feel to stepping on it barefoot? Wait!” I added, hoping I wasn't too late to avoid a lawsuit, “Don't actually step on a nail to check!” I continued, “If you look inside that shoe, can you see the extra 2-3mm of insole padding they added to the 3mm outer sole?” “Uh-huh.” I could hear in his voice the first stages of someone starting to see through the fog of marketing hype. Many shoe marketers suggest, and many minimalist shoe buyers believe, that sole thickness is equivalent to “barefoot feel.” It’s not. It’s more complicated than that. When it comes to minimalist shoes, I feel compelled to paraphrase a line than no man wants to hear from a woman, “Honey, thickness isn’t everything.”
The little lie of barefoot running
As the barefoot running boom continues to explode, it’s important that we debunk the mythology that’s sprung up and face some facts. And perhaps the most obvious fact is this: If you run with anything between your skin and the ground, you are not barefoot runner. Let me say that again. If you wear Vibram Fivefingers, New Balance Minimus, Merrell Trail Gloves, Altra Adams, Vivobarefoot shoes, Newtons, Inov8 shoes, even our Invisible Shoes huaraches running sandals, you are not a barefoot runner. I don’t care if your previous shoes were padded stilts and your new shoes are a “zero-drop” natural movement minimalist shoe, if you’ve got something on your feet you’re not barefoot running. Barefoot running means that you run in bare feet. Period. Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that if you’ve just spent $125 on your Vibram Bikilas you need to throw them away, or that if there’s a barefoot running Meetup you can’t be part of the cool clique. And I’m not saying everyone needs to be barefoot. And, clearly, I'm not saying "don't buy Xero Shoes" ;-) But it’s important that we differentiate actual barefoot running from minimalist running. Why? Because more often than some would like to admit, barefoot running and minimalist running do not produce the same results. The promise of barefoot running is that the sensations you get when your skin contacts the ground — often known as pain — teach you proper running form. That is, if you change your form to make the pain go away, you’ll have a more efficient, lighter, easier stride, and you’ll be able to run pain-free for life. Anything that you put on your feet reduces the amount of sensation you feel and can interfere with the feedback loop that barefoot running gives which produces those benefits. Again, I’m not saying that you don’t get feedback from minimalist shoes. You certainly get more than you do when you’ve got 2″ of padding in your Nike I Can’t Feel The Grounds. As the developer of Xero Shoes, I know hundreds of people who switched to our sandals, improved their barefoot running form, eliminated life-long aches and pains, and now enjoy running ultra-marathons. As one of our early customers put it, "Xero Shoes are just like being barefoot... if they covered the world in a thin layer of comfortable rubber." But, I’ve also met a LOT people who bought a pair of Vibrams or Merrells (or any other minimalist shoe), soon became injured, and now tell everyone they know that “barefoot running” is dangerous… and they’ve never run barefoot! I’ve been on a number of barefoot running panel discussions and, inevitably, there will be some number of doctors, physical therapists, podiatrists and other medical professionals who say, smugly, “Hey, stick with this barefoot running thing. All the people getting hurt by doing it are putting my kids through college!” Before they can finish chuckling, I fire back: Me: “You know, of course, that all you guys made the exact same joke 40 years ago when running shoes were invented, right? And you know that people who have no problems running barefoot — and ones who get cured of injuries by running barefoot — will not come to see you, right?” Them: “Uh…” Then I pull out the bigger guns: “And when a patient tells you they got hurt from barefoot running, did you ask if they were actually in bare feet? Did you check to see if they simply over-trained by doing too much, too soon? And, maybe most importantly, did you take a video of them running so you could analyze their form and see if they were simply using the same injury-producing mechanics they used when they wore shoes? Or did you see if they were trying to stay on their toes, putting extra strain on their calves and Achilles, because they have a mistaken ideas about proper barefoot form?” Them: “Uh…” Barefoot running is more than switching to a minimalist shoe. And it’s more than simply removing your shoes. Don’t believe me? Go to a barefoot running event, find the people in their minimalist shoes, and see which ones are still landing on their heels, as if they’re still in motion controlled running shoes. In fact, be on the lookout for runners who are actually barefoot doing the same thing! Some of us are either unable to feel those important form-changing sensations, or unable (without coaching) to actually make form changes in order to find a painless way of moving. For an example of this, check out Pete Larson's video of the recent NYC Barefoot Run. Most of the VFF wearers, and a handful of barefoot runners are still landing on their heels. (I was there and noticed the same thing, but I didn't have the brains to video tape it... so, Thanks, Pete!) Let’s wrap this up with a wish: If you’re one of those “barefoot” runners who has never run barefoot, I can’t encourage you enough to try it. Don’t think there’s some transition you need to go through before you’re “ready.” Ironically, the best advice I can give you is: Just Do It! Get on a good clean hard surface (a bike path is great, streets work too) and go for a run. Listen to your feet, if they hurt, try to move in some different way so that they don’t. And if you can’t figure out how, then stop and try again another day. Don’t think you need to build up callouses; none of us who successfully run barefoot have any (they’re another sign that you’re doing something wrong). If you can find a coach or some training, get some guidance. Report back here with what you discover. The goal is not to be barefoot all the time. The goal is to be flexible. To be able to run comfortably, easily, and enjoyably under any circumstance. To know when barefoot is the best option and when something under your feet is called for. I wear my Xero Shoes for all my walking, hiking, and getting into restaurants. I'm barefoot for a lot of my sprinting training. But, hey, I still wear running shoes, too… when I have to shovel a 2′ Colorado snowfall. The content of this post does not constitute and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Always seek the advice of a physician or other qualified health provider with any questions or concerns you may have about your health or a medical condition.
Comparing Barefoot Running Shoes - Nike Free vs. Xero Shoes
I bought my first pair of Nike Free about 6 years ago, soon after they came out.I LOVED them. The flexible sole really let me feel the ground in a whole new way and they quickly became the only shoe I wore. Once I had the chance, I went to NikeID and made a custom pair that were all black... my "dress" Frees ;-)On the one hand, I'm glad I did that because earlier this week I needed to appear for a legal arbitration hearing and the only pair of "real" shoes I owned were those all-black Frees. For the last 3.5 years, all I've worn are Xero Shoes running sandals or my sprinting spikes (I'm a sprinter, not a "runner").On the other hand, I could barely remember why I used to be such a Free fan.Compared to huaraches, where the only thing between you and the ground is a few millimeters of rubber, the sole on the Free felt a mile thick.But the weirder thing was how quickly my stride changed. With the big, cushy, heel on the Free, I was almost instantly reaching out with my foot and landing hard on my heel, using the padding. In fact, with the elevated heel, I couldn't even find a way to land on my mid-foot as I was walking... no matter what I did, my heel struck the ground first.Let me back up a bit and add one fact: I removed the insole from the shoe. The insole -- at least the 5mm one that comes with it -- has 2 rubber "bumpers". One under your heel, and one under the ball of your foot. Without those shock absorbers in place, I noticed something else about the Free... the sole offers some cushioning at first, but once you've fully compressed the foam, it's really solid. Jarringly solid.I could feel the jolt of force run from my heel to the back of my head. After just 5 minutes of walking, I had a mild headache!After 2 days of wearing them, my right knee is out of whack and I'm writing this post during a time I'm usually out on the track, training.It's been so long since I've worn any of the "barefoot" style running shoes that I forgot how un-barefoot most of them truly are.
Orthotics vs. Barefoot Running
The only time I've worn anything other than my huaraches or my sprinting spikes in the last 16 months has been the 3 times I put on my old running shoes... so I could shovel snow. Those shoes have my $200 orthotics in them. And each time I've put them on, I have the same thought, "Geez, my foot can't even move. How did I wear these?" Often, when I'm out and about, someone will see my Xero Shoes and say, "Those look great, but I can't wear them. I need orthotics." "I used to think the same thing," I reply. "But let me ask you something. When has putting a cast on a limb and immobilizing it made it stronger?" "Well... never," they say, not wanting to admit the obvious fatal flaw in their reasoning. "Right. So you put a cast on your foot, called an orthotic, it gets weaker. Then you need a new cast to handle how much weaker you've gotten, and then... Oh, by the way," I mention, "you had your orthotic made while you were standing on a flat surface, didn't you?" "Yes." "Look at the shape of your shoe. Is it flat?" "Uh... no." "Because of how the shape of the shoe influences the way you move, you really need a different orthotic for each shoe. And it needs to be fitted based on how you move in that shoe, not how you stand, motionless, on the ground." "Hmmm..." I can see the glimmer of realization in their eyes. Well, now I have new ammunition in my anti-orthotic holster, an article in the New York Times by one of my favorite science writers, Gina Kolata: Close Look at Orthotics Raises a Welter of Doubts Let me give you a few highlights: Shoe inserts or orthotics may be helpful as a short-term solution, preventing injuries in some athletes. But it is not clear how to make inserts that work. The idea that they are supposed to correct mechanical-alignment problems does not hold up. Kinda sums it up, yes? Just wait, there's more. Gina interviews the top orthotics researcher, Benno M. Nigg, who says this about a man named Jason's flat feet: There is no need to “correct” a flat foot. All Jason needs to do is strengthen his foot and ankle muscles and then try running. without orthotics. Who knew? ;-) Well, *I* did... I've had really flat feet my whole life... until I started running and walking barefoot. Now I have some arch in my foot. BTW, I'm legally required to say that barefoot running shoes and sandals are not a medical treatment, I'm not a doctor, nor am I able to promise that by going without shoes you will develop arches in your feet. That said, do some Googling and you'll hear a lot of similar stories. Do with that what you will. Sometimes people with high arches give me the same story. "I need support because my arches are so high." Just because they're high, doesn't mean they're strong, especially if you've been supporting them all your life... remember the cast analogy. Now I'm not going to say that orthotics don't do something. But the question is: What do they do? How do they do it? And are they really helping? Dr. Joseph Hamill responds, in Gina's article: I guess the main thing to note is that, as biomechanists, we really do not know how orthotics work. Results from his studies cause Dr. Nigg to add: There was no way to predict the effect of a given orthotic. Hey, I'm not here to make anyone throw away their high-priced foot supports even though I haven't worn mine since 2009. But I am here to inspire a bit of wondering, a bit of curiosity, a bit of common sense, and a bit of critical thinking. Man lived without orthotics for a LOOOONG time. That doesn't mean they couldn't have benefited from them. But it means they got along without them. Maybe you can too. It doesn't cost much -- in time or dollars -- to set up an experiment for one. The content of this post does not constitute and is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Always seek the advice of a physician or other qualified health provider with any questions or concerns you may have about your health or a medical condition.
Can you really run in huaraches?
When you're used to hanging out with barefoot runners or, at least, with people who've read Born To Run, you forget how "normal people" think.One of the questions I'm most asked by non-barefoot people is: "Can you really run in those?"What amazes me about this question is not how people have forgotten that, for tens of thousands of years, this is exactly what humans wore to run. What amazes me is that I'm usually asked this question by someone who has been watching me run in my Xero Shoes.Silly humans.Well, don't just take my word for it, though.Check out this great race report by Alan Thwaits and see that, yes, you can run in these ;-)
Find the Shoe That Moves Like You Do.
Take the Quiz
