The controversy over barefoot running has existed for a very short time but the interest in barefoot running is not new.  I believe that the controversy over barefoot running is mostly a cyberspace phenomenon and wouldn't exist without the internet. This is because the bulk of the people who claim to be the "purveyors of truth" on the matter, post blogs based on very little fact and can easily flood the internet with their opinions.

Once you step outside the blog battle field you will see the view points of those who research barefoot running and those who have a true passion for it.

I first became aware of barefoot running when I watched the ill fated Zola Bud compete at the 1984 Olympic Games in bare-feet. Since this time many coaches have been encouraging their athletes to do some training in bare-feet because they feel that there are strength and technique benefits in doing so. In fact the first shoe marketed as a barefoot running shoe (Nike Free, 2004) was created after a Nike representative observed some of their track athletes training in bare-feet.

Mary Decker from the USA trips over the barefoot Zola Budd during the famous 3000 m showdown in the 1984 Olympics

The Argument

The argument revolving around bare-feet running is really 4 arguments not one and as a result I think confusion exists. The arguments are as follows:

1. Barefoot running is natural

2. Barefoot running alters foot function

3. Barefoot running reduces injuries/causes injuries

4. Barefoot running shoes offer the same benefits as barefoot running

1. Barefoot Running is Natural

It is well understood that humans have developed over millions of years to walk and this is not in contention. What is a little more controversial is whether the human lower limb is well suited for endurance running. Daniel Leiberman (Professor of Biology) suggests that our unique spring like tendons such as the Achilles are well suited for endurance running but not a necessary evolutionary adaption for pendulum walking. I would accept that this is a fair observation and this would mean we have evolved as a running animal over many generations.

2. Barefoot running alters foot function

For some years research in shod and unshod running has observed kinematic changes in the foot and ankle while running in bare-feet. These were also observed in Leiberman’s recent paper on the topic and it was noted that habitual barefoot runners tended to have a more plantar flexed ankle and applied a greatly reduced effective mass of the lower limb as it collided with the ground. This reduced effective mass lowered the transient impact loading of the foot which is speculated to reduce the injuries related to high impact loading. However it was also noted that the rate of loading was the same for forefoot loading barefoot running and heel striking shod running. This suggests the shock absorbing heel of the running shoe is effective in slowing the rate that the heel impact transient is applied to the foot.

3. Barefoot running reduces injuries/causes injuries

It is suggested that barefoot running can both increases and decreases running injuries. I have seen no evidence that either opinion is true and hope that over time some research can be done on this topic to clarify this point. But in short those who say injuries are reduced by barefoot running suggest that barefoot running increases feet and leg strength and reduces high transient forces. However as barefoot runners adopt a more forefoot landing style they may be exposed to higher tension forces on the Achilles, metatarsals and plantar fascia which may produce injury. In fact it may be true that there are inherent injuries related to shod and unshod running.

4. Barefoot running shoes offer the same benefits as barefoot running

Possibly the most controversial argument related to barefoot running is the contention that the barefoot running effect can be generated while wearing a barefoot running shoe. I really do not believe this to be true and over the last four years I have read many articles marketing barefoot shoes and even orthotics by the perceived benefits of barefoot running. My belief is that the barefoot effect is related to the mechanoreceptors of the plantar skin sending sensory signals to the neural system to reduce high peak loading and pressures. This in turn over time will stimulate intrinsic muscle function and alter kinematics of the gait cycle. If a person wears a foot cover this effect is likely to be lost. I feel that a barefoot shoe should be seen as a preference not an advantage.

For my part I don’t think a real barefoot controversy exists. Most people that I have discussions on this topic with simply want to do just that - discuss and compare notes. Often patients want to discuss barefoot running to see if it would give then a performance advantage or reduce their injury risk. It really is important to know why a person wants to try barefoot running and then they can be more clearly advised on the topic.

I often encourage a little barefoot running to improve foot and lower limb strength, proprioception and running aptitude but I still have confidence in running shoes. However if a person wants to explore the natural running style I will do all I can to help them adapt and stay safe while doing it. The process of adaption to prolonged periods of barefoot running is long and is deeply based in the theories of tissue adaption to increase loading.

Barefoot running theory, injuries and running corrective exercises will be discussed at the Running Technique and Injuries Workshop in June/July 2011.