I first became curious about this in the fall of 2009, when reading the book:
Another lesson is that we need to run more and slower and longer. And to have more fun too. Our bodies benefit more from longer sustained exertion.
Clearly to transition to barefoot running will require some care in order to develop the strength in previously pampered feet, but many people who are now running barefoot say that it solved problems they were having with injuries.
Hand in hand with this de-emphasis on speed is a surprising lesson that older people running slower actually do better at long endurance runs than younger people. Leave the short fast runs to the youngsters and learn to plug along at a nice sustainable pace for hours.
Here is some interesting information on running times from chapter 28. Suppose you ran a marathon at age 19. It has been found (by looking at finishing times for the 2004 New York Marathon) that runners get faster every year after 19, and hit their peak at age xx. However, it isn't until a runner reaches age 64 that his time gets back to his 19 year old time! The point is that human beings (even older human beings) are particularly good at long distance running.
A fellow named Jack Kirk (aka the "Dipsea Demon") was still running the
Dipsea Trail Race at age 96.
(The Dipsea trail run is an extremely scenic 7.4 mile course in Northern California.
It begins in the town of Mill Valley and passes through the Muir Woods on the way to the finish
at Stinson Beach.)
Jack said:
You don't stop running because you get old;
you get old because you stop running.
Jack Kirk died on January 29th, 2007 at the age of 100, at a hospital in Clovis, CA.
Starting in 1930 and continuing until 2002, when he was 95, Kirk started and finished every Dipsea race that was run. In 2003, at the age of 96, Jack was the first runner out of the gate, but he got only as far as the top of Cardiac Hill, the highest elevation point on the course. He was not well, yet he still achieved that challenging summit at 96.
Vibram five-fingers defined the whole notion of a barefoot running shoe (though they were intended originally as footwear for people on the wet decks of yachts). I owned a pair (but seem to have misplaced them) and greatly enjoyed them. However, I am unlikely to replace them with another pair because I have found something that I like much better.
Merrell "sonic gloves" have become my next barefoot shoe. I like them because they are much easier to put on, they don't look as weird, and above all because they protect my foot better on rocky trails. On one run with my five-fingers my foot brushed a trailside rock and nearly ripped off my little toe - this kind of thing does not happen with the Merrels. Some people complain about the sonic gloves needing a break in, but although I worried about this a bit, after the first short run they have been absolutely comfortable. Also, I chose them because they looked like they would hold up better than other shoes (such as the New Balance offerings, and even the "trail glove" from Merrell). The "trail glove" would seem to make sense for a place like southern Arizona where I run, but I know the mesh will get torn up much more quickly that I would like. All in all these are fantastic shoes, despite the obnoxious orange color that was my only choice.
A side note -- some people fret a lot about shoe width, which I think is nonsense as long as the shoes are not too narrow. I lace my shoes loosely and all I ask from the shoe upper is that it keep the soles from falling off of my feet. I would be just as happy running with comfortable sandals (and sometimes I do). I have found this true of hiking shoes/boots as well. Get the length right and let your foot loaf around inside a roomy chamber. Works for me, or maybe I have adapted my running and hiking style to shoes that fit like this. I recommend you give it a try.
Barefoot shoes have now hit the big time, and the makers specify the "drop" of the shoes in millimeters. A true barefoot shoe has zero drop. The drop measures the wedge of the shoe from the heel to the ball of the foot. A shoe with 3mm of drop would have the ball of the foot 3mm below the heel. Actually if I was setting up this lingo, I would call it the "lift" (the heel is lifted 3mm above the ball of the foot), but nobody asked me. When you start thinking about heel lift though, your mind focuses on one of the major flaws of conventional modern running shoes. There is substantial heel lift, and you are in effect running atop a raised platform -- and your foot can topple off the platform to the side (as happens when you sprain an ankle). A zero drop running shoe makes you almost immune to this kind of injury. The Merrel sonic glove, although a zero drop shoe, does put (some say) about 12mm (half an inch) of stuff under your foot -- but I have never minded or noticed.
Here are a list of facts from an Amazon.com reviewer (Golden Lion Reader):
Tom's home page / [email protected]