In fact - we are heel strikers. Right?!

[tofudish]

Just stumbled upon this:

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/23/is-there-one-right-way-to-run/

What confused me here is that they article claims that they have come to the conclusion those tribe men are being heel strikers by using a pressure-sensing pad, which certainly is nothing I would consider to be able to do anything than measuring pressure, no matter if I touch it with my toes, fingers, butt, or whatever. So checking out the actual research article ( http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0052548) it seems the conclusion was made from just two pictures, one of them showing a foot in heel strike position indeed...three or four inches above ground. Uhmmm....

What bothers me most is that they had the perfect testing objects, people who have never worn shoes before, in their natural environment. And just two pictures to prove all barefoot runners wrong? I admit I haven't gone trough the actual study yet, besides the pictures, so chances are the article is just messed up.


Edit: Just noticed that I opened this in the wrong forum, send a message to have this corrected

 

[Barefoot TJ]

I think if we are on softer surfaces, then we will tend to land more on our heels. Take beach sand for example; the deeper and looser the sand, the more we will land heel first. This is natural.

By contrast, we are forced to heel strike when we are on hard ground with a wedge under our heels. This is unnatural running.

I am surprised that some find this "new" news.

 

[Sid]

Thanks for the link to the article. They state that they used a 210hz camera, so I'll assume that they looked at the right frames. A few things. That soil looks like it could be sandy. The authors clearly state that the participants are running slower than the other tribe. Well, gee, to compare apples to apples, how about asking them to run faster?! Scientists, ppfft!

 

[migangelo]

and once they sped up they landed further up on their feet.

 

[Barefoot TJ]

What about bent knees? If they're running with bent knees, then perhaps (as Jason says) the placement of the foot doesn't matter. Although I believe "STRIKING" the ground with any part of the foot cannot be good for the knees and the body, especially if the knees are NOT bent.

 

[Barefoot TJ]

Speed matters, as we know. Sprinters are not heel strikers. People who run fast for a real purpose, such as to hunt down their pray, are not going to be heel striking.

 

[tofudish]

What about bent knees? If they're running with bent knees, then perhaps (as Jason says) the placement of the foot doesn't matter. Although I believe "STRIKING" the ground with any part of the foot cannot be good for the knees and the body, especially if the knees are NOT bent.

But wasn't that the main thing Dr. Lieberman discovered when he had people running on these pressure sensing pads, and showed that the shock from a heel strike causes an additional spike in the graphs that is supposed to cause additional stress in the hips and knees:

http://birthdayshoes.com/results-of-daniel-lieberman-barefoot-running-research-beginning-to-emerge

Of course, one major factor is also that most heel striker in padded shoes are overstriding, with knees locked in a straight position, so bending the knees most likely makes the situation less bad. But I still think landing on the heels while running misses out an important part of the natural spring our feed and legs provide.


BTW, did not notice that they were testing on sand, so great find Sid. I think that explains the heel strike pretty well, especial on these people who had never had a lesson in barefoot running

 

[Barefoot TJ]

Yes, Tofu, that is what his research discovered, but many are disregarding it and trying to discredit it, as many studies have come out since then aimed at undoing his work.

 

[Barefoot Gentile]

Good article. I especially like reading the comments.

Here is my favorite one.

• David H. Thompson
• Madison, Wisconsin

I grew up walking barefoot on stony, dirt roads, during the summer. I remember a lot of pain, even after my soles thickened.

For barefoot runners, it's critically important to take into account the running surface--in terms of stones that can bruise or cut the foot. A hard, rocky surface (typical of deserts), with round or sometimes sharp stones lying on top, can cause pain and sometimes injury.

The front of the foot has a greater surface area than the heel, and is more flexible. Hence, hitting a small, sharp stone with the front of the foot will spread the pressure over a greater area, causing less pain or damage.

This could explain the variability in native African runners. Landing on the front or back of the foot depends on the typical surface in the area where they were raised. Those raised in stonier landscapes might favor landing on the front of the foot first.

Avoiding pain also depends on watching carefully where you place your foot. When you run more slowly, you can better avoid the painful stones, so landing heel-first is more of an option for slower runners.

The same kind of reasoning might also apply to running on sand (such as dry streambeds, which make ideal "highways"). The front of the foot is better, because it's broader, so it doesn't sink in as deep when you land.

Understand the ecology of native runners to understand how they run. What speeds, what routes, and how soft or stony is the surface? What strategies do they employ to avoid injury?