For decades, barefoot runners have dominated long distance events, leading many to believe barefoot running is more efficient. A new study from the University of Colorado says cushioned shoes actually do a better job of conserving a runner's energy.

• Related Articles

• What Role Does Climate Change Play in Tornadoes?
• Search for Survivors Races On as Dozens Feared Dead in Tornado-Hit Oklahoma
• Without Glia, the Brain Would Starve

8 Comments

1. 1. jctyler 09:40 AM 5/19/12

   as an amateur runner who recently tried barefoot:
   
   a) were the runners equally trained in both?
   b) was the strain the same?
   c) any ideas on the long-term effect on joints etc when comparing both?

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. krschafer 11:14 AM 5/19/12

   I couldn't get the video to play, but I have read the study.
   
   This study had nothing to do with cushioned shoes. They took experienced barefoot runners. And compared how much energy they used running barefoot and how much energy they used running in very light weight minimalist running shoes (little to no cushion). The subjects used slightly more energy when running barefoot.
   
   It is important to understand that the subjects maintained the same "barefoot" running technique with and without shoes. So this was not a test of fore-footed running technique vs. heel striking running technique. Most of the evidence to date indicates that the technique used by barefoot runners is more efficient than the heel landing technique that most people (from sedentary shoe wearing populations) use when running.
   
   Second point, barefoot runners have NOT dominated distance running for decades. The person, who wrote this, in the caption above, has no idea what he is talking about. The African runners, who many times have grown up barefoot, and who often run using a fore-footed landing, have dominated distance running for decades, but mostly while wearing shoes.
   
   Finally, this was just one study. So it is the results are far from conclusive.
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. jctyler in reply to krschafer 11:35 AM 5/19/12

   thank you very much, your reply has the exact information I was looking for.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. Ralf123 in reply to krschafer 05:04 PM 5/19/12

   Yup, exactly my thoughts. And anybody who has tried barefoot running knows that it's harder.
   It's better for your feet though, assuming a suitable surface.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. Trafalgar 11:04 PM 5/19/12

   Just like watching TV news! It's completely terrible. Also, why didn't they test a representative sample of barefoot runners in barefoot style, and a representative sample of shoe-wearing runners in shoes, rather than switching the barefoot runners to shoes? Seems strange.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

6. 6. dominicsmith412@fastmail.fm 08:26 AM 5/20/12

   I bet to disagree. Ever since I switched to barefoot running, I have developed a more natural gait and strengthen the muscles, tendons and ligaments of the foot. It's really amazing. Born to Run by Christopher Mcdougall and Barefootrunningshoes.org are two factors that keep me staying with barefoot running style. It really feels good.
   
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

7. 7. awheewall 04:26 AM 5/21/12

   There are a lot of problems with this study. Most noticabley that it was trying to prove this theory (hypothosis) that barefoot running is less efficient. To prove a theory scientifically you should actually set out to disprove it. If then after sufficient tests you are unable to disprove it then it becomes the established science. Trying to prove an idea with an experiment set up to try and prove it is bound to be subject to bias in favour of what you're trying to prove.
   
   Besides, the barefoot running revolution is not efficiency in terms of energy spent. It's about running injury free and enjoying running. There's not much point in having saved 3% in terms of energy, if your knees fail on you 1 mile from the end of a marathon.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

8. 8. DarklingThrush 06:06 AM 5/30/12

   I find this study unimpressive on several points. The biggest is the fallacy that shod runners will use the mid-foot strike practiced by the 12 participants in this study. If the study shows anything, it is that shoes are less important than running style. A study more relevant to real-world conditions would have focused on runners used to running in modern built-up shoes versus runners used to running barefoot, both groups with roughly equal experience running in their accustomed style.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this