My favorite part was the Seattle Sasquatch stomping so heavily barefooted (hairy barefooted, natch) that it drowned out the witness's own earbuds... That was the point at which I called shenanigans on the whole article. I'm amazed she omitted the fact he was wearing a utility kilt as well...
"Medical experts recommend a midfoot or forefoot strike but say it can be achieved while wearing shoes. "
Maybe self-annointed pop-experts who sell articles to Runner's World continue to say that these days, but real experts know that footstrike means nothing... Not that I expect a WSJ journalist to know anything about it.
I think foot strike means a "heel" of a lot. First of all, you don't want to be striking your foot on anything. Ouch! Second of all, if you are running truly barefoot, you shouldn't be striking your heels into the ground. Ouch! I can see where foot strike would not be a detriment, as long as the knee is bent.
I've been having fun all day buying copies at coffee shops and places barefoot in the snow, and when questioned showing them my feet on the front page. Really freaks them out!
Hit two fitness 19's as well. Abing on floor at one right now as I type this. Already treadmilled using same trick as last paragraph . Then I'll meet my wife again and enjoy the night out or in, her choice even though I'm the celebrity of the family for today.
Comments on the site you linked to were the comic relief I needed. Maybe it's a good thing the WSJ only allows comments from paid subscribers. Plenty of bad science there too, but a more sophisticated style of bad science.
Yeah, I read all 35 comments on the WSJ TJ