Just been on a mission to create a bit of space at home and came across a few years worth of Running Magazine from the mid 1980's, a UK publication. They would be going out of the door one way or another.
Before being thrown out I had one last nostalgic flick through them to see what had changed over the years.
Well, apparently not much. The magazines contained page after page of injury advice, race reports and every other page was an ad. for running shoes. It was the it occurred to me that back then I didn't stand a chance when up against the sales and marketing departments of the running shoe companies. I started reading some of the ads and relised they were plain nonsense wrapped up in pseudo science.
I have read many arguments against barefoot running, most of them saying that there is no 'scientific' evidence that barefoot running prevents injuries. Where were these same critics I wonder when the running shoe companies were spouting marketing claptrap in the running magazines saying their shoes were scientifically designed to prevent injury, where was the proof. The answer is: there wasn't any proof as all of the ads were from the marketing department.
It actually made me feel quite angry, I believe that we have all been led astray by their need to sell product. What should have happend is that, if while running in a running shoe that was said to prevent injury and you got injured, the shoes should have been sent back to the company for a refund for not living up to their stated purpose, in effect they were defective products. What most of us will have done though is blame ourselves.
As a lesson then, when you read articles on running in magazines or online always ask yourself, what are they trying to sell me. At least with barefoot running I know if I get injuried I know where the blame lies (with myself, I thought I better put that in as I realise how litigious people are in the USA ;-) )
Neil
PS TJ let me know if you want any of the scans of some of the interesting articles and ads I made before my big clear out.
Before being thrown out I had one last nostalgic flick through them to see what had changed over the years.
Well, apparently not much. The magazines contained page after page of injury advice, race reports and every other page was an ad. for running shoes. It was the it occurred to me that back then I didn't stand a chance when up against the sales and marketing departments of the running shoe companies. I started reading some of the ads and relised they were plain nonsense wrapped up in pseudo science.
I have read many arguments against barefoot running, most of them saying that there is no 'scientific' evidence that barefoot running prevents injuries. Where were these same critics I wonder when the running shoe companies were spouting marketing claptrap in the running magazines saying their shoes were scientifically designed to prevent injury, where was the proof. The answer is: there wasn't any proof as all of the ads were from the marketing department.
It actually made me feel quite angry, I believe that we have all been led astray by their need to sell product. What should have happend is that, if while running in a running shoe that was said to prevent injury and you got injured, the shoes should have been sent back to the company for a refund for not living up to their stated purpose, in effect they were defective products. What most of us will have done though is blame ourselves.
As a lesson then, when you read articles on running in magazines or online always ask yourself, what are they trying to sell me. At least with barefoot running I know if I get injuried I know where the blame lies (with myself, I thought I better put that in as I realise how litigious people are in the USA ;-) )
Neil
PS TJ let me know if you want any of the scans of some of the interesting articles and ads I made before my big clear out.
