Barefoot Running May Lessen Knee Pain

[Barefoot TJ]

Barefoot Running May Lessen Knee Pain
Runner's World Newswire
A new study adds to growing evidence that various combinations of footwear and foot strike might be a way to address chronic pain in a specific body part. In this case, research found that running barefoot can lessen impact forces at the knee. The ...

http://www.runnersworld.com/injury-prevention-recovery/barefoot-running-may-lessen-knee-pain

 

[Ahcuah]

Barefoot Running May Lessen Knee Pain
Runner's World Newswire
A new study adds to growing evidence that various combinations of footwear and foot strike might be a way to address chronic pain in a specific body part. In this case, research found that running barefoot can lessen impact forces at the knee. The ...

http://www.runnersworld.com/injury-prevention-recovery/barefoot-running-may-lessen-knee-pain

From the article:

As sport podiatrist Craig Payne has often pointed out, there's an important caveat to keep in mind when considering findings like the above. "It is not possible to reduce the load in one tissue without increasing it somewhere else," writes Payne. That is, reducing forces at the knee by running barefoot means another body part incurs increased load when running barefoot.

This statement is utter crap. (Unless he is using some definition of "load" that makes no sense.)

Jump down off a 2-foot box. The first time, keep your legs completely straight and your knees locked so your entire body is jolted from top to bottom. The second time, as you land, use your ankles, knees, and whole body to absorb the shock.

And he's saying you cannot reduce the load? Utter crap. (Where's the smiley that's dropping a turd? We really need one.)

 

[Barefoot TJ]

Yes, I've thought about asking for a turd smiley.

 

[NickW]

Ahcuah, I hate to argue for that podiatrist, but he is technically correct. Your bodies inertia does not get any less by changing your footstrike (remember Newtons law, an object in motion stays in motion until some force changes that motion), so that force has to get slowed down and absorbed somewhere if not in the knees. This is where that energy not absorbed by the knees is now absorbed by the muscles of the legs, foot, ankle, etc. I would think the poor podiatrist you referenced though would understand that muscles can absorb this force much better than bones can after training them to absorb these forces. This is why we always tell new people to be careful of doing tmts. You have to train these muscles to take that force. If you don't train them to, they will develop an injury most likely, but you know this already.

 

[Ahcuah]

Ahcuah, I hate to argue for that podiatrist, but he is technically correct. Your bodies inertia does not get any less by changing your footstrike (remember Newtons law, an object in motion stays in motion until some force changes that motion), so that force has to get slowed down and absorbed somewhere if not in the knees. This is where that energy not absorbed by the knees is now absorbed by the muscles of the legs, foot, ankle, etc. I would think the poor podiatrist you referenced though would understand that muscles can absorb this force much better than bones can after training them to absorb these forces. This is why we always tell new people to be careful of doing tmts. You have to train these muscles to take that force. If you don't train them to, they will develop an injury most likely, but you know this already.

Nick, I'm a physicist. I know these things. Yes, the impulse (total momentum transferred, i.e., force integrated over time) will be the same. The total energy transferred over time would be the same. But impulse is not load.

Furthermore, he is stating it as if the forces will stay the same (or moved elsewhere), and that is simply not the case.

Go back to my example. Jumping off the box knees-locked has much higher forces in all the joints than easing down, even though the total impulse (momentum transfer) is the same.

And more importantly, when running barefoot you can easily run in such a way as to decrease the load on all the joints without increasing it on others.

​

​

 

[NickW]

Ahcuah, I think we are saying the same things man, just wording differences.

 

[Ahcuah]

Ahcuah, I think we are saying the same things man, just wording differences.

Very simply, that podiatrist is not technically correct. He is wrong and doesn't understand the physics involved. So in that regard we are not saying the same thing.

 

[NickW]

Very simply, that podiatrist is not technically correct. He is wrong and doesn't understand the physics involved. So in that regard we are not saying the same thing.

He's saying the forces that would be applied to the knee are going somewhere else when we run barefoot. You might be getting a little upset about his wording, but quite honestly he isn't saying anything we as barefooters don't already know. I don't see why you're getting so up in arms about it. I know you are exceptionally avid about barefoot lifestyle and what not, but this guy really didn't say much wrong (other than terminology), at least from what you had quoted. You are just looking for something to fight about. Changing your gait and learning a new one does in fact change where the body is stressed. Big deal, we all know this, get over it Ahcuah. Nothing to get this up in arms about just because he used the wrong terminology to say the same thing we all in this community know.

 

[Ahcuah]

He's saying the forces that would be applied to the knee are going somewhere else when we run barefoot.

And that is simply wrong. What's so hard to understand about that?

It has nothing to do with my being avid about the barefoot lifestyle--it has to do with a supposed expert spouting nonsense.

No, by running barefoot (or more correctly, by running with a form that going barefoot more easily produces), the forces don't necessarily go elsewhere; they can actually be diminished, over all parts of the body. It's not looking for something to fight over; it's about whether the guy actually knows what he is talking about. And the answer to that is: No.

He is cautioning people that this study doesn't mean anything because the sum of all the forces are moved elsewhere, and that because of that, when you run barefoot the fact that you are saving your knees means that you are probably hurting a different part of your body (a "conservation of force"). That is lousy physics. It is momentum that is conserved, not force, and that means that you really can lessen the forces on your knees without necessarily increasing the force on other parts of your body.

Maybe applying rigor to these things make me an asshole. Well, I'd rather be an asshole than accept utter crap.

​

 

[Sid]

Oh no! This is what the shoddies want. They're sowing the seeds of discontent to promote infighting. They're trying to divide and conquer. Before you know it, they'll have us all wearing shoes!

 

[Barefoot TJ]

I read it the same way you did, Ahcuah.

 

[Longboard]

We're all barefoot family here, there's room for discussion without people getting pi$$ed off at each other etc.
Nick, I understand what you are meaning to say, but it's not Ahcuah's hard-core barefoot attitude that was causing his disagreement with you. He not only is a self-trained legal expert and barefoot athlete/liver/rights advocate/blogger/enthusiast, but also he is a retired physicist who has earned a PhD in the discipline. He knows and understands and researches of what he speaks and was just trying to point out that the podiatrist was spouting nonsense.
Much more to do with Ahcuah's knowledge of physics and bio-mechanics than his penchant for all things barefoot I believe.

 

[Longboard]

Maybe applying rigor to these things make me an asshole. Well, I'd rather be an asshole than accept utter crap.

I've been labeled a "troublemaker" for fighting barefoot access battles. I may have caused trouble, but that was never my motivation. A troublemaker as well as an asshole have antisocial agendas, we do not.

 

[NickW]

We're all barefoot family here, there's room for discussion without people getting pi$$ed off at each other etc.
Nick, I understand what you are meaning to say, but it's not Ahcuah's hard-core barefoot attitude that was causing his disagreement with you. He not only is a self-trained legal expert and barefoot athlete/liver/rights advocate/blogger/enthusiast, but also he is also a retired physicist who has earned a PhD in the discipline. He knows and understands and researches of what he speaks and was just trying to point out that the podiatrist was spouting nonsense.
Much more to do with Ahcuah's knowledge of physics and bio mechanics than his penchant for all things barefoot I believe.

LB, I cannot see anything wrong with what that podiatrist said other than his wording, which I think we all agree is not very good. I am a huge supporter of Ahcuah and what he fights for and blogs about. I just don't see anything wrong with stating something that is essentially true although with bad wording, at least just from what Ahcuah had quoted. Maybe if I had the time earlier to read the article and not just Ahcuahs quote I would feel differently. We all know barefoot lifestyle and running can help the joints and lessen pain, but it does tax the muscles more until they adapt. I read this quote in this way. The written word is often mistaken because tone is not conveyed very well and often the readers own biases are applied to add tone. This happens all the time with my wife for example. I wrote something for her and she reads it and gets huffy because she thinks I meant something I didn't. She applied tone that wasn't there. I kind of feel like that is how this podiatrist is being taken, although I admit maybe if I had read more than just Ahcuahs quote my point of view would change.