So what I'm trying to get at
So what I'm trying to get at is that the transisition and the months upon months of low level mileage and base building could actually be a significant factor in the lower level of injuries. What I can't see a way to argue myself out of is that if every shod runner started running by using Jason's plan to get into just normal running would we see more of the running injuries go away. I think many many shod runners "run through the pain" which is what causes the injuries, but bf runners really can't do that. As SillyC said, we are powered by strength not evo foam. So the question is, is it actually bf running that lessons the injury or the fact that bf running forces a near stop in mileage and then a slow build that lowers the injury rate.
So for example to try and explain what I mean, I think the experiment to show this would be to take 100+ shod runners with a myriad of chronic injuries. Make half of them keep wearing shoes but follow Jason's plan on how to build up barefoot mileage (just do it in shoes) and then have the other half runnners go barefoot and follow the same plan. At the end or a year or two I'd be curious to see if many of the shod runners were also able to surpass their own mileage and speed injury free because they built up so slowly and built all the proper muscles and therefore didn't stress all the ligaments/tendons/bones/joints ect.... as much.
The thing that got me thinking about this was my lurking in other forums and how many people say after coming back from an injury they actually get faster and can go longer. It probably wasn't that the injury made them stronger, but that the period of rest followed by a slower buildup (for fear of reinjuring themselves) was what helped them. I think the same argument can be made for barefoot running. Again I'm not saying I do or don't believe this, just that I can't internally argue my way out of it.
So what I'm trying to get at is that the transisition and the months upon months of low level mileage and base building could actually be a significant factor in the lower level of injuries. What I can't see a way to argue myself out of is that if every shod runner started running by using Jason's plan to get into just normal running would we see more of the running injuries go away. I think many many shod runners "run through the pain" which is what causes the injuries, but bf runners really can't do that. As SillyC said, we are powered by strength not evo foam. So the question is, is it actually bf running that lessons the injury or the fact that bf running forces a near stop in mileage and then a slow build that lowers the injury rate.
So for example to try and explain what I mean, I think the experiment to show this would be to take 100+ shod runners with a myriad of chronic injuries. Make half of them keep wearing shoes but follow Jason's plan on how to build up barefoot mileage (just do it in shoes) and then have the other half runnners go barefoot and follow the same plan. At the end or a year or two I'd be curious to see if many of the shod runners were also able to surpass their own mileage and speed injury free because they built up so slowly and built all the proper muscles and therefore didn't stress all the ligaments/tendons/bones/joints ect.... as much.
The thing that got me thinking about this was my lurking in other forums and how many people say after coming back from an injury they actually get faster and can go longer. It probably wasn't that the injury made them stronger, but that the period of rest followed by a slower buildup (for fear of reinjuring themselves) was what helped them. I think the same argument can be made for barefoot running. Again I'm not saying I do or don't believe this, just that I can't internally argue my way out of it.
