25 Oct 2011 by Damien Tougas

Making the Transition [Part 6 in The Case for Minimalist Footwear]

So, maybe you are at the point now where you think that you would like to give this minimalist footwear theory a try. Where to next? Well, the good news is that it's easy to get started, you can do it now, and doesn't have to cost you anything. You really have nothing to lose!

The practice that I learned and recommend (although I acknowledge some will disagree on) is landing on the forefoot when walking. When running and jumping, it is universally agreed upon in barefoot circles that landing on the forefoot is the proper form. When walking, some feel that walking on the heel is ok, while others (such as myself) believe that landing on the heel is less desirable. I won't go into the details as to why here, as I feel that the reasons have been sufficiently covered in the previous posts.

The practice of landing on the forefoot will require a little concentration and practice when walking, but will come quite natural when running. Landing on the forefoot does not mean that the forefoot is the only part of the foot to touch the ground, but that it is the first part of the foot to touch the ground. Also note that when I say forefoot, I don't mean toes, I am referring to the pad of the foot just behind the toes. It is usually the outside edge of the forefoot that will touch the ground first. Another important point to make is that when doing this, the knee should be slightly bent, not straight and locked as when landing on the heel. The easiest way that I know to learn what the correct form feels like is to walk barefoot on a rough surface such as gravel. On this type of surface, the body will do the right thing, causing you to land on the forefoot. Once you get comfortable with the motion, try doing the same on other surfaces.

In the beginning it may feel a little strange, kind of like you are walking on your toes. It will require focus and thinking about how you are walking, probably something that you are not used to doing. After a while, with practice, it will seem normal and your body will adapt into an efficient stride that is comfortable, natural, and very smooth.

Start Barefoot

This is really important. By starting barefoot you will be assured of having the proper form. The easiest place to start is in your house, it is a safe and comfortable environment. For the first little while, as your muscles develop, you will probably feel soreness and stiffness in the feet and calves. This is normal and will subside as the muscles rise to the occasion. The important thing is to take it slow, listening to the body, and not over-doing it.

It probably won't take too long to adapt to being barefoot in your house. After the house, I recommend practicing on soft natural surfaces, such as grass or sand. Once you feel comfortable on grass/sand, try experimenting with other surfaces, making sure to take your time. To get the maximum benefit, it would be a good goal to learn to both walk and run on a wide variety of surfaces: concrete, asphalt, rocks, dirt trails, sand, etc. Also helpful is to practice those surfaces while going flat, uphill and downhill. Each combination of terrain requires a slightly different form that can only be perfected through practice. A worthy long-term goal would be to feel completely comfortable on any terrain.

Once you decide to start being barefoot outside, one recommendation that I can make (although it is certainly not required) is to get a pair of Vibram FiveFingers. They are the next closest thing to being barefoot that I am aware of. FiveFingers will give you pretty much all of the same benefits as being barefoot, along with the added benefit of extra protection for the soles of your feet. The downsides are that there is an initial cost involved, and that your soles will not get toughened up as quickly. (Please note that I have absolutely no financial ties to Vibram in any way, I just really like the product.)

Another benefit of starting barefoot is that you will learn what the ideal feels like. If/when you decide to purchase footwear that allows for barefoot movement, you will be better able to discern what makes a good minimalist shoe.

Start Slow

Walking and running barefoot relies on the usage of muscles for support and shock absorption rather than footwear. These muscles (as any muscle in the body) require slow development in order to reach their full potential. Nobody who is new to weight lifting would (in their right mind) immediately try bench press 200 pounds, they would most certainly get injured. The same can be said for going barefoot, substantial training will be required before the muscles are ready to be used to their full potential. Take your time, start easy, progress slowly, and enjoy the process. Think of this as a life-long endeavor, listen to your body, and have fun!

The soles of the feet will gradually adapt for barefoot usage. Over time they will become tougher, thicker, and less sensitive to every little pebble. As with the muscles, this process of adaptation will take time as well. Too much, too fast can lead to problems of pain, swelling, or injury. Again, Vibram FiveFingers can help in this regard (although they are definitely not required) because they give your soles a jump-start on the adaptation process.

Tips

Don't worry about what other people think.
When first starting out, do it in your house, in the grass, in the sand, or any other comfortable surface.
Start doing it for 15 minutes, then gradually increase it as your body allows.
A good goal is to work up to going barefoot all the time when in the home.
Play. If you are in the park on on the beach, try running, jumping, skipping, walking.
If you are learning to run barefoot, alternate running/walking, starting with a few minutes of each. Gradually increase up the running time as you feet get stronger.
Don't worry about dirty feet. It's ok, really, they can easily be cleaned.
Learn to be comfortable walking barefoot on as many different surfaces as you can.
Try to work up to as much barefoot, or close to barefoot (using minimalist footwear) as your lifestyle allows. The more the better.

Related Articles
Comments (49)

In this Series: The Case for Minimalist Footwear

Other Stuff

How Footwear Affects the Way We Move [Part 3 in The Case For Minimalist Footwear] - If you're following along with this series you might remember that in my last post I left at the point ...

A transition? or straight to barefoot? - I've been wondering this lately. I'm deciding to go barefoot (potentially - and hopefully - for the rest of my ...

What Three Years as a Runner has Taught Me - Part 1 - I’ve been runner for a little over 3 years now. It’s a blink of an eye really; less time than ...

Continuing to Learn from the Road and Trail - Last year I published an article which discussed some of what I had learned throughout my admittedly short running "career", ...

My first real minimalist walk: is some degree of pain normal? - Hello everyone, Though this isn't a question pertaining exclusively to footwear, I hope this forum is an appropriate enough place ...

How Going Barefoot Made Me Stronger - Don’t ask me to explain what triggered the decision because I honestly can’t remember. What I can tell you is ...

Jon N

June 19, 2009, 2:40 p.m.

I watched a barefooter in a youtube video (an excerpt from a local interview) say that he can even run on glass. Wouldn't this hurt the part of the foot that doesn't touch the ground (the arch)? What limitations, if any, are there for walking barefoot (besides what you posted before), e.g., running on glass, etc.?

Damien Tougas 953

June 19, 2009, 3:40 p.m.

The big hazards are: punctures, cold, disease, and sometimes chemicals. This isn't to say we all need to worry about these all of the time. Each person may or may-not need protection from one or more of these hazards depending on the location and environment. If you live in a city with lots of debris, then punctures may be your primary concern. If you live in a country with poor sanitation, then disease may be your primary concern.

So, all this is to say that it depends. Running on glass may be completely fine, depending on the condition of the feet and the size of the shards. Your choice to go barefoot or wear footwear should be made according to the type and level of protection you require based on your environment, as well as your level of experience and confidence.

Keith (Twitter Ironked)

June 20, 2009, 9:56 a.m.

Thanks for the articles. I'll look at your video later. I have been trying to transition to less cushioned footware based on other articles I've read. You do a good job of pulling it all together with some expansion. I appreciate the research references. You mention all the conditions with which I am having problems. Back of the knee pain, ITB, twisted ankles and age related 'feeling of instability'. I've tried many types of shoes, hiking boots, and insoles. I still have problems. The last pair of shoes I bought were trail runners. Less, but still, padded, very stiff sole. I feel best in my minimal LL Bean mocs with just a thin, flat gum rubber sole. I've been shying away from water shoes thinking the look doofy. Maybe it's time to give them a try. I'll also look for the Asics models cited. I'll also to try running the common field behind our house barefoot and see how it goes.

Physical therapist

June 22, 2009, 5:02 a.m.

You say that "When running and jumping, it is universally agreed upon in barefoot circles that landing on the forefoot is the proper form. When walking, some feel that walking on the heel is ok, while others (such as myself) believe that landing on the heel is less desirable.".

Unfortunately for you, it is a biomechanical function of the homo sapiens musculosceletal system (ie. the body) to have the heel make first contact when walking normally. This may change with the speed, but for the casual walk and trekking, the normal contact points are defined and are easily available from literature and research. Stepping on forefoot first is a dysfunction and introduces non-optimal walk pattern and possible problems with time with the change in biomechanics.

Damien Tougas 953

June 22, 2009, 9:22 a.m.

Thank you for your comment.

I am not sure that I am prepared to characterize stepping on the forefoot as a dysfunction. If you were to take off your shoes and go for a walk on rough or uneven terrain, you would almost certainly adopt a gait that landed on the forefoot. Landing on the heel is too unstable and tends to be painful in these types of conditions. Our body switches almost instantly, without thinking (instinctively). You can try it yourself by going for a walk on gravel, for example.

I am not sure how you characterize an optimal walk pattern. I would argue that our body has the natural ability to both forefoot strike or heel strike, depending on the conditions of the terrain. Heel striking is probably fine in conditions where the ground is soft, predictable, and able to absorb impact. If you were to try walking barefoot for a mile while heel-striking on concrete or pavement, the absence of shock absorption from the ground would soon make it very uncomfortable. That doesn't seem like it would be optimal, and could potentially lead to injury.

Mark Johnston

June 22, 2009, 6:07 p.m.

I've been running for 30 years as part of staying fit for skiing and mountaineering. I came to question my foot strike after I injured my calf backcountry skiing this past winter. I whacked my right calf into a tree sliding backwards after a fall. After three weeks the injury began to heal and I could walk and even ski w/out pain. But if I tried to run I could only manage a couple hundred yards using my trainers and my normal heel strike gait before the pain was too much. I did find however that if I adopted fore-foot strike I could actually shuffle along for 20-30 minutes. At the time I assumed that since my normal heel strike gait hurt, I shouldn't run at all. So for about two months I stopped trying to run and waited for the injury to heal. After months of not running I started experimenting again only to find the heel strike still killed, but the mid-foot strike was fine. Over the last few months I've adopted this as my "normal" strike, and even though my injury is now healed to the point that I can stand the heel strike, it now seems jarring and harsh. As the weather has warmed, I've started doing more of my runs barefoot on sidewalks and playing fields, and as my strength has increased and my soles have adapted, this now feels pretty normal. I notice that I feel more stable, and I no longer twist or roll my ankles which used to happen from time to time. With the purchase of some vibram fivefingers I've been doing more trail runs in rocky terain that I can't manage completely barefoot. It may just be the novelty of barefeet and the different gait, but I seem to be enjoying running much more. Instead of running as means to an end -- drudgery required for being fit for other activies -- running has become an activity I really look forward to doing.

Damien Tougas 953

June 23, 2009, 7:32 p.m.

Thanks for sharing that story, I hope that it can be an inspiration for others who might be thinking about giving it a try.

Luke

June 26, 2009, 9:07 p.m.

I have commented previously on your blog and feel like this is an appropriate point to bring up my disagreement with your theory. The person who your responding to has a valid point. Before I get into why I want to assure you that I do walk barefoot frequently and wear negative counter heeled shoes and believe in the intrinsic strength of the foot. And as I mentioned previously I am an orthopedic surgery resident and have studied feet and gait analysis quite extensively. The gait cycle for walking is traditionally thought of as having very strict stages. One of which is heel strike. The reason for that is like you have said regarding the structure of the foot. In order for the arch to function you must contact the ground with a dorsiflexed foot so that your anterior tibialis (shin) muscle is activated. It is this muscle that in an eccentric contraction lowers your arch onto the ground and allows it to supinate to absorb shock. This leads to the stance phase of gait. In one part of this series you discussed how wearing shoes causes you to dorsiflex your foot and results in heel strike. I think if you examine the videos closely you will see that when you look at the bony landmarks the feet are in very similar positions just before ground contact and that the only reason the foot is more dorsiflexed in the video with shoes is because the runner is intending to land on her heel. When you intentionaly try to land on your forefoot you will have to plantarflex your ankle more to bring the foot in for touchdown. Now, examining what occurs when you walk on your forefoot is an interesting exercise, because like you said it is what you resort to when you are walking on pebbles or hot ground or something uncomfortable. You also see this position in sports like sprinting, hiking, cycling, etc. What occurs here is in effect skipping the heel strike and stance phase of gait. You Go right through to push off position which is activated by the posterior tibialis muscle. What this muscle does is effectively lock the midfoot to the hindfoot producing a rigid lever for maximal efficiency in energy transfer to the ground. Now, that is great if you are sprinting on a bike or trying to move very quickly. What it is not good for is every day locomotion. It is very inefficient and results in abnormal joint movement upwards in the kinetic chain. Your observation of the knees being more bent in this type of gait is absolutely correct because you are taking all the shock absorption out of the arch and utlizing only the ankle dorsiflexion and knee flexion extension to cushion your walk. So, I challenge the idea that walking on your forefoot is desirable for everyday activities. However, I do agree with you that weak intrinsic foot muscles are responsible for some foot morbidity. Strengthening those is important, and minimalist footwear can aid in that. I should warn people reading your blog and considering attempting this that it is not necessarily a good idea for everyoone to try this. Many people have conditions that do actually require orthotics and structured footwear. If you have any questions regarding this consult an orthopedic surgeon that is fellowship trained in foot and ankle, or a sports medicine physician that has studies gait. I hope this is seen as a helpful contribution and not as an insult to your efforts.

Thank you.

Damien Tougas 953

June 27, 2009, 12:41 a.m.

Thank you very much for your very thorough reply. I do not see this as an insult at all, I do not claim to be an expert, and only am trying to share my experience and observations. I am all for learning new things, especially when it comes to the body and how it is designed to function. I also hope you don't regard my posts as argumentative or insulting to you, I am just trying to fully understand how this works. I absolutely agree that there are going to be real cases where orthotics and special footwear are required. I am not sure if you read the entire series or not, but I had undergone a gait analysis, had prescription orthotics made for my condition. While it did help somewhat, the problem never went away. I was only able to solve my problems by going minimalist. I suspect that there may be others with problems that may benefit more from going minimal than with orthotics, unfortunately it is not always recommended by doctors to try that route. It is my desire to let people know that there may be other solutions that they have not yet heard of. What I think I hear you saying is that landing on the forefoot is normal for some activities, but not recommended for everyday use. My argument is: doesn't it really depend on the surface or terrain? You stated: "... you are taking all the shock absorption out of the arch and utilizing only the ankle dorsiflexion and knee flexion extension to cushion your walk." My observations from studying my own gait are that when heel striking, my arch does not provide much (if any) shock absorption. The reason I say this is because when landing on the heel, 100% of my weight is transferred to the heel before the foot begins to roll through the arch. That means that the vast majority of the shock has been absorbed by my straight leg, which really has very little shock absorption ability at all (except for the pad of my heel). I can feel it. It is a jarring action that goes straight up the leg into my back. This is probably ok when walking on soft ground or sand, but I don't like the way it feels when walking on a hard floor, or concrete, or asphalt. When I feel this shock radiating up the leg, are you suggesting that it is ok and normal? That it won't cause me issues over the long term? When landing forefoot first (it is actually more like the outside edge of my forefoot, almost midfoot), my observations are that the weight transfer from one leg to the other is gradual. By the time my heel touches the ground, most of the shock has been absorbed because the heel is lowered through a controlled descent. It feels very smooth, light, and comfortable to walk this way - there is no jarring action whatsoever. I would love to see this analyzed more somewhere because if it is in fact bad for me, then I would prefer to stop doing it. My experience however has shown me that my body prefers (or works better) when avoiding a heel strike. Over the winter months, when wearing boots with heels and thicker padded soles, I tend to heel strike more. By then end of the winter my knee and back begins to bother me. When summer rolls around and I am able to use minimal footwear again and practice landing on the forefoot, my problems disappear.

John Sifferman

June 27, 2009, 9:44 a.m.

I've had the same experiences when walking forefoot/midfoot vs heel striking. I don't think I'll ever go back!

Ted Fiedler

June 27, 2009, 9:46 a.m.

I have been able to manage between 8 and 20 miles per week running barefoot or in Vibrams. The rest of my miles I am still running is shoes, specifically on trails. I have notices that after running barefoot I tend to want to forefoot strike when I walk ( does that make sense? ) When walking barefoot or in Vibrams this is manageable and comfortable at a slow pace. In shoes or when I pick up the pace I immediately switch to a midfoot strike and it feels natural. Heel striking just does not feel right or comfortable anymore. Up until this past winter I was still solidly a heel striker - since then my pace has slowed considerably, but my running has become more relaxed and enjoyable. If nothing else I have become very aware of my gait and posture, and have virtually no foot or IT band issues that I have had in the past.

Damien Tougas 953

June 27, 2009, 10:33 a.m.

I have also noticed a slower pace when walking with a forefoot/midfoot strike, it's just not possible walk quickly that way. When I need to pick-up the pace, I would rather run slowly than walk quickly.

Justin

July 11, 2009, 3:24 a.m.

yeah, now that i've started walking and running barefoot, my entire posture from head to toe is changing and i'm standing much straighter. i've also noticed that i'm not stepping past my center of gravity (or at least not very far) which is when a heel-strike becomes more likely. this feels radically different than "normal" walking with thickly cushioned heels/soles but now that i'm getting used to it, the advantages are immediately obvious.

and damien has been through orthotics and gait analysis so is aware that the gait cycle is "traditionally thought of as having very strict stages". the whole concept of minimalist footwear is, at root, something of a deliberate departure from traditional thought and therefore, yes a bit risky. but at the same time, the experience of it seems so blatantly beneficial that it's worth it.

P.T.

July 17, 2009, 9:12 a.m.

Luke already gave a pretty thorough answer, but I'd like to add a few pointers (and links) to shine some more light into the issue.

Literally all the medical literature describes the normal human gait pattern beginning with heel touch and ending with toe push.

You can get an idea by performing google scholar or pubmed search for 'human gait' or 'human locomotion'. One place to start could be http://www.epodiatry.com/resource/gait.htm though I cannot vouch for their contents.

Of course the first contact point varies with terrain, speed etc. but, I would be very interested if you can find some (scientific) links that describe either some other gait cycle as normal for humans OR some indigenous people who traditionally walk barefoot and who have a different gait pattern. Take a look, for example, at the Masai Barefoot Technology shoes which design was inspired by the way the Maasai tribe in Africa walk barefoot. You can clearly see the shoes are designed to enhance the heel contact AND the rolling movement of the step, not forefoot contact.

I would also use the term "heel touch" because "heel strike" might, for some, imply driving the heel to the ground with force - which it does not mean. It's simply that the heel is the first point of the body to make ground contact when taking a new step. Others points may follow close behind.

While running and walking are quite different aspects of human locomotion as implied in http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&db=PubMed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=17685722&dopt=AbstractPlus even when running long distance the 'heel touch' pattern is most regular one on elite-level marathoners. It might also be of interest that http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/04/running-technique-footstrike.html describes even many people who think of themselves as "forefoot strikers" actually making heel touch when running barefoot, but it is only noticeable if you look very carefully (or record them running with fast camera and play it back slow).

Like said, changing the gait to forefoot contact activates different muscles and produces different stress patterns in the musculosceletal system (more eversion in the subtalar joint, increased triceps surae and deep plantar flexor activation etc.) - something that should not be advocated carelessly.

Please also be aware that, with the human body's amazing ability to compensate for deficiencies, all the effects of a changed biomechanical function in one part of the body may not be noticeable immediately. It might take years of changed stress and compensation cycle to lead to visible symptoms.

P.T.

July 17, 2009, 9:23 a.m.

"the whole concept of minimalist footwear is, at root, something of a deliberate departure from traditional thought and therefore, yes a bit risky. but at the same time, the experience of it seems so blatantly beneficial that it's worth it."

I would like to offer a few comments on this. Firstly, as everyone familiar with the scientific method knows, anecdotes are not evidence and more than a few years follow up studies are needed to know the real long term benefits / drawbacks.

Secondly, walking barefoot is not a new phenomenon. There are still people out there who have walked without shoes their whole life, so the issue of barefoot walking is not new to science. And it makes you wonder, if some other gait pattern was more beneficial or optimal than the one currently thought of as 'normal' - don't you think humans would have evolved to use it or found about it thousands of years ago when there were no shoes or other method of moving around available?

Like I said in my other posts, the inspiration for the MBT shoes was how the Maasai tribe walks (and how they all seemed very healthy and had no or little joint problems). And they are not forefoot strikers.

I'd like to make it clear that I'm not against barefoot walking or minimalistic footwear. I do that myself whenever the weather allows and have done dozens of miles long treks with no shoes on me. But I am sceptical of trying to change your natural gait pattern consciously to something different, and one that from biomechanical viewpoint is inefficient and is not found among the traditionally barefoot walking people.

Wazzup

July 28, 2009, 2:16 p.m.

Since I bench press over 200 pounds I overdid my first run on minimal shoes a wee bit. Result: my calves hurt like crazy the day after. During the 5K run it was fine, and I did do some forefoot running on my regular shoe the weeks before, but still.. I was in no way prepared and suffer for this in agony now. (ibuprofen helps a wee bit, but not enough)

I should have read this page earlier ....

JeffintheUP

Aug. 4, 2009, 2:04 p.m.

I would like to state the importance of starting slow as he mentions. If you're calves are like rock and your tendons ache, you're going too fast. Focus on relaxing while you walk barefoot.

Damien mentions VFF's a few times in his posts. Skateboarding in VFF's is fantastic. There's no other way to describe it. If you're a surfer, you'll love it.

Jeff.

Damien Tougas 953

Aug. 4, 2009, 4:46 p.m.

Yeah, I did a little longboard skatebaording in VFFs, and as you say, it was fantastic. My only problem was footbraking... my foot started getting hot pretty fast, and didn't take long to noticeably wear the soles. Barefoot Ted did a little experimenting with foot patches to help slow the wear, you can read about it here: http://barefootted.com/2008/06/fivefingers-as-skateboard-shoe.html

Anonymous

Sept. 1, 2009, 2:03 p.m.

The MBT is designed to simulate soft unstable ground in substitute for our hard paved world. In the case of sand, soft dirt, or even soft grass, the body can more naturally adopt a heelstriking walk pattern. This will strengthen your ankles and lower leg muscles as MBT claims, but does not strengthen your whole foot.

Their intention was to make the modern stable world into something unstable. See the text on this page: http://au.mbt.com/Home/Benefits.aspx

Yes, the Masai are not forefoot strikers, but they also don't walk or run on concrete and pavement.

Jay

Jan. 18, 2010, 2:50 p.m.

I was reading a bunch of the comments here and I noticed that people here refer to this study or that study, but nothing can really unhinge your simple observation of humans naturally switching to the forefoot/ ball strike. Nature simply didn't design us to walk on concrete with a big wad of cushioning under our heel.

I think the controversy comes from those that have been jogging for years being unwilling to admit that their method is somehow flawed. They are resistant to the change, for whatever reason. Perhaps they just want to justify buying their expensive running shoes, or they judge their jog not based on core strength, but on how many miles they can traverse? Not that this is bad, but it's a certain state of mind that doesn't play well with the thought of walking/ running less (but correctly).

However, I do believe that the heel-strike is far more efficient. What makes it efficient is that it uses the pendulum motion to help pull our bodies forward, so that it takes less energy to propel our bodies forward (roboticists have studied this extensively). Because it is so efficient it is easier for us to walk long distances in our comfortable shoes.

Walking about barefoot isn't about efficiency, though. Efficiency would defeat the purpose! It's meant to make it HARDER to walk, so that we can build those muscles we have learned to relax in a padded-heel gait.

My theory is that walking/ running shoes were never meant to become so popular. But with all the jogging craze, people realized they'd rather be more comfortable -- it became more about prolonged comfort during the whole day than as a means to build core strength. Of course, times have now changed, and the focus is on health and pain-relief, rather than how many miles you can run. I'm not sure if I'm being altogether clear on my point, but I believe that pop-culture, as well as marketing, has had a large influence on the role of the spring-heeled shoe in society (think Nike and its ads telling you you can JUMP HIGHER with their shoes).

Anyway, I finally managed to grab a pair of Vibrams yesterday and already I can feel myself walking differently, but it is a very familiar motion to me. I played a lot of tennis and hackysack, which promotes the fore-strike, but the motion of fore-strike came from a strange circumstance. I had an apartment on the second floor -- the people on the third floor above me would heel-strike and I could hear them walking across the floor all day. It was very annoying. I don't like to be annoying myself so I always cushioned my step for the courtesy of those living a floor beneath me. After a while this was just my normal "indoor" step. Even in my house I'm living in now, while everyone is stomping around the house heel-striking and making the objects on my shelf vibrate (I can imagine what it's doing to their spine!), I glide silently across the floor. I never wake anyone up by going from one end of the house to the other.

When I heard of the Fivefingers I snapped my fingers and said, "Of course! I'm not crazy!" I instantly had to have them. I don't even have to make much of a transition in my indoor-stride. It's very natural to walk that way, although it does make my legs tired faster. Now that I can wear them anywhere I go, however, I can start to adapt my body to it for prolonged use.

I hope I've added to the discussion. Very cool article, by the way. :)

Damien Tougas 953

Jan. 18, 2010, 10:10 p.m.

Hello Jay, welcome to the discussion!

Thank you so much for the terrific comment, you have definitely added good value to the conversation. I couldn't agree with you more, you have really nailed it on the head. It seems like a no-brainer to those of us who have spent any appreciable amount of time doing activity in bare feet.

My thinking is that perhaps a light heel strike is ok for a short, slow leisurely walk on flat, consistent terrain. As soon as you want to increase the distance (i.e. lots of repetition), pick-up the pace, perform some sort of action, or navigate uneven/uncomfortable terrain, the forefoot strike is the only way to go. I think that you are right, being in shoes for so long on predominantly predictable terrain (i.e. hard and flat) has made us forget how to move... that and a mostly sedentary lifestyle. It has made it too easy for us to fall into a relaxed, efficient, pendulum gait. It has caused us forget how to be fluid, graceful, and nimble (our birthright!). Instead we bang around on our heels, wrecking our ankles, knees, and backs in the process.

Maria

Feb. 22, 2010, 3:30 p.m.

I don't seem to be able to NOT land on my heel when walking... and I don't walk with excessively long strides. How is it that you land on anything but your heel without moving quickly or wandering around on your tiptoes? When I'm actively trying to not involve my heel at all when landing, the best it gets is landing on my whole foot... Maybe someone can explain? I can't see it...

Damien Tougas 953

Feb. 22, 2010, 3:46 p.m.

Hello Maria,

Are you doing this barefoot, or with shoes on? If you are wearing footwear, depending on how high the heel is, and how stiff the sole is, you may have a difficult time performing a forefoot landing. The best thing to do is to practice barefoot.

Secondly, the heel should still be involved in the stride, just not the first part that touches the ground. You definitely don't want to be walking around on your tip-toes. The knee should be slightly bent when your foot is coming down. This is much easier to practice when walking uphill. You can also practice this by walking on uncomfortable terrain (i.e. gravel), your body will have a tendency to walk this way in order to prevent pain from the uncomfortable surface.

Let me know if you still have troubles with this, I would be more than happy to help you out!

t8769

Feb. 24, 2010, 8:47 a.m.

I've been using TeraPlana barefoot shoes, very comfortable, nice looking and I'm almost barefoot.

I have been able to walk after years of being near-crippled. I could not walk on uneven surfaces without twisting my ankle, and even on flat surfaces my ankles were very weak and would twist.

Now I can walk anywhere, I don't care. I threw out all those boots with extra support - happy days!

I'm slowly learning to walk on the front of the foot, but its taking a few months. My heels were very sore, so I've put in some extra padding temporarily - I guess it'll take a few more months for me to be properly adjusted.

Barefoot shoes have changed my life...!

Damien Tougas 953

Feb. 24, 2010, 5:06 p.m.

Great to hear that you have made a good recovery. Yes, adjusting can take a lot of time, taking it slow and letting your body adapt at it's own pace (as it sounds like you are doing) is the best way to go.

Barefoot shoes changed my life too, so I totally know where you are coming from!

Henry Racewalker

March 25, 2010, 10:54 p.m.

I really enjoyed the comments by the experts here.

I race walk in Vibram 5 fingers. Let me make a few comments. First, in order to race walk legally, you must strike with your heel first. One of the rules in race walking states that you must land on a straightened leg, and you must land on your heel in order to land on a straight leg. Landing on a bent knee will get you disqualified. This rule was established in order to distinguish running from walking and to prevent walkers from cheating and getting and advantage. However, it is believed that having a straight leg actually means you walk both more efficiently and faster. (I know the two statements contradict themselves, for if bending the knee means you walk slower, how can bent-knee walkers really gain an advantage? Being new to race walking, I don't have an answer.)

So you have to land heel first when you race walk. In fact, you are not only encouraged to land heel first, but to point your toes up as high as you can when you plant your heel.

I do notice that it felt a bit uncomfortable when I first started landing on my heel when walking. However, I got used to it pretty quickly and I don't even notice it any more.

There is a world class race walking athlete, Govindasamy Saravanan, who races completely barefoot. He won the gold medal in the Commonwealth games. Obviously, he lands with his heel first. If you do a search on youtube, you can find a video of him.

I am still experimenting myself with barefoot race walking. On the one hand, going barefoot (or with VF) is a huge benefit because, unlike walking, you really need your foot to roll, and the more flexible the shoe, the better. Racewalkers love flexible shoes. There is no more flexible shoes than no shoes--or, in my case, the VF. On the other hand, the heel striking can feel a bit hard, though, to be honest, I don't even think about it. When I race walk, I see people staring at me, and I assume it is because of how funny race walking looks. Then I remember I am wearing what most people think are funny shoes. So I don't even think about my footwear any more.

Damien Tougas 953

March 26, 2010, 8:01 a.m.

<pre><code>Racewalking always struck me as a sport that seemt to be designed for hard flat surfaces like pavement or concrete. Those might be the rules for racewalking, but I have a hard time believing that advice for general purpose usage. I don't think that the gait you are talking about works on more natural surfaces which typically are uneven/rough. I would be interested in hearing your thoughts in that regard. </code></pre>

Henry Racewalker

March 26, 2010, 10:36 a.m.

Racewalking always struck me as a sport that seem to be designed for hard flat surfaces like pavement or concrete.

</blockquote> </blockquote>

What you say is partially true. You can't keep race walking form on very steep hills, and for this reason sanctioned races don't have such inclines. However, race walking has been an Olympic sport since 1908, when athletes competed on asphalt (dirt) tracks.

To be sure, race walking exaggerates and takes advantage of our natural gait, striking heel first and rolling with the foot. As the experts pointed out, and research shows, man developed using this natural gait, heel strike followed by foot roll.

"Natural surfaces" is kind of an ambiguous term, since it could mean mountains or beaches, tundra or prairie. On a flat surface most people will land with a straightened leg, providing they don't over stride, over striding seemingly a habit encouraged by padded shoes. Go to a mall and watch people walk; a majority who have good posture straighten their leg just as they land on it. Anyway, in the Western world we do almost all of our walking on hard, flat surfaces.

John Sifferman 61

March 26, 2010, 11:27 a.m.

I'd be interested in seeing the research you mention if you have it available. I've looked for research supporting heel-striking as an optimal/healthy gait and I haven't found any to date. I don't think heel-striking is an optimal movement pattern based on my research and personal experience. You can get away with heel-striking on smooth or soft surfaces, but take it almost anywhere else and you're destined for pain and injury. No, heel striking won't severely damage you in the short term, especially on asphalt or concrete, but a mid-foot strike is more efficient from a physiological perspective. Heel striking is also one of the leading causes of shin splits because of the repetitive flexion of the ankle prior to landing. If you've got that research handy, I'm all ears!

Henry Racewalker

March 26, 2010, 2:21 p.m.

I've looked for research supporting heel-striking as an optimal/healthy gait and I haven't found any to date. I don't think heel-striking is an optimal movement pattern based on my research and personal experience.

</blockquote> </blockquote>

The medical experts above linked to numerous articles showing how that's how humans evolved walking, and that's how native bare-foot people walk. In addition, I pointed out how a world class race walker walks barefoot, landing with his heel. He won the 50K commonwealth on hard surfaces.

http://jeb.biologists.org/cgi/content/abstract/213/5/790

I am aware of no peer-reviewed research that supports your position that heel fore-foot landing (when walking) is more efficient that heel striking, or that heel striking leads to injuries. I do

Henry Racewalker

March 26, 2010, 2:45 p.m.

Here is a summary that better explains the technical abstract I linked to above:

http://www.unews.utah.edu/p/?r=012710-3

"Compared with heel-first walking, it takes 53 percent more energy to walk on the balls of your feet, and 83 percent more energy to walk on your toes.

...

"The study concludes: 'Relative to other mammals, humans are economical walkers but not economical runners. Given the great distances hunter-gatherers travel, it is not surprising that humans retained a foot posture, inherited from our more arboreal [tree-dwelling] great ape ancestors, that facilitates economical walking.'"

John Sifferman 61

March 29, 2010, 1:32 p.m.

I can see how walking with a heel strike is more efficient from an oxygen consumption standpoint. Walking with a heel strike first is more of a controlled roll (more skeletal balancing, less muscular holding), whereas walking with a forefoot/midfoot strike involves a little more stability and muscular control as the JEB study indicates. More muscular activation means more oxygen consumption and that's why this study concluded a 53% difference in oxygen consumption. But that's only one variable that contributes to walking efficiency and I think there are too many unknowns to draw conclusions from this particular study. Maybe there are others that can confirm the validity of the conclusion.

For instance, were these volunteers normally heel strikers or midfooters? It doesn't say. We do know that muscular conditioning is directly linked to oxygen consumption. If you are better conditioned in any particular activity, like walking or tennis, you will consume less oxygen to perform that activity. So, a well-conditioned midfoot striker will consume less oxygen than an untrained heel striker when walking with a midfoot strike, and vice versa. Walking efficiency cannot be accurately measured solely by oxygen consumption, and especially without indicating more information about the study participants such as skill level, conditioning level, body composition info, etc.

As is usually the case, the research doesn't tell us enough. It gives us a tiny slice of information, but not the big picture. The infamous line, "we need more research in this area" strikes again!

But I'm more concerned with... Is it practical? Is it healthy long-term? And the ultimate question is, is one foot strike better than the other - even if only in certain situations? From the research I've seen, I don't think we can know this for sure, and we'll have to rely on personal and anecdotal evidence while we wait for the research to confirm. It's also important to realize that this argument is a minor detail in the grand scheme of things, too.

Henry Racewalker

March 29, 2010, 2:23 p.m.

For instance, were these volunteers normally heel strikers or midfooters?

</blockquote> </blockquote>

As has been pointed out above, humans naturally land on their heels. No native people have been observed to walk otherwise. Likewise, scientists know we evolved walking as heel strikers--as you would have known if you actually read the article I linked to, or any of the links above cited by the medical experts. It is senseless to ask whether there is some long term risk in walking the way we evolved and the way all humans walk.

From the research I've seen, I don't think we can know this for sure, and we'll have to rely on personal and anecdotal evidence while we wait for the research to confirm. It's also important to realize that this argument is a minor detail in the grand scheme of things, too.

</blockquote> </blockquote>

You are wasting my time. You keep talking about the research you have seen, but as I already stated, I am not aware of any peer-reviewed research that backs up your claim. Having no science to back up your assertions, you now want to resort to anti-scientific thinking, relying on "personal and anecdotal evidence." No thanks. I want to live in the modern world, not the medieval one.

John Sifferman 61

March 29, 2010, 2:59 p.m.

I'm not trying to waste anyone's time, especially mine - just questioning the status quo. I did click through the above links (I landed on several "page not found"), and I did read the study you mentioned. I'm still unconvinced that heel striking is the best gait for all situations. If you don't want to discuss it any further, that's fine.

Roy Hopkins

April 14, 2010, 9:46 p.m.

I am a 61yr old runner, started running at 35yrs of age.When I first started to run I was a heel striker,than all of the problems started heel,foot,knee,back and more. I went to all the medical experts, wore the high priced orthotics,with little relief. At 58yrs old I tried a product called Bare Foot Science they did help I did away with my orthotics but still had problems.Than the book Born To Run I read it and it made sense.I started fore foot running than tried running in Vibram-five fingers mixing my runs through the week. To date my transition has gone well,I run with Nike Free,no back pain,the only pain is the normal transition to fore foot running go slow and easy, build slowly. If you try something and it works stick with it until something better comes along. The fore foot running so far has worked for my wife and I. An athlete is the expert he knows how his body feels and works don't be scared to try something different, but go at it slowly. Good luck to anyone in transition this is an great web site. Roy

Damien Tougas 953

April 15, 2010, 9:31 p.m.

<pre><code>Hello Roy, welcome to the blog, I am glad you enjoy it! Thanks for sharing your story and encouraging others to try it out. I suspect that it resonates with a lot of people who have made similar discoveries in an attempt to live active, pain-free lives. It is my hope that this message get out there so that people can learn more about how their bodies were designed and regain the mobility that they may have lost. </code></pre>

joravo

June 28, 2010, 12:06 p.m.

In my opinion, this "fox walking" walking concept has come from a sereis of people adopting barefoot walking who have had some kind of leg, osteoarthiritis and/or back problem. While switching to ball/fore foot striking, initially it may feel that you are not jarring up your body your back or knees and your condition is improving but as commented earlier in this blog, you are engaging your body's wrong muscles in doing so. The overall impact of this totally unnatural gait may not be evident at the moment but in long run, may be after years you are inviting some deformities in the musculoskeletal system. Go barefoot, I also encourage it, as I understand that the problem lies in man made protection system(footwear), and going barefoot in a proper manner shall definitely be good, but do not do the ridiculous things.

Do not be afraid, your heels are made to take the jerk/impact, infact human brain knows how to minimise/rationalise the impact and some of this jerk is even necessary for our musculoskelatal system to grow and function naturally as it is made for it.

Simply by being barefoot and following natural gait many of the ploblems shall solve slowly.

WE are humans, we have a unique foot design our biomechanics and gait clearly calls for heel to toe walking.

scott

Aug. 10, 2010, 6:14 p.m.

I started using vibram kso treks in January 2010. For me the biggest adjustment to the midfoot stride was in my calves. It was all about the calves. When I first started, if I vibramed or barefooted too far, like for more than 7 or 8 minutes, my calves ached for days. But I'm not young - 57 years old in fact.

So, I went slow. I eased into minimal running in like 5 minute increments. Before long, I was up to 15 solid minutes on the treadmill in the kso's or just in socks or just barefoot. In 2 months or so, I could go 1/2 hour, no discomfort.

I found the kso treks fine down to 28 F and ok In wet/slush conditions. Really feels like you are barefoot. Fun too. When I run through fields with high weeds, the weeds do get stuck in between my toes. I am quite happy with them.

Then I got into chi running in March of this year. I taught my self using the book, videos, and watching myself on video.

I found the combination of chi running and 5 fingers to be the best way for me to run. No injury, I go further faster, with less effort.

Try it. Chi running just seems to go hand-in-glove with barefoot-midfoot striding, works for me.

I never really thought much about how I walk in the vibrams, I pretty much just run in them.

Cheers

Damien Tougas 953

Aug. 11, 2010, 7:33 a.m.

<pre><code>I haven't tried Chi running as of yet. I also hear that the Pose method of running is very good as well. One of these days when I find some time, I will look into one of those in a little more depth. The truth of the matter is that while I do run for fitness, I don't consider myself a "runner". I am much more interested in minimal footwear use for everything (especially the outdoors, hiking, and backpacking), rather than just running. </code></pre>

Jason

Aug. 15, 2010, 4:04 a.m.

Sir, your book learned opinions on how one should walk with a heel-strike for everyday activities is not so much an insult as it is an opinion based on studies from a population that wears shoes with well padded heels. In fact, if you were to ditch your shoes for any amount of time, you would find heel striking even while walking to be most undesirable and awkward. I'm sure that as a foot doctor in training, you can imagine what it is like to go without shoes, but in reality, I would guess that you actually have no basis for making opinions on how one should walk naturally without shoes. If I were to factor modern shoes into the equation, then what you say makes perfect sense, but minus the shoes, and your opinion becomes quite irrelevant, degree or no.

I converted to barefoot walking/running several years ago because I am somewhat of a contrarian. That is, I believe that most people have it wrong most of the time, and I spend a great deal of time testing that out. So, I decided to see if we had it wrong about shoes, and essentially relearned how to walk naturally. I struggled for awhile with the deeply ingrained sense of having to heel-strike first, because that was all I had known most of my life, but 20 minutes on a hard surface quickly taught me that only a sadistic person would walk this way. There is simply no shock absorption without a shoe heel, and it proves to be very painful and damaging to the heel and knees. I learned to walk essentially as the author of the article describes, landing first on the mid to outer forefoot, then briefly and lightly bringing down the heel before springing back and lifting off more of the inner toes. Is this more "inefficient" as the good doctor warns us of? I suppose for a "soft-foot" it is quite a bit more difficult. It in fact took me months to build up my foot muscles and tendons to the point where I could walk naturally for long periods of time without my feet tiring out. However, now my feet and ankle muscles have toughened up to the point where I no longer notice foot weariness, even after walking all day hikes. In fact, I have on occasion found myself out-walking my poor shoed friends. It does require more muscles to walk properly, so in this sense it may be more inefficient, but also, I imagine that standing upright with correct posture is more inefficient that slouching, yet we don't say that we should therefore slouch. Walking barefoot with heel-strikes is the equivalent of slouching. It may be easier, but in the long run, it is going to ruin your heels, knees, back and feet, unless perhaps your world happens to be covered with thick soft padding everywhere you walk.

After years of ditching shoes (except wearing Vibrams where shoes are required), I can say with empirical certainty that the good doctor, and others like him are simply wrong, and trying to enforce a shoe-wearing walking perspective on a non-shoe wearing population. His good intentions and trusty book learning is simply misguided, and worse, dangerous advice for anyone seeking to go barefoot. I would not trust a shoe-wearing person to give me advice about how to walk properly without shoes. The idea is absurd and makes me laugh.

After years of barefoot walking, I now find that my heel area actually hurts when I wear "normal" shoes and am forced to revert to heel-striking for any long duration. My heels have gone soft? After awhile, it gets too painful, and I am forced to try and do forefoot walking with padded heels. It is incredibly awkward, and looks more like tiptoe walking. Most silly, and it just proves to me that modern shoes are NOT friendly to healthy and natural walking. They do force one to heel strike, since they stick out from the foot so far that they catch the ground first, and one has to exaggerate the foot curve in order to avoid heel striking. It just isn't possible for long periods, and certainly is inefficient. More than once since switching to barefoot, I have had to remove my nice modern shoes and carry them with me just so that I can walk naturally and without pain. And yes, the foot pain goes away as soon as I stop heel-striking. Due to this happening many times, I have now switched pretty much exclusively to the Vibrams, and I never have foot, leg or back pains when using them. My olympic runner friend compliments me on what a graceful and natural gait I have while we run or walk. His feet went bad after years hard running, and he has also converted to barefoot running, finding it less painful (though he may never fully heal). Nothing the good doctor says will convince me that I or the author has it wrong. What he lacks is common sense and empirical evidence. I'd like to see him go a week without shoes, taking a good 2-3 mile walk every day and maintain his naive opinion. Even then, should he maintain his advice, I'd wonder if he isn't a sadist.

Jason

Aug. 15, 2010, 5:25 a.m.

Sir, I have no leg/back problems, and find that barefoot walking or running on hard city surfaces requires some kind of cushioning. Since the heels have none, it is dependent on soft tissues of the foot and legs to provide it. Forefoot walking is not nonsense, it is the only practical way to walk barefoot on hard surfaces. As far as using the "wrong muscles", and causing deformities in the long run, forgive me, but I think you're just full of shit. I never thought I'd say this, but after years of going barefoot, as my feet have become stronger, they have become beautiful. Yes, I have beautiful feet, and I'm actually quite proud of them. My calves and thighs are quite nice too, since this way of walking promotes the healthy use of so many muscles in your legs. You remind me of some hunch backed ninny telling a child, now sonny, don't you go walking with good posture, you might use the wrong muscles and become deformed!

You say, "Do not be afraid, your heels are made to take the jerk/impact, infact human brain knows how to minimise/rationalise the impact and some of this jerk is even necessary for our musculoskelatal system to grow and function naturally as it is made for it." This sir is nonsense! Heels are not made to take impact anymore than your elbows are! And how exactly does the human brain minimize/rationalize the impact? What is that even supposed to mean? It rationalizes the impact, saying something like gee all this clonking around, destroying my knees really makes me appreciate the soft things in life, so it must be good! If memory serves correct, some 8 out of 10 heel to toe runners experience an injury every year, and many injuries are severe enough to end running careers. You simply don't find anywhere near as high a rate of injuries amongst barefoot runners, and yet in your ignorance, you suggest that the impact of heelstriking is good for the legs? I wonder where all your nonsense has come from?

Ian

May 16, 2011, 6:03 a.m.

Hi Damien,

I don't know if you are still active with this line of enquiry but I'm curious to know how forefoot walking is progressing for you. Only recently I tried it for myself in Vibram five fingers - I hadn't heard of anyone doing it but my girlfriend said that she often walked forefoot first (she is a professional mountain guide in the French Alps). I was shocked to find that after a few minutes if felt very much better than heel striking and completely stopped any stones from hurting my feet. It did not feel any less efficient either on tarmac. My entire posture changed - becoming more upright and I could feel my core muscles being activated - to that point that going back to a heel strike I could instantly feel all the muscles stop working and the load go straight through my spine. I now don't want to walk any other way but after a lifetime of heel striking It just seems unbelievable that this can be correct.

Paul Halliday

May 23, 2011, 4:45 p.m.

I have recently taken up walking regularly (2-3 miles a day, more at the weekend) in order to lose the weight I accumulated in my 30s, a "decade of slob". I have not run really since school but have been barefoot almost all the time around the house, the garden and the type of shoes I wear tend to be low/flat heeled and thin soled.

Inside a month, I have been able to take to what I call "protected barefoot" walking, either in huaraches or VFFs. I would say, I've been pushed towards minimal footwear because boots just hurt too much and I feel very tired afterwards. Moving over to boots (Inov-8 288s) for off-trail, muddy exploring at weekends I have to support my legs with calf compression and hot bath afterwards to rest my legs.

My technique is heel first ... but read on.

I have a shorter stride, a very upright posture (perhaps even slightly reclined) and listen to my legs - if they ache, I adjust how my hips and my head balance over the feet. I walk at a good pace, although not what I would call speed walking. I walk a lot over trails, off-road and up & down hills where my regular routes can take me some 400' of elevation inside a half mile!

Thinking through my technique, my heel does touch the floor first ... but only momentarily until my body rolls over the top, rolling my feet around and onto the front. I had trained myself not to spring off with the toes, but rely on my next foot to be placed by the time I lift that foot - this seems to work better for huaraches. Since doing more and more in the VFFs, I am finding I can push off more with my toes and extend my just a little ... maybe 6" more, or so but my heel is first to make contact still.

The key point is ... my heel meets the floor first, but I would not call it "striking"; more like "placing". The heel is only in contact momentarily. I sense that my knees are relaxed and ready to accept the placement, not rigid as they might if I forced my foot onto the heel. Finally, my lower back is completely without aches, something I suffered from a lot prior to walking - it does not get jarred as my feet meet the floor.

My walk is quiet and fluid, feels natural and does not give me any grief.

I may adjust my technique in time and with more experience, but for someone relatively new to barefoot and protected barefoot walking this is what feels right for me.

Damien Tougas 953

May 25, 2011, 9:18 p.m.

<pre><code>Hello Ian, The discussion is still open, I am always interested in hearing a new perspective. I still walk with a forefoot strike, I find it vastly more comfortable than a heel strike. The problem I find is that it doesn't take much heel or cushioning in a shoe to cause me to want to heel strike. If I go barefoot or with very minimalist shoes, then forefoot is easy and feels very normal/natural. I also agree with you on the posture, it really does make a difference! Thanks for sharing your experiences, I appreciate hearing other peoples stories. </code></pre>

Katie

Oct. 10, 2011, 12:15 p.m.

I agree with what most of what you say. But I think I disagree on the heel-strike part when walking. I've walked barefoot for a good chunk of my life (Im 25 and grew up in the south and that's just what you do a lot here lol). I've always gone barefoot as much as I can, basically just because I've always loved the way it feels. When I walk barefoot, I generally just naturally walk heel to toe, and when running do the opposite (again naturally, not much thought goes into it). I've never had any problems with that, no pain at all. And yes I walk for long periods of time on asphalt and concrete outside. Although, I have noticed, just like you said in earlier comments, that I tend to switch depending on the different situations (gravel for example). Now, I take fairly short strides when walking barefoot but I imagine when taking longer strides I probably would switch to toe to heel strike. I've heard that as you age you lose padding in your feet. No idea if that's true but maybe something like that has happened to your feet? It might explain the pain in the heel. Anywho, just my two-cents. Definitely not a doc. just using my common sense.

Ten Toes

Sept. 16, 2012, 8:53 a.m.

'the normal contact points are defined and are easily available from literature and research'

This is true, however, it is worth noting that most all of that literature involves subjects that have grown up wearing shoes. We are a shoe wearing culture. Normal contact points, as normal gate, does not necessarily mean natural. Western medicine has it wrong on this subject, with few exceptions.

chris e.

Sept. 28, 2012, 2:11 p.m.

I'm 56. In my early teens I used to run 8 miles a day in moccasins to and from school with no problems. I walked everywhere in my 20's and 30's in athletic store runners, but as i approached 40 I started getting back/knee/multiple foot problems. So of course I bought 'better' shoes. Over the last decade my ability decreased to the point where even 15 minutes of walking was challenging. I wore 'supportive' shoes even in the house but was in constant pain. About a year ago, while I was sitting (barefoot) in the living room, a pot boiled over on the stove. I raced into the kitchen to pull it off the burner, and to my amazement realized I had just run through the house pain free! I've been barefoot (or socked) inside ever since, although kept wearing expensive walking shoes outside, but if anything they left me even more crippled than before. The final straw for regular shoes came a couple of weeks ago. After a day long trip to the city--we live in a rural area--I arrived home with my feet and back in severe pain. The pain disappeared as soon as I took my shoes off. I was back in the car the next day, off to buy a pair of Minimus shoes, second generation ones with zero drop, not the 4mm ones. I can now walk outside, although only for about 15 minutes at a time. Left to their own device, my feet naturally do a mid foot strike. And since ditching my shoes (at least inside) I remember yes, this is how I used to walk and run in my moccasins. My knees did some rather noisy adjustments at first; now the only problem I have is pain across the top of my right foot, but if I adjust my gait it disappears. Is that your recommended method? That if pain can be alleviated by an adjustment in gait, then adjust the stride to reflect that until it becomes the natural pattern? I'm really hoping to get up to several miles a day again. This is a fabulous site! Thanks so much for all the work you have put into it.

Kris

May 26, 2013, 11 a.m.

I've read all 6 parts of this blog and all the comments. All I can say is can't we all just get along? :)

I think what is important is how the individual feels about what's going on in their body. If it hurts, stop doing it! Let people who want to try barefoot, forefoot running/walking give it a try. Let those who want to continue to heel strike carry on. I can't imagine that the same technique works for every foot.

I got to this blog by Googling "plantar fasciitis, shoes with toes" and read your other article: http://www.toesalad.com/articles/plantar-fasciitis. I was diagnosed with PF about 12 years ago after discovering that it felt better to walk around with heels on than with comfy tennis shoes (in the most generic sense). I went to the podiatrist and had steroid injections and casts made of my feet to make orthotics that were both expensive & didn't work (my thought is because they didn't change the form of my foot, they just reinforced it). I kept trying to feel comfortable in them, but they didn't help.

In the Seattle area, there was a orthotic retail store that took scans of my feet and talked me into these hard plastic orthotics that at first hurt like heck, but then as I gradually started wearing them more & more, it was like a dream come true. They reshaped my foot so that I could walk without pain when I wore them and even got to the point that walking barefoot every other day didn't hurt. I could wear high heels a couple times a week with no ill effects.

Then, a few weeks ago, I did something that I thought had twisted my ankle, but the pain wasn't in my ankle. It was in my foot. All the pain that I felt 12 years ago is back and I am trying to resort back to all the things I did before to get to feeling better: stretching, icing & taping my foot. My orthotics don't seem to help anymore and I got a new night splint a few days ago and it seems to be helping a little bit. I have been told to give the treadmill and elliptical a rest until I can walk pain free for 7-10 days. But what's hard for me is that I can't give up going to the gym. If I miss even a few scheduled days, I am afraid that I won't go back (says the former fulltime & still sometimes couch potato).

All the advice I get is not to walk barefoot, EVER! I am at the end of my rope. I see more people at the gym wearing the "funny shoes with toes," so I think I will give them a try. I am going to listen to my body and when it hurts, I will put my regular shoes back on, but until then, here I go. I mean after all, like you said, what more can it hurt? (I'm not sure that I agree with you about the ibuprofen though. We will have to see if I can take it!)

Damien Tougas 953

May 28, 2013, 9:24 p.m.

I am not a doctor, but there are doctors (and podiatrists) out there who are barefoot friendly. They could probably give you recommendations for a recovery process that does not require orthotics, and that probably involves foot strengthening exercises, etc.