Foruminlägg av Tobias Rydergren

Idag har Testfakta publicerat sitt årliga test av löparskor. 15 löpare har testat åtta modeller. Skornas stötdämpning och stabilitet har sedan mätts i laboratorie.

Läs testet här: http://www.testfakta.se/sport_fritid/article61222.ece

MVH/Tobias Rydergren chefredaktör Testfakta

Att urvalet består av skor med pronationsstöd beror helt enkelt på att det är de skor som flest löpare använder. Men vi har testat skor för neutralt löpsteg tidigare. Att blanda de två typerna i samma test är däremot inte speciellt fruktbart.

Betyget är till 40 procent satt på komforten, stötdämpning 25 procent och stabilitet 35 procent.

Ni som säger att testet är värdelöst får gärna utveckla hur ett test skulle kunna genomföras bättre. Vi utvecklar ständigt våra testmetoder och tar gärna emot idéer.

Här kommer professor Ewald Hennigs introduktion till testet. Där finns ett antal referenser till vetenskapliga studier för den som vill fördjupa sig i sambandet mellan stötdämpning, pronation och löpskador.

Introduction:
It has been shown in many studies that shoe construction has an influence on loads and stress to the human body, eventually leading to medical overuse complaints (Nigg et al., 1977; Subotnick, 1979; Cavanagh & Lafortune, 1980; Segesser & Nigg, 1980; Smart et al., 1980; Clarke et al., 1984; Nigg et al., 1984). Much effort has been spent to investigate the influence of shoe construction on the human locomotor system during running. Biomechanical research results from numerous running shoe studies are summarized in two books by Nigg (1986) and Cavanagh (1990). The results from many different studies suggest a high probability that restriction of excessive rearfoot motion and improved shock absorption will reduce the risk of running injuries (Buchbinder et al., 1979; Clement et al., 1981; James & Jones, 1990; Light et al., 1980; Lorenzton, 1988; Radin et al., 1972; Radin et al.,1982). Although manufacturers of athletic footwear try to implement biomechanical guidelines for the design of their shoes large functional differences can be found between running shoes.

Fortsätt att ställa frågor om ni undrar om någon av referenserna,

Här kommer en kommentar från Ewald Hennig om hans syn på barfotaskor:

Daniel Lieberman from Harvard University conducted a study on barefoot running and found that runners tend to run less across the heel, when running barefoot. From this result he concluded that running in shoes is bad for you and increases injuries.
This research triggered the barefoot running boom across the globe. Because of a dubious research design Liebermans research results and especially his conclusions have received great criticism in the scientific world.

Of course, to protect your body from too much shock, runners will try to avoid running across the heel.
Therefore, they will change running style and load their muscles and bones differently during each contact with the ground.

And this may be the reason for the enormous increase in injuries, seen in runners, wearing no or minimalistic shoes.

These are only a few internet links that discuss the problem. http://running.competitor.com/2010/05/features/the-barefoot-running-injury-epidemic_10118 http://www.therunningfront.com/running-form/beware-of-barefoot-running-injuries/ http://www.sportsscientists.com/2010/05/barefoot-running-and-injuries.html http://www.runningnut.com/avoiding-barefoot-running-injuries/

My personal opinion: Use good running shoes to protect your body when you are an average runner.

If you are a very good runner and you have trained your body for many years, you can try barefoot running. However, be very careful - start slowly - because your body has to adapt to a complete different loading of the body. Otherwise, you will get injuries.
Your muscles and bones have to adapt slowly to the new style of running.

It is very simple - your muscles, bones and joints have to take over the protection that the running shoe would normally give you.
You take the protection away, the body will have to provide the protection by adaptation - but it takes time and it certainly increases the injury of risk during the transition period.