Minimalist/"barefoot" shoes, anyone?

[jimmymax]

Jumped to the end of the thread to mention the book "Born to Run" and I see I was beaten to it. I'm not a real runner but loved the book and the discussion of feet and shoes.

Meanwhile, during these Covid times where I wear sweatpants or shorts 99% of the time, I've heard "real" pants (jeans/slacks) referred to as "hard pants" which I think is humorous. I'm probably barefoot 90% of the hours I'm awake, 8% in flip-flops, and the 2% I don socks and "hard shoes" comes as a shock to my tootsies! There's been no negative repercussion to feet, back, etc.

[weezie]

Except for work, I’ve been wearing Birkenstocks constantly for my entire adult life. The lack of enclosed shoe protection has only been a serious problem a few times over many decades.

I wear Birks garden clogs when I am forced to weed.

[rsvman]

Jumped to the end of the thread to mention the book "Born to Run" and I see I was beaten to it. I'm not a real runner but loved the book and the discussion of feet and shoes.

Meanwhile, during these Covid times where I wear sweatpants or shorts 99% of the time, I've heard "real" pants (jeans/slacks) referred to as "hard pants" which I think is humorous. I'm probably barefoot 90% of the hours I'm awake, 8% in flip-flops, and the 2% I don socks and "hard shoes" comes as a shock to my tootsies! There's been no negative repercussion to feet, back, etc.

I think when people are barefoot they automatically slightly adjust their gait. The challenge with these shies is that you have to walk as thiugh you are barefoot but you are clearly wearing something that looks like shoes. So it's an adjustment. Although they are so thin that you can definitely feel that they are not like typical shoes, and if you heel strike you can feel that they are not typical shoes.

I kind of buy the idea that wearing them could help to train me to a better gait. I chickened iut and wore Ecco shoes today, not sure if I could do two days back-to-back. Maybe I'll wear them again tomorrow and see how it goes.

I have always taken off my shoes to come into the house, so I am used to being up and about without shoes....

[mpj96]

Born To Run is a great book. I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a good read. I started running after reading it and had zero interest in the activity prior to that.

Consistent with the theme of the book I chose some really thin soled nike shoes to start. My gait changed, heel striking reduced but after 4 - 6 months of consistent running on pavement I started getting pain in my feet when I walked barefoot. After a few weeks of trying to roll out / rest my feet I went to a shoe store where they analyze your gait and recommend a shoe. They recommended a pair of thick soled sauconis and told me my foot pain would be gone in 2 weeks. Much to my surprise they were right. Have been running in thick soled sauconis or brooks ever since without issue.

My experience was very different from that of the author of Born To Run and many others. Led me to the less than startling conclusion that we are not all the same and respond differently to identical stimuli.

I think you've just got to see what works for you and listen to your body's response. But in this case like so many others your mileage may vary.

[Jeffrey]

I wear Birks garden clogs when I am forced to weed.

I always wear my Birks at the beach. A strong hose nozzle cleans Birks quickly and they last a long time.

[tbyers11]

Interestingly, one of the selling points of the shoes is that they protect against plantar fasciitis. I saw something from a podiatrist about this, as well; he said he usually asks people to go barefoot or more to minimalist shoes if they have plantar fasciitis.

So, two totally different opinions. Interesting.

My understanding (and personal experience) is that going barefoot is the worst thing I can do for my plantar fasciitis.

My wife's personal experience with plantar fasciitis is also that going barefoot is the worst thing for it. We have wood floors throughout most of the house and her podiatrist recommended wearing slippers around the house and doing so alleviates the symptoms.

[rsvman]

Well, not that anybody cares, but I've been wearing these Xeroshoes quite a bit since I started the thread, and I decided to post an update about them.

I have to say that I have bought in to at least a few of the thoughts/theories that minimalist shoe proponents talk about. I'm not completely sold on all of them. Here is a list of what they purport, and what I think of each thing so far:

1) Shoes ought not to have elevated heels. This one I am buying. Heels were put on shoes in the first place for reasons that don't have anything to do with health. They made it easier for a person to stay in the saddle when they rode horses, before we had cars. They made women's legs look more shapely. They made men slightly taller. None of these is a compelling reason for the heel to be elevated above the toe. It just makes sense that the heel and the toe shoe be level, the way they naturally are.

2) Shoes ought to have a wide toe box so the toes can spread out in a natural fashion. 100% sold. Absolutely. No reason for shoes to pinch the toes together into an unnatural position. The only reason shoes come to a point is because people think they look more stylish that way. It may be true, but it's not good for your feet. I just LOVE the freedom these shoes give my toes. Downside is that if I have to wear a "normal" shoe for any reason, now it feels like they are really pinching my feet (which they are, for no good reason whatsoever).

3) Shoes shouldn't have arch support. I'm buying into this one a little bit, too. I certainly don't see the need for it. The foot supports itself nicely the way it was designed (or evolved). The arch gains strength by being supported on either side.

4) Shoes shouldn't be cushioned. The thought process here is that too much cushion actually makes it harder to walk in the long run, like playing volleyball on the sand is more work than playing volleyball on a court. The other thing they talk about is allowing the foot to "feel" the surface it is walking on, which supposedly helps it/you to learn how to react appropriately to various surfaces. This one I'm not 100% sold on. It's fine even on really hard carpets like they have in office buildings, but if you have to walk a lot on completely hard surfaces like linoleum and concrete, it seems like a little bit of cushion wouldn't be a bad thing. I do agree that many shoes are overly cushioned, though.

5) The sole of a shoe ought to be completely flexible. Again, this has to do with allowing natural ground feel. I don't have anything against flexibility of the sole, but I'm not sure it's a really important point.


Overall, I think they are mostly on the right track. I'd love to have a shoe that had just a tiny bit more cushioning but had the zero drop between the heel and toe and also maintained the very wide toe box so that the toes aren't pushed together.

I haven't had any massive problems with the shoes at all. I definitely changed the way I walk a bit, from strong heel-striking to a more natural gait that one would assume when walking barefoot. I think my slightly altered new gait is actually a better gait that engages the buttocks and core more and keeps my posture better.

[-jk]

I'm in the "shoes need a little cushion" camp - evolution didn't have us spending a lot of time on large rocks.

-jk

[YmoBeThere]

Do you need any arch support if you have flat feet?

[Neals384]

Interestingly, one of the selling points of the shoes is that they protect against plantar fasciitis. I saw something from a podiatrist about this, as well; he said he usually asks people to go barefoot or more to minimalist shoes if they have plantar fasciitis.

My understanding (and personal experience) is that going barefoot is the worst thing I can do for my plantar fasciitis.

My wife's personal experience with plantar fasciitis is also that going barefoot is the worst thing for it. We have wood floors throughout most of the house and her podiatrist recommended wearing slippers around the house and doing so alleviates the symptoms.

Have had PF and the only thing that works for me is wearing only Keen shoes with Superfeet insoles - lots of arch support. The notion that minimalist shoes would be good for people with PF doesn't resonate for me.

[curtis325]

Well, not that anybody cares, but I've been wearing these Xeroshoes quite a bit since I started the thread, and I decided to post an update about them.

I have to say that I have bought in to at least a few of the thoughts/theories that minimalist shoe proponents talk about. I'm not completely sold on all of them. Here is a list of what they purport, and what I think of each thing so far:

1) Shoes ought not to have elevated heels. This one I am buying. Heels were put on shoes in the first place for reasons that don't have anything to do with health. They made it easier for a person to stay in the saddle when they rode horses, before we had cars. They made women's legs look more shapely. They made men slightly taller. None of these is a compelling reason for the heel to be elevated above the toe. It just makes sense that the heel and the toe shoe be level, the way they naturally are.

2) Shoes ought to have a wide toe box so the toes can spread out in a natural fashion. 100% sold. Absolutely. No reason for shoes to pinch the toes together into an unnatural position. The only reason shoes come to a point is because people think they look more stylish that way. It may be true, but it's not good for your feet. I just LOVE the freedom these shoes give my toes. Downside is that if I have to wear a "normal" shoe for any reason, now it feels like they are really pinching my feet (which they are, for no good reason whatsoever).

3) Shoes shouldn't have arch support. I'm buying into this one a little bit, too. I certainly don't see the need for it. The foot supports itself nicely the way it was designed (or evolved). The arch gains strength by being supported on either side.

4) Shoes shouldn't be cushioned. The thought process here is that too much cushion actually makes it harder to walk in the long run, like playing volleyball on the sand is more work than playing volleyball on a court. The other thing they talk about is allowing the foot to "feel" the surface it is walking on, which supposedly helps it/you to learn how to react appropriately to various surfaces. This one I'm not 100% sold on. It's fine even on really hard carpets like they have in office buildings, but if you have to walk a lot on completely hard surfaces like linoleum and concrete, it seems like a little bit of cushion wouldn't be a bad thing. I do agree that many shoes are overly cushioned, though.

5) The sole of a shoe ought to be completely flexible. Again, this has to do with allowing natural ground feel. I don't have anything against flexibility of the sole, but I'm not sure it's a really important point.


Overall, I think they are mostly on the right track. I'd love to have a shoe that had just a tiny bit more cushioning but had the zero drop between the heel and toe and also maintained the very wide toe box so that the toes aren't pushed together.

I haven't had any massive problems with the shoes at all. I definitely changed the way I walk a bit, from strong heel-striking to a more natural gait that one would assume when walking barefoot. I think my slightly altered new gait is actually a better gait that engages the buttocks and core more and keeps my posture better.

Altra shoes are also zero-drop and some of their models have cushioning. Some of them have a lot of cushioning. I mostly prefer the Xeroshoes. For running, Merrell is also very good.

[nocilla]

I also started wearing the minimalist shoes after the 'Born to Run' book about 8-10 years ago. I don't wear them for walking though, just running.

I have been through several pairs of the Vibram FiveFingers and a couple New Balance minimalist Trail. I currently have a pair made by Merrell but I don't remember what it is called, glove maybe.

I don't wear shoes in the house and wear flop flops a lot in the summer. I have tennis shoes and boots for work and everyday use. But for running, anything other than minimalist feels bulky and unnatural. I went though the calf soreness the first week and I recommend easing into them. But I run with a midfoot strike meaning my foot lands underneath me and not out in front. This seems to be much better on my joints as my calves are the shock absorbers instead of my knees. I've had a couple foot ailments over the years but nothing too bad. I'm not as fast now but 5 years ago I was regularly running 5Ks under 20 minutes. I'm not saying the toe shoes (as they are often referred to as) made me faster, but psychologically, I felt faster because my foot felt lighter.

I do agree that we are all made differently though. So what works for some may work differently for others. So it boils down to how you feel in them.

[rsvman]

Do you need any arch support if you have flat feet?

I don't know, because I'm not a podiatrist. Their argument would be that many cases of flatfoot are caused by the fact that people have used too much arch support their whole lives, leading to weakness and falling of the arch.

[cato]

Have had PF and the only thing that works for me is wearing only Keen shoes with Superfeet insoles - lots of arch support. The notion that minimalist shoes would be good for people with PF doesn't resonate for me.

The only thing I know about PF is that it stinks. Actually, I feel more strongly about it, but don’t want to get wankerized.

I ultimately overcame it without adding insoles, but good shoes with the right fit definitely helped. Brooks and NB shoes with wide toe boxes and flexible soles seem to be the right formula for me.

[rsvman]

Another quick update.

I bought a very thin sole cushion without an arch (1/8th inch) and put them in my Xero Shoes. This was just enough to make really hard surfaces tolerable without getting rid of ground feel. This made a big difference for me.

Now I am wearing these shoes every day for essentially everything except working out and lawn/yard work. I have really grown to love them. My gait has definitely changed, and for the better.

All my life I was a supinator (or under-pronator, if you prefer), walking essentially almost exclusively on the outside of my feet. I also walked with my toes pointing outwards quite a ways (duck-footed). With these shoes I can feel when I am just using the outside of my feet, so I can adjust to use the entire foot evenly. I have also gradually been bringing my toes more inward so they don't point so far outward when I walk.

Hard to imagine, but I have essentially changed the way I walk almost completely, even though I walked that other way for almost 60 years. I think all the changes I have made have been positive ones that will help my body in the long run.

It now feels weird to walk in other shoes that have an elevated heel and arch support and cramped toes. I don't think I will ever be going back to "regular shoes." If anybody else is thinking about trying shoes like these, I would recommend a very thin insole without an arch, and I would also recommend transitioning from regular shoes to this type of shoes gradually over a period of a couple of months.

[budwom]

Do you need any arch support if you have flat feet?

I have the flattest feet of anyone I know of (primary care doc says they are exceptional) and I very much need and appreciate arch support, otherwise my legs ache. So I'm not buying the "don't need arch support" generalization, FWIW, which I'm sure is not much.

[rsvman]

I have the flattest feet of anyone I know of (primary care doc says they are exceptional) and I very much need and appreciate arch support, otherwise my legs ache. So I'm not buying the "don't need arch support" generalization, FWIW, which I'm sure is not much.

The hypothesis is that many people with flat feet developed flat feet over time precisely because of too much arch support. I don't know whether I believe this, but that is the idea. The muscles that form the arch weaken because the shoe is doing the job the muscles were designed to do.

[budwom]

The hypothesis is that many people with flat feet developed flat feet over time precisely because of too much arch support. I don't know whether I believe this, but that is the idea. The muscles that form the arch weaken because the shoe is doing the job the muscles were designed to do.

I hear ya, but my feet were ultra flat right out of the box*. As a kid I played sports for hours every day, and my legs ached every night because ALL shoes (football, baseball, basic Keds) were flat as a pancake inside, zero support whatsoever.
I imagine that worked for most people, but not flat footed me. Finally I found some inserts (good, not great) which alleviated the pain.

So as someone who walks a solid 1800 miles per year, I'm extremely grateful that ALL the shoes I use (we have lots of different conditions here), be they shoes for hiking, walking, walking on ice, snow, gardening, have really nice arch support...no pain whatsoever...

* my mother had ultra flat feet as well, so I suspect there is a genetic component to this...

[rsvman]

I hear ya, but my feet were ultra flat right out of the box*. As a kid I played sports for hours every day, and my legs ached every night because ALL shoes (football, baseball, basic Keds) were flat as a pancake inside, zero support whatsoever.
I imagine that worked for most people, but not flat footed me. Finally I found some inserts (good, not great) which alleviated the pain.

So as someone who walks a solid 1800 miles per year, I'm extremely grateful that ALL the shoes I use (we have lots of different conditions here), be they shoes for hiking, walking, walking on ice, snow, gardening, have really nice arch support...no pain whatsoever...

* my mother had ultra flat feet as well, so I suspect there is a genetic component to this...

I hear ya. I know little to nothing about podiatry, and I suspect there are people who genetically have problematic lack of arches and need support. I also wouldn’t be surprised if there are others whose arches might have been ok if they had been strengthened rather than babied.

[budwom]

I hear ya. I know little to nothing about podiatry, and I suspect there are people who genetically have problematic lack of arches and need support. I also wouldn’t be surprised if there are others whose arches might have been ok if they had been strengthened rather than babied.

Funny you mention the word "podiatry." I've talked to my primary doc a few times about bunions I have (no big deal, but my feet demand a sizeable toe box) and if I say the word "podiatrist" she looks at me like I've mentioned a witch doctor.

As you imply, feet can be pretty complicated...