Página 1 de 1

in soreness was elevated in Vibrams was

Publicado: Vie, 10 Ago 2018, 02:46
por Labi1995
A few weeks ago I wrote a post on a new study published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine in which I predicted that media headlines/articles would get the interpretation of the results wrong. Well, yesterday Reuters published an article on the study titled “Switch to minimalist running shoes tied to injuries, pain.” And the Adidas NMD Womens first two lines Nike Air Max 97 Damen of the article are:“Advocates of trendy “minimalist” running shoes promise a more natural experience, but runners in a new study reported higher rates of injury and pain with the less structured shoes. Three months after switching from traditional running shoes to the minimalist variety, study participants had two to three times as many injuries compared to runners who [url=[url=http://www.joomlas.co.uk/nike-air-max-95-c-21/nike-air-max-95-womens-c-21_23/]Nike Air Max 95 Womens[/url] http://www.bezvazeme.cz/nike-air-max-90 ... 3-c-23_26/]Nike Air Max 90 Dámské[/url] stuck with traditional shoes.”
I disagree with this headline and interpretation. What did the study really show? Well, injury rates were indeed higher in the partial minimalist Nike Free 3.0, and runners in Vibram Fivefingers reported greater calf/shin pain, but the most interesting result to me, and the one that seems to keep getting overlooked in reports about this study, is that it found no significant difference in injury risk between runners who stayed in a www.dannywinstanley.co.uk more traditional running shoe and those who transitioned into the ultraminimal Vibram Fivefingers. Only those moving into the Nike Free experience higher injury rates. (for more Nike Air Presto Femme on the details of this study view my post on it or this post by Blaise Dubois in which we discuss the results with the lead study author in the comments).
To be quite honest, these results surprised me. A lot.I would have expected that transitioning from a traditionally cushioned trainer to a Nike Air Max 90 Femme Noir very minimal, barely cushioned shoe with toe pockets would have resulted in a much higher risk of injury. I even wrote an entire post on why I thought that Vibrams were risky and why I generally don’t recommend them. But the results of the BJSM study don’t support my own stance on the shoes. Runners who transitioned to them in this study were not at elevated risk of Adidas [url=http://www.aromery.co.uk/Nike-Air-Max-Thea-Mens-c-4_6.html]Nike Air Max Thea MensSuperstar Homme[/url] injury in any of the analyses they performed.That calf/shin soreness was elevated in Vibrams was not a surprise at all (I’m guessing it was mostly all calf soreness, but the authors don’t break it down). Calf soreness is Nike Air Max 2017 Damen a typical experience for those going to minimal shoe because the calf presumably has to work harder. Would sore muscles after going to the gym lead you to say that lifting weights is a bad thing? My guess is that muscles on the front of the shin Adidas Superstar Mens worked less, and if the runners in the study had been suffering from anterior shin splints or anterior compartment syndrome then their pain symptoms might have improved – it’s all about shifting forces around and knowing which www.luzdevelas.es areas of your body are most prone to injury.As the science starts to come out on the pros/cons of barefoot and minimalist running what we are finding Adidas ZX 700 Femme is that in Nike Air Max Zero Womens general claims about improved performance or reduced injury risk are not being borne out. But, claims of increased injury risk in minimal shoes are not being borne out either. Last May I wrote about another study which found no difference in injury rates between traditionally and minimally shod soldiers. It was based only on an abstract from a presentation given at the American Society of Sports Medicine annual meeting, but the results are consistent Nike Air Max 95 Homme with the findings of the BJSM study.So www.lavolailles.fr what we are left with is that there is no strong support for a difference in injury rates between barely-there minimal shoes and more traditional shoes. People will run well in both, people will get hurt in both (but maybe the types of injuries will differ Nike Air Max 2017 Mens – we saw this pattern play out as shoes went from pretty minimal to pretty Nike Air Max 270 Mujer cushioned in the 1970’s). Science is not telling us that either is better than the other. This begs the question: Why?