So What about Gorilla Feet Shoes… (The End of Blog#3Assignment)
Why My Study on Injury Rates related to use of Barefoot-Gorilla-Feet Shoes-vs-Traditional Running Shoes Might Matter to Someone
What will change in the world if the marketing claims are true? That shoes that look like large primate feet are more kind to your feet & legs while running? This would not impact world health policy. It might not even make any of the health news. However, there are some interesting implications:
1) If these shoes caused more harm than other traditional running shoes, a study might help pull them off the market, as proof of hazard or danger would be needed for consumer products advocates to act.
2) If these shoes cause less harm than traditional running shoes, it might change marketing strategies & product development in a really large financial industry (in 2010, the sales figures for the sporting goods industry, which includes athletic shoes, topped $71 billion dollars (see the press release from the Sporting Goods Manufacturing Association, http://www.sgma.com/press/224_SGMA's-2010-State-of-the-Industry-Report-Released ).
3) A study could potentially help consumers to make a healthy choice for their own bodies, with a decrease in running-related injuries (estimated 2008 totals from different industries on numbers of persons engaging in running as a sport or exercise: 35.9 to 41 million people, http://www.running.net/read_new/running-usas-state-sport-2009 ).
4) As many studies do, my study could generate more inquiry into the biomechanics of running, or other related sports.
Ending Reflection
When new products are introduced into the consumer market, there is often an associated marketing campaign, designed to make one believe that this is a superior product with unique benefits. As health care advocates, we must carefully consider how the associated purchasing choices can affect the health of buyers. Large health consequences have been attached to past marketing campaigns, such as with the outcomes of early tobacco company ads such as this one:
While footwear choices might not be as dramatic as the “smoking ad/resulting lung disease & cancer example”, false or true, marketing can affect the health of millions, if not billions, of consumers.
I think this study would definitely make the news. If they were better then the traditional running shoe it would change recommendations we give patients that come in with c/o knee pain or foot pain. It would effect all sports. Would soccer players prefer to wear them too? They do a lot of running.
ReplyDeleteOn a a personal note, I love to run but also have some knee pain. In high school I was told by my doctor that this was because I needed to use running shoes with a good arch support since I am flat feet. Would you exclude runner with flat feet from your study?
Sonia, I think rather than excluding people with flat feet, high arches, or other variations of normal feet, rather than major pathology, it would be interesting to stratify the results. Useful information might be found for specific foot types. Thank you for your input!
ReplyDeleteLisa,
ReplyDeleteTo start, this is a great idea for a study and it is something I have been wondering about since these “shoes” started to penetrate the market. Since then I have seen an explosion of people wearing them, especially in the gym. However, I have never seen anyone wearing these while running, which is why the links you provided are puzzling to me. It sounds absurd that these “shoes” could be better for our feet than a traditional running shoe.
As I type this I’m thinking of when I was a child and running home barefoot from a friend’s house, or playing basketball barefoot. The day after, my feet always ached terribly.
Do you think that by limiting the study population to recreational runners that have been running for 5 to 10 years, for a set range of miles per week, or who participate in a certain amount of longer distance competitive runs, you are limiting your generalizability of the results? What about those individuals who wear these and haven’t been running for 5 to 10 years? Perhaps a more comprehensive study would be to look at any ankle or foot related injuries while wearing these, not just while running because it seems obvious to me that these “shoes” will stimulate injury, contrary to much of the hype. Perhaps, those runners who have been running barefoot for greater periods of time would not experience increases in injury, but I think that those who have been running in traditional running shoes would initially see a huge increase in foot and ankle related injuries due to these minimalist shoes.
Also, a potential confounder I was thinking of is the quality or variation in running surfaces between cities (L.A., N.Y., etc.). This is something that, though hard to measure or account for, would be directly related to any running-related injury, especially ankle sprains. I agree with you that this study would be difficult to conduct, as this study would see a large amount of drop out possibly before any injury is documented.
Overall, this is a great idea for a study. I can see it was well thought out. This is something I would like to see carried out in the future, as I truly feel these shoes are just a fad and will pass with time.
Lisa, I love this study idea and I must be transparent in that I am a toe shoe person. I have two sets of Vibrams one for running and one for walking. One thing that I think is a bit hard to add in to this study is that you really have learn to run in the Vibrams. You can walk with the shoes with no problem and it is super easy and really natural. You cannot pick up running the same amount of miles you normally do because that almost guarantees injury. Vibrams make you run on different parts of your feet, which has been amazing for me since I have an old rugby knee injury.
ReplyDeleteWill you designate the specific shoe type for the toe shoes, how will you make this decision, or does it matter? There are so many varieties with so many different soles even among brands. Will you allow for time to adjust to running in the shoes before measuring for you disease?
@Ryan...The reason I set some parameters for runners in order to qualify for the study was to try to keep new runner injuries out of the study, therefore, making the results more reliable. I do agree that the generalizability would be decreased. Maybe a better way would be to stratify new runners, runners that have been running 1-5 years, and then 5-10 years? I also agree that running surfaces vary widely, and would be a potential confounder (such as uneven sidewalks..). I chose urban areas, thinking that maybe that would be more hard surface running, making the results a bit stronger than people running on a treadmill, a soft surface track, or grass. Nice comments! Glad that you liked the idea!
ReplyDelete@ Ashley, I looked at some information regarding preparation/transition exercises & times for people going from traditional running to barefoot running. I probably would include that as part of the study, in hopes to isolate the effect/result, reducing that as a potential confounder. I would designate a specific shoe, or shoe type, as they can vary significantly. Glad that I got a toe-shoe wearer to comment!
ReplyDelete