I managed to read the paper.
There are significant limitations to the study, and I agree fully that it is not possible to make sweeping generalisations as expensive running shoes are less useful or more useful than cheaper running shoes.
But there are some useful points. A shoe may not be safer or more useful because its RRP is higher than another model from the same manufacturer.
It is possible that more expensive models could be concentrating more on comfort which may not be related to shock or impact absorption.
Authors quote another study "Hazard of deceptive advertising of athletic footwear" which appeared on the same journal in 1997 which again suggest that expensive models does not always mean less injury.
Or somebody may have to come up with some thing like Euro NCAP's star ratings for new cars
Pft just read the article.........................................
How many people run the way God intended?
Or how many people think that running sith yur heels hitting the ground like a jack hammer is the correct way to run. The last road race I did guy running behind me sounded like he had bricks tied to his feet. Flat feet and knock knees. There are people who need support to alter physical weaknesses, foibles of their particular physiology.
As for cheap or expensive trainers...... I buy last years model in last years colour adn get half price and the same performance, though I can run up behind people flat out and surprise them and walk on rice paper without it tearing
Visit the official Runner's World page
Follow Runner's World on Twitter
Other Natmag-Rodale Sites
Run For Charity
About Runner's World
Runner's World is a publication of Hearst Magazines UK which is the trading name of The National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.
Website powered by: Immediate Media Company Ltd. | © Runner's World 2002-2013 |