Your thoughts please.

To be fair, it's half an interesting study if he/she could have limited the conclusion to fit the evidence, that impact cushioning varies little across a range of shoes. Inferring anything mfrom that gets you into huge complexity. Though it does get you on the BBC......

And the shoes have been tested on a treadmill. Which will also be cushioned. This would of been a lot more relevant to me, and most other runners if the shoes had been tested on tarmac.

The implication was that more expensive trainers are cashing in due to a trendy label, but I think it's only really Nike that are coveted by people wanting to be cool - otherwise there'd be a decent choice of running shoes in JJB. There were also some inaccuracies on injuries - basically misinterpreting correlations and citing a load of guff.

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

I've always been of the thought that expensive trainers were really no better than medium priced ones. Being new to running I knew that I didnt want (or should wear) a really cheap pair of shoes for obvious reasons.I would normally pay around £30-£40. I have a trusted pair of Saucony Jazz which got me round my first half marathon plus a few subsequent events and loads of training runs and classes, still have them and love them.
However, I was lucky enough to win a pair of the new saucony progrid paramount and can finally see why people invest so much money in their running shoes. They have given me a totally new experience of running.
Fashion trainers have always been hit or miss but if your the sort of person to pay £300 for a piece string and elastic then your the sort of person who will happily pay the same amount for a nice looking pair of shoes.

A running friend went to buy new shoes and was asked of her old shoes "Are you enjoying them?" which I think is a very good question to ask.  I've been running for the last 18 months in Saucony Grid Tangent and can honestly say that I enjoy them.  That makes them worth the price.

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