Any benefit from cycling as opposed to running?

[JauntyAngle]

If you still get shin splints try landing more on the mid-foot to ball of your foot and run on grass instead of asphalt or concrete.

Another option is to go and get properly fitted for some running shoes.

I was getting some shin pain if I did two long road runs in three days. I was also getting a lot of blisters because my shoes didn't fit me that well and were moving around when I ran. A friend of mine saw me running on the treadmill and pointed out that my feet were collapsing inwards a lot when I was running, and recommended that I go to a speciality running store to get a pair of shoes that would fix my gait.

I went to a store in London, with my current shoes. The guy pointed out that my shoes were very hard. He put them on the floor and observed that they did not sit flat on the ground- both were tilting inwards, because I had worn away the inside a lot more than the outside (evidence of uneven gait). He suggested I needed a pair with much more padding, and fairly high arch support. I tried about three different pairs, and each time I would run on a treadmill and he would take a video of my feet and legs. Then he would play the video back so I could see how much my feet were coming off a straight line. Eventually I found one pair that felt most comfortable and which almost completely fixed my gait- eliminating the tendency to come off a straight line, and for my feet to roll inwards.

I haven't had any shin pain since getting these new shoes, and the blistering issue has been much better (basically, just got them once after the first long run). They feel great to run in, and my feet just feel *so* much better afterwards, especially after a long run (which is 10km+ for me).

 

[Tosa]

If you choose to cycle over running be sure to incorporate some weight lifting into your overall fitness program

The lack of skeletal stress in cycling can lead to lower bone density in people who don't supplement with some running or lifting.

People should lift weights regardless of their choices for cardiovascular exercise.

 

[bowlie]

The benifits of cycling is that you can do it at much lower intensity than even jogging, and still feel like you are moving. When i jog my HR is around 160, so for cardio work cycling is better for me. By getting into a 140-150 BMP range you can see the most benefits to your heart, the trade off is you need to do it for longer. defiantly get an outdoor bike, its much more fun than stationary

 

[Human Bass]

Another option is to go and get properly fitted for some running shoes.

I was getting some shin pain if I did two long road runs in three days. I was also getting a lot of blisters because my shoes didn't fit me that well and were moving around when I ran. A friend of mine saw me running on the treadmill and pointed out that my feet were collapsing inwards a lot when I was running, and recommended that I go to a speciality running store to get a pair of shoes that would fix my gait.

I went to a store in London, with my current shoes. The guy pointed out that my shoes were very hard. He put them on the floor and observed that they did not sit flat on the ground- both were tilting inwards, because I had worn away the inside a lot more than the outside (evidence of uneven gait). He suggested I needed a pair with much more padding, and fairly high arch support. I tried about three different pairs, and each time I would run on a treadmill and he would take a video of my feet and legs. Then he would play the video back so I could see how much my feet were coming off a straight line. Eventually I found one pair that felt most comfortable and which almost completely fixed my gait- eliminating the tendency to come off a straight line, and for my feet to roll inwards.

I haven't had any shin pain since getting these new shoes, and the blistering issue has been much better (basically, just got them once after the first long run). They feel great to run in, and my feet just feel *so* much better afterwards, especially after a long run (which is 10km+ for me).

Arch support is bullshit, afterall an arch is made weaker if you put a pillar under it.

If you want proper running form, do some barefoot, listen to your feet, then go minimal. Padding and arch support doesn't correct anything, they only make bad form tolerable.

 

[bowlie]

Arch support is bullshit, afterall an arch is made weaker if you put a pillar under it.

If you want proper running form, do some barefoot, listen to your feet, then go minimal. Padding and arch support doesn't correct anything, they only make bad form tolerable.

that said I can imagine a shoe with really bad design as opposed to not quite perfect would mess you up much much more.

 

[JauntyAngle]

Arch support is bullshit, afterall an arch is made weaker if you put a pillar under it.

If you want proper running form, do some barefoot, listen to your feet, then go minimal. Padding and arch support doesn't correct anything, they only make bad form tolerable.

As I understand it, there is not one shred of scientific support for this "minimal" thing- it is an assertion unsupported by any evidence. Personally, I see it as the hippie equivalent of bro-science.

 

[bowlie]

As I understand it, there is not one shred of scientific support for this "minimal" thing- it is an assertion unsupported by any evidence. Personally, I see it as the hippie equivalent of bro-science.

Most scientific studies are funded by outside investors. In this case shoe companies, who, strangely enough, want to sell shoes. The studies they want are ones that say that shoes are great, and expensive shoes are better. With the emergence of minimalist running and companies like vibram, I think studies are starting to emerge, although I cant vouch for their scientific validity. I run this way because it seems like common sense. I run using normal cheap shoes but land on the ball of my foot not my heel. Since doing this I have noticed a difference in how my shins feel, and it makes sense, as my calf absorbs the shock, not my shin and knee joint. The need for expensive fancy shoes is questionable in my opinion

 

[JauntyAngle]

Most scientific studies are funded by outside investors. In this case shoe companies, who, strangely enough, want to sell shoes. The studies they want are ones that say that shoes are great, and expensive shoes are better. With the emergence of minimalist running and companies like vibram, I think studies are starting to emerge, although I cant vouch for their scientific validity. I run this way because it seems like common sense. I run using normal cheap shoes but land on the ball of my foot not my heel. Since doing this I have noticed a difference in how my shins feel, and it makes sense, as my calf absorbs the shock, not my shin and knee joint. The need for expensive fancy shoes is questionable in my opinion

Well, last time I heard, even the chief proponent of the theory conceded there was no scientific support for the view.

As for claiming the science is skewed by Adidas or Nike, or whatever, well, do you have any substantive evidence for claiming that? Can you report any actual cases of studies on the subject being funded by sports apparel companies, or give any statistics on the funding of such studies by apparel companies vs indepdently funded studies? Can you describe any methodological weakness of any papers that were funded by apparel companies that found no support, or do you have any evidence of research in favour of the minimalist theory being suppressed by these companies? Because otherwise, to say such things just seems like speculation. More generally, there are vested interests in most practical research: last time you read a study saying that eggs are healthy, did you say "well most of that research is funded by the egg industry"?

Don't want to be overly hostile here, but if something is a scientific consensus, I think it is just lazy to say "well it's probably all just funded by corporations".

Oh, and can't these companies make just as money selling these minimalist shoes?

 

[bowlie]

Well, last time I heard, even the chief proponent of the theory conceded there was no scientific support for the view.

As for claiming the science is skewed by Adidas or Nike, or whatever, well, do you have any substantive evidence for claiming that? Can you report any actual cases of studies on the subject being funded by sports apparel companies, or give any statistics on the funding of such studies by apparel companies vs indepdently funded studies? Can you describe any methodological weakness of any papers that were funded by apparel companies that found no support, or do you have any evidence of research in favour of the minimalist theory being suppressed by these companies? Because otherwise, to say such things just seems like speculation. More generally, there are vested interests in most practical research: last time you read a study saying that eggs are healthy, did you say "well most of that research is funded by the egg industry"?

Don't want to be overly hostile here, but if something is a scientific consensus, I think it is just lazy to say "well it's probably all just funded by corporations".

Oh, and can't these companies make just as money selling these minimalist shoes?

There was a pretty extensive documentary on the subject a few months ago summing up the findings of the (i think) British medical journals research into sports equipment and supplements. It looked at alot of things from running shoes to protein powder and examined the claims made by the companies. They were overly aggressive in my opinion, but im sure they have a point. I will try and find it for you. They summed up by saying protein powder is no better than normal protein and can be worse (well who didnt know that?), well fitting shoes are better than badly fitting shoes and fancy arches and things dont help hugely, the main difference is fit. They said power drinks were just sugar and salt (again, i thought everyone knew that) and the only thing they thought was really beneficial was creatine.

And yes, they can make money off of minimal shoes, which is why they are starting to sell them, and starting to fund research into them.

 

[chaospfa]

I like the feel of barefoot running. I usually get shin splints and since switching to barefoot running it has subsided. It has also strengthened my feet since I squat barefoot as well. That being said, I still preffer my Nike waffle racers for asphault running, especially sprints.

 

[PUO3]

I like the feel of barefoot running. I usually get shin splints and since switching to barefoot running it has subsided. It has also strengthened my feet since I squat barefoot as well. That being said, I still preffer my Nike waffle racers for asphault running, especially sprints.

next time you are due for shoes give the new balance minimus a try at the store. amazing shoes.

 

[chaospfa]

next time you are due for shoes give the new balance minimus a try at the store. amazing shoes.

I'm due for a new pair. I've been glueing my soles after every run for the last two weeks. Will give them a go.

 

[PUO3]

I'm due for a new pair. I've been glueing my soles after every run for the last two weeks. Will give them a go.

they are sort of pricey ($80+) but im really pleased with them. IF you like lifting barefoot they're pretty damn good for that also given the flat firm sole and wdith. mine have the vibram soles, i know there is a few different models but those are the ones im familiar with.

let me know what you think.

edit: these are the ones i have.

 

[bowlie]

I couldnt find the article. Might well be this one but I cant access it
http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e4848

 

[chaospfa]

they are sort of pricey ($80+) but im really pleased with them. IF you like lifting barefoot they're pretty damn good for that also given the flat firm sole and wdith. mine have the vibram soles, i know there is a few different models but those are the ones im familiar with.

let me know what you think.

edit: these are the ones i have.

Don't think I could lift in them. I have broad feet and most shoes are too narrow for me to effectively spread the floor. The reasons why I went with the nikes is that nikes are traditionally broader than most other running shoes.

 

[PUO3]

you should like those for running at least then. theyre really wide for running shoes.

hope they work out.

 

[Human Bass]

As I understand it, there is not one shred of scientific support for this "minimal" thing- it is an assertion unsupported by any evidence. Personally, I see it as the hippie equivalent of bro-science.

The opposite, there is not a single study that shows that overly cushioned shoes with heels higher than the forefoot prevent injuries, that's the bro science "if we put a pillow under the feet there will be no impact".

The shoe industry that most prove why changing the natural gait, heel landing first, supporting the arch and such can improve. Any engineer will be the first to say that the concept of arch support is nonsense.

The shoe industry basically says that the human foot is an evolutionary mistake, but strangely so poor people wearing very light sandals or nothing has much less foot ailments than those always wearing shoes.

So yeah, I would love to see an article showing how some passive 12oz of rubber with high heel numbing my feet can make my stride magically better.

 

[SMillard]

cycling is great, in Starting Strength he Ripp even goes into some detail about biking being good for your squats and squats good for your biking. For a little more full body try some cross country off road biking and mountain biking. I just did a 12 hour race as a relay team and my shoulders, triceps and back were just as tired and sore as my legs. Also in all the mountain biking books I've read the one strength activity they all recommend is deadlifting, so you know it's gotta be good if they are recommending deadlifting.

As for the running, definitely get some good shoes, One of the guys I bike with is a monster on the trails but always had a hard time running because of shin splints, finally he bought a good pair of shoes and it made a world of difference. T

he other thing is don't full out run do some intervals, there are programs online that get you up to a 5k pretty quickly. In all that I've seen and done (had acl surgery in 08) you start out with a lot of walking then some intervals of running, then the as you progress through the program you are doing more running and less walking. I found that if I followed one of those programs I didn't have nearly as much knee pain or swelling. Also don't forget to stretch and ice after and if you have one use a roller. You will notice a real difference.

 

[PUO3]

As I understand it, there is not one shred of scientific support for this "minimal" thing- it is an assertion unsupported by any evidence. Personally, I see it as the hippie equivalent of bro-science.

im no scientist, but when i put on a "minimal" shoe it feels much better and more natural than putting on the typical tennis shoe etc with raised heels and arch support.

 

[Tosa]

Shoe companies are going to sell shoes, regardless of whether they're shoes with cushioning and support, or a more minimal, less durable, type shoe. Plenty of shoe companies are coming out with their own minimalist shoe, and making shoes that while still providing some cushioning, are much more flexible, with less of a heel drop. So they're making money regardless. So it doesn't make sense to claim bias without any further evidence.

But regarding the idea that "Ooh, Ah, it's more natural and how people evolved to run", people also didn't evolve to live particularly long. Jaunty is already ancient by the standards of early man, and I'm practically a senior citizen at 26. So unless there's further evidence to support the idea that doing things "as nature intended" is the right way to go, it does't hold water, because mother nature can be a cruel bitch, and she just wants to live long enough to have a bunch of kids, and take care of them long enough so they'll do alright if you die. She doesn't care if you have no teeth, arthritis, and your joint cartilage is all gone and now your bones are grinding together to make a powder when you're 32, because you've outlived your usefulness.