“We didn’t all grow up Kenyan, after all.”
Every discussion about minimalism seems eventually to come around to this statement. If the argument is that, having grown up shod, we’re trained to need supportive shoes, what about the next generation? Can and should we as parents do anything to help our kids grow up more Kenyan than we did?
The medical establishment tends to be conservative on the issue. David Davidson, D.P.M., president of the American Academy of Podiatric Sports Medicine (AAPSM), says, “Kids should not be running in ‘minimalist footwear’ at all and, as in other shoes, should be wearing brand name running shoes with good motion control, cushioning, etc.” The academy’s official statement is somewhat more agnostic, stating, “Currently, inconclusive scientific research has been conducted regarding the benefits and/or risks of barefoot running.”
It makes sense that doctors would be cautious. They tend to see kids who have problems, and supporting the foot and controlling the stride helps to alleviate many of these problems. It would seem to follow that all developing feet could use some support. But as runners, learning that many of these issues stem from foot, hip, or core weaknesses and improper strides, putting kids in motion-control shoes before they demonstrate the need for them feels like prescribing corrective eyeglasses to all children as soon as they start to read. Is it possible that overbuilt shoes contradict the medical mandate to “first, do no harm?”
Michael Yessis, Ph.D., professor of biomechanics and kinesiology and author of Explosive Running, believes so, stating that motion-control shoes “change how you run, preventing the foot from functioning normally.” Yessis maintains that these shoes “don’t do what they are supposed to do—if anything, they will lead to more injuries.” Paul Langer, D.P.M., chair of the AAPSM’s Shoe Committee, points to three studies from 1985 to 2008 that found differences in toddlers learning to walk when barefoot compared to wearing shoes, and between those in “sneakers” and those in less supportive shoes. “The significance of these studies,” Langer says, “is that they show how our feet are sensory organs that allow us to interact with our environment and to develop natural movement patterns. These studies suggest that shoes can interfere with that development. Balance, stride length, and stride width are all influenced by our ability to sense the surface we are landing on. Clearly, the more ‘stuff’ between the foot and the ground the less ability we have to sense the landing surface.”
The existence of thousands of East African youths running miles to school barefoot is another argument against the idea that shoes are necessary to prevent injury. The resulting stride that they develop speaks for itself in terms of running results. Watch very young American kids and you’ll note that most of them also naturally demonstrate a “Kenyan” stride, up to a certain age. Nicholas Romanov, Ph.D., professor of physical education and sport, known for his “Pose Method” of running, analyzed several thousand school children in Russia during the 1980s. Based on these observations, he told us, “Kids, with some exception[s], have a natural ability to run properly, meaning to fall forward, keep high cadence and the feet under the [general center of mass], their body weight on the forefoot, until age 5—6 years old.” Romanov blames the change after that age not on shoes but on training, noting that the age boundary is concurrent with the beginning of education. “Of course,” Romanov says, “this education is based mostly on our experience, habits, eclectic knowledge with lots of individual preferences in thoughts on ‘proper’ running technique.” Romanov goes on to say that, when kids begin to think about their running, they base their technique on visual images of those around them, which does not often include the best runners: “Top runners, unfortunately, are out of our sight, because we consider them as a special case with ‘God-given’ abilities, who are out of our league.” Yessis agrees that education is much to blame, lamenting, “No one teaches how to run.” Observing my 8-year-old son’s first basketball practice, in which 90 percent of the time was spent teaching how to stand and pivot with proper balance and posture, I can see their point: Does anyone do this with running, particularly at this formative age?
Yet, again recalling those barefoot African youth, it seems that such education should only be necessary for those who have already learned poor habits. Something else happened at that basketball practice that may be even more significant in forming a young athlete’s running style: The coach used running as punishment for disruptive talking. Several experts, including Ron Usher, coach and PE teacher with a masters in kinesiology, believe that doing a lot of slow slogging, both as punishment and conditioning for other sports, emphasizes the development of poor form, and teaches kids to hate running. Also, when they are required to be fast, they often are pushed to run too hard, making them tense up and overreach, or too far, beyond what they can complete with their natural, floating stride of youth.
Other changes happen at school age that affect children’s stride. Bruce Williams, D.P.M., past president of the AAPSM reports, “When kids begin to gain weight and enter puberty their risk of foot ailments seems to drastically increase.” Rob Conenello, D.P.M., international lecturer on podiatric sports medicine, reports an increase in injuries related to growth spurts in 8- to 14-year-olds. “Their soft tissue and bone structure is not entirely in sync,” Conenello says, “and as they get bigger and stronger, their stride changes.” Because of these changes, and the negative running education they often get in PE class and in playing sports, Usher believes that currently approximately 80 percent of middle school through high school kids do need instruction in proper running form, and most need strengthening work to be able to run properly. “They just aren’t getting the movement experience,” Usher says.
Which brings us back to shoes. Given that most kids aren’t running completely efficiently, and that they aren’t typically running on the dirt roads of the Rift Valley, it seems that most American kids are in a similar position to their parents: They need some level of shoe. “You can’t make a blanket statement,” says Conenello. “Some kids, some adults can adapt to a barefoot stride.” Rather than recommending traditional cushion/control shoes off the bat, however, Conenello advises putting them in the “most minimal shoe possible, and adding support if necessary.” The level of minimal that is possible will vary with the child—Conenello has observed genetic differences on the required level of support even among his three children—and may vary as the child ages. Langer agrees, concluding, “While research does not yet allow us to predict the long-term risks/benefits of minimalist footwear in children, it does suggest that allowing the feet and lower extremities to develop naturally with minimal cushioning or support is ideal.” Given what we’re learning about the running stride, it seems parents should think twice before putting their kids in a pair of “good sturdy shoes.”