People have been running barefoot for most of human history. Specialist running shoes are a relatively recent invention, first appearing in the 19th century. As the technology developed, from the 1970s onwards, cushioning was increasingly added to “protect” the lower limb from impact forces.

Some people pointed out that cushioned shoes encouraged people to land on their heel (“heel striking”) rather than their forefoot, because they no longer needed to use the muscles of the foot to absorb the impact from the ground. They argued that this results in a less biomechanically sound, less efficient style of running; one that puts more strain on the joints of the lower limb, and leaves people prone to chronic overuse injuries as well as weakening foot muscles.

By the time Chris McDougall published his bestselling book Born to Run in 2009, which helped to spread the minimalist shoe revolution, various companies were already manufacturing “barefoot” running shoes: lightweight, minimalist footwear that eschew cushioning in favor of promoting more “natural” mechanics that mimic the way we (apparently) evolved to run.
There’s now a selection of such shoes available, ranging from so-called “barefoot shoes” which offer only a very thin sole, no arch support and a “zero drop” (meaning that there is no difference in height between the heel and the toe), to shoes that are more of a hybrid between “barefoot shoes” and traditional running shoes, with a little more cushioning and heel elevation. Examples of the former are the Vibram FiveFingers range, Vivobarefoot’s Evo Pure, and Merrell’s Pace Glove. The latter include New Balance’s Minimus, or the Nike Free.

In some circles, though, this enthusiasm for barefoot running became a dogma, with the insistence that it was uniformly better, more efficient, and healthier. The argument in favor of a barefoot running style sounds as though it makes sense, but does it?
This is where we run into an important principle of critical thinking.

Develop a healthy skepticism for “just-so stories,” in the absence of evidence.

We all love a good story: it’s easy to get carried away and find ourselves nodding along in agreement. The idea of a return to nature freeing us from the ills that the modern world has inflicted upon us is an old one that has an instinctive appeal. But is there any evidence to back it up?

First, let’s clarify some terms. Most of us aren’t going to run literally barefoot very often; pebbles, stray broken glass, adverse weather conditions, and strange looks from passers by are enough to dissuade all but the most committed. But the term “barefoot running” is often used by people to mean wearing minimalist shoes and running with a “barefoot style” forefoot strike. Although these two things are often confused, they aren’t the same. One study suggests that despite the marketing of some shoe companies, running mechanics vary considerably between barefoot and even the most minimalist footwear.

The claim that running in minimalist footwear makes people more efficient and less prone to injury is one that can be tested experimentally, and a number of such studies have been carried out.

When looking through scientific research, it’s easy to get lost the detail. There may be many different trials, all conducted in slightly different ways, and sometimes reaching contradictory conclusions, so it’s important to build up an overall picture of all the evidence taken together. This is a daunting project to undertake if we’re just trying to figure out which pair of shoes to buy.
Fortunately, someone has already done it for us. Systematic reviews are scientific papers that go through all the research that has been conducted on a topic in a consistent way, and summarize the overall findings.

The most recent systematic review about barefoot running was published in 2014. Its findings? “Barefoot style” running, whether barefoot or in minimalist shoes, does appear to be associated with lower impact forces, but there’s no clear evidence that this leads to a reduction in injury rates, and it appears to be no more efficient.

One minimalist shoe manufacturer, Vibram, fell foul of this lack of evidence. Vibram brought out its “FiveFingers” range since 2005. The shoes not only have a thin, flexible sole, but also have individual pockets for each toe, giving the shoes their unique appearance. In 2012, a lawsuit was filed against the company because of their boast that the shoes “reduce foot injuries and strengthen foot muscles.” Many runners using the shoes had developed injuries since switching to them, and pointed out that there was no evidence to support the claim. Although Vibram denied liability, they settled out of court and agreed to refund those who had purchased the product.

So, is it time to throw away the minimalist shoes and dismiss barefoot running as just another fad?

Maybe not just yet. The studies into minimalist shoes and barefoot running don’t support the dogma that “natural is best.” But if you look carefully at the data, there’s a lot of individual variability there. While the research doesn’t support the dogma that barefoot is best for everyone, it may indeed turn out to be better for some people, depending on things like foot type, running technique, conditioning and pre-existing injuries.

In other words: one size doesn’t fit all, and your mileage may vary. While Alice may find that transitioning to a barefoot style of running takes stress off an old knee injury, Bob might discover that instead, it flares up his plantar fasciitis.

Part of the problem is that while anyone can throw on a pair of minimalist running shoes, the really important factor is the mechanics of the person wearing them. Changing running technique takes time; both to change the ingrained motor patterns, and to build the specific physical conditioning needed for the new pattern. For a heel striker used to running 30 miles a week in conventional trainers, changing to a forefoot strike will be demanding on the muscles of the foot and calf. Switching abruptly to a set of minimalist shoes and trying to do the same mileage is likely to be a recipe for trouble. Any change needs to be made gradually, taking care to make sure that the new technique is learned correctly. Since there’s no guarantee that the new way of running will be an improvement, this is an investment of time and effort that not every runner will want to make.

There’s no hard and fast rule as to who will adapt well to minimalist running in the long run, but in general, if you’re a forefoot striker with a high arches, then you may find the transition relatively easy, whereas if you’re an over-pronating heel striker then you’re likely to struggle more.

Can you tell which you are? Perhaps not. It turns out that most runners are fairly poor at identifying their own foot strike pattern, as well as their arch type. Short of a proper video analysis, there’s no foolproof way to tell, but some observations have found that over 90 percent of distance runners are heel strikers.

So, what’s the verdict? True, or false?

The best evidence to date does not support the view that barefoot running is more efficient, or healthier on average, so this goes down as false.

At least, that is to say: if you are happy with the way you are currently running, there doesn’t appear to be an evidence based reason to change. Heel striking is not an inherently bad thing, and is the pattern used by the majority of runners, even at an elite level.

However, it’s also true that some people do get on better with a minimalist running style. If your current running style is causing you problems (for whatever reason) then it might be worth trying an alternative. If you are currently a heel striker suffering from hip, knee, or shin pain, perhaps, then switching to a pair of minimalist shoes and a forefoot strike might redistribute the load on your joints in a way that plays better with your injury. There’s no easy way to tell, other than trying it, but if you are already suffering from pain, I’d highly recommend speaking to a qualified physical therapist, podiatrist, or experienced running coach for advice before making a decision.

If you want to make the transition, there’s plenty of advice around with suggestions of how to go about it. You can find specific plans for runners with particular goals, levels of experience, and mileages; but sadly we’ve been unable to find any that have been scientifically tested. There are a few basic principles that any such plan should follow, though.

1. Focus more on your technique than the footwear. Be prepared to invest time in re-learning the mechanics of running. If you’re not sure what your current style is, and not confident that you know how to change it, consider investing in some coaching rather than winging it.

2. Make the change gradually. Start by running only short distances in minimalist shoes, and increase that slowly as your body adapts. “Too much, too soon” is a common cause of injury. If you’re a serious runner and you wish to maintain your current mileage while you’re making the transition, then consider using your current running shoes for the bulk of your training at first, and starting to incorporate intervals using your minimalist shoes, and gradually increasing the length of these intervals.

3. If you start to develop pain, then consider consulting a running specialist who can assess your gait and give you individual advice.

Good luck!