I must admit. I’m a geek.
I read a lot of articles, most of them on running, and most of them refer to studies. And some of them contradict each other. Interesting…
So is science flawed? How can midfoot striking be better for you and so can heel striking?
I think science is a lot like stats, you can almost make it say what you want. Do you remember all of the science experiments you did in high school. 10 teams or so followed the same steps but yet some got ridiculously different outcomes!
There are a few things that are close to gospel (gravity, osmosis, photosynthesis, etc) but every time you add human interaction it has potential to be flawed. It’s not because we are bad people (I truly think people are good) but rather biased beyond belief. This fact has been proven studies so there!
I still try to be aligned as close to science as I can in what I do but sometimes you gotta go with what feels natural. When both collide, it’s magic. Hence my love for ChiRunning!
I’ve been re-listening to Timothy Ferriss’ books (Four Hour Workweek and Four Hour Body) and through both, he takes a critical look at a lot of assumptions. A lot of the day-to-day principles we follow are not really scientific but people love something that sounds good.
I guess it goes back to figuring out what works for yourself. We’re all a walking science experiment with countless variables. So go out there and experiment and throw out all those assumptions.
And let me know what science is flawed for you!
Here is a good article from Running Times on foot strike since I know a lot of folks are worried about that. I guess that’s a by-product of science talking about how bad heel striking is…