Gruber et al.8 found that midfoot and forefoot striking was more common in barefoot runners Selumetinib on a hard surface vs. a softer surface. Furthermore, the adolescents studied by Lieberman et al. 9 were experienced runners and were running at a fast pace (5.5 m/s). When the Daasanach, who are not considered frequent runners, ran at this speed or faster, frequency of midfoot and forefoot striking increased to the point where they were more common combined than rearfoot striking. 10 In the

Hadza tribe, adult women and children typically rearfoot strike, whereas adult men typically midfoot strike. 16 This latter finding suggests that running experience may also influence running form and foot strike type since adult Hadza men tend to run more often while hunting game as compared to Hadza women who primarily gather plant foods. Taken together, results from these studies suggest that determination of foot strike

type is multifactorial, with midfoot and forefoot striking being NVP-BKM120 supplier most likely when experienced runners run barefoot on harder surfaces and at faster paces. Foot strike distribution for minimally shod runners was significantly different from both barefoot runners observed here and from shod runners observed in previous road race studies. A total of 52.4% of minimally shod runners were forefoot or midfoot strikers. Thus, frequency of forefoot and midfoot striking in minimally shod runners on an asphalt road is lower than in barefoot runners, but higher than in traditionally shod runners. It seems that at least in terms of foot strike, Resveratrol running in a minimally cushioned shoe may encourage kinematic patterns that are different than running in a traditionally cushioned shoe, but may not always encourage kinematic patterns similar to that typically observed in barefoot running.

The response may be very subject-specific. Studies have observed significantly higher vertical impact force peaks and loading rates in rearfoot striking barefoot runners.9 and 18 Given this, it is somewhat surprising that runners wearing VFF, a shoe that provides minimal impact protection to the foot, would continue to land on the rearfoot on a hard surface like an asphalt road. There are a few possible explanations for this. First, it is possible that runners attending this “barefoot” race who were wearing minimal shoes were less experienced with barefoot running and thus wore shoes for protection (i.e., they were not comfortable running fully barefoot). It has been demonstrated that foot strike patterns in minimal shoes can change with experience, and inexperienced minimally shod runners may exhibit different gait mechanics than those who have had greater acclimation time.