For the past few years, proponents of barefoot running have argued that modern athletic shoes compromise natural running. But now a first-of-its-kind study suggests that, in the right circumstances, running shoes make running physiologically easier than going barefoot.
The study, conducted by researchers at the University of Colorado in Boulder published online in the journal Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise was designed to determine whether wearing shoes was metabolically more costly than going unshod. In other words, does wearing shoes require more energy than going barefoot?
Researchers found that barefoot running, often touted by fans as more natural than wearing shoes, was actually less efficient. When barefoot runners and shod runners carried the same weight on their feet, barefoot running used almost 4 percent more energy during every step than running in shoes.
If you are barefoot, the job of absorbing some of the forces generated by the collision of foot and ground shifts to your leg muscles, a process called the cushioning effect. As a result, the leg muscles contract and work more and require additional energy. The metabolic cost of the activity rises.
It is important to note that the study looked only at the metabolic efficiency of wearing shoes, compared with going barefoot. The scientists did not evaluate the common claim that barefoot running lowers injury risk.
In the end, lightweight models, though, that provide cushioning to spare leg muscles without mass to slow movement may be the physiologically smartest alternative to being bare.

Source: The New York Times