training
Barefoot Running Technique
The following video has great British accents as well as quality drills that will help you to adapt a running posture more conducive to minimalist running.
Learning the Skill of Barefoot Running from Terra Plana on Vimeo.
The first problem people make when they begin to experiment with a barefoot style of running is that they try to avoid heel striking. This happens naturally when your posture is correct. This video does a great job of illustrating how to lean forward from the ankles not at the hips.
Adjust Your Strength: Studies Demonstrate Significant Strength Increases With Spinal Adjustments
I can be a bit of a skeptical person. This makes me difficult to live with but it also makes me a pretty good researcher. It is because of this trait that I shy away from emotion-driven claims on the power of chiropractic to raise the dead and heal all wounds. That being said, a recent review of the literature has opened my eyes and has me a little emotional myself. The research states that my two favorite things- chiropractic and strength gains make each other better. I’m stoked.
I performed a very simple review of literature where I searched the terms “Chiropractic, Strength” in a Pubmed search engine. This is what I found:
I found seven studies that compared full force isometric contraction of muscles including the quadriceps, rotator cuff, cervical extensors and low back extensors before and after chiropractic adjustment of the spine. All seven found increased strength and/or decreased muscle inhibition post adjustment (1,4,6,7,9,10,11). One study showed as much as 66.8% increase in muscle recruitment as tested with surface electromyography (4). These results are compared to placebo groups and control groups. Summary: This is a big deal.
Two of these studies were of particular interest from a sports medicine perspective as they studied the effect of chiropractic adjustment on the vastus medialis oblique of subjects with anterior knee pain (6,7). Both studies found decreased inhibition immediately post adjustment. This is very useful information to anyone trying to regain strength after a knee injury. As any Physical Therapist will tell you, post injury the primary focus of rehabilitation is to activate the VMO which easily inhibits and leads to lifelong strength and stability problems. Take home- if your knee is injured, get your spine adjusted.
The first question I am usually asked when I tell people about the previous studies is “how long after the adjustment do these effects last?” I like this question. It means to me that the patient is trying to plan how fast they’ll have to drive after leaving my office to take full advantage of this phenomena. Two of the above studies attempted to answer this question by performing multiple strength assessments at predetermined intervals following the adjustment. Wang and Meadows 2010 (9) found a measurable increase in the strength of the rotatror cuff muscles for up to ten minutes after the cervical spine was aligned and Grindstaff, Hertel 2009 (10) found acute measurable increases in quadriceps strength of 3% and muscle recruitment of 5% for twenty minutes post adjustment. 3% may not sound like much but if you have a 400 pound back squat, 3% means another twelve hard-earned pounds.
These serial assessments are a difficult way to determine how long the effects last because fatigue obscures maximum efforts. What is also missed by these studies are the accumulative effects of multiple adjustments over the span of a treatment period. These only measure the acute changes after a single adjustment.
I did come across a long-term case study (2) that followed the treatment of an 18 year old patient who had a greatly reduced lumbar curve. The clinician sent the patient to his high school strength coach to test his baseline bench press single repetition max which was 245 pounds. Over the course of a 16 week treatment period which restored his lumbar curve to 31 degrees his bench press max increased by 60 pounds to 305 pounds and he was not bench pressing at all over that entire four month stretch. You would expect his numbers to go down not up. This study supports the premise that a normal lumbar lordosis provides inherent biomechanical stability and strength.
This case study shows the potential for long-term effects but the duration of the study allows for potential confounding factors that can be difficult to control: was he eating and sleeping the same? Was he under the same amounts of stress? It is hard to say. With a larger study with more subjects to compare individual results to you can account for these factors and that sort of a follow-up study is necessary to validate the findings of this case study.
Discussion:
These findings are exciting to most people and everyone who I’ve told about them wants to know: “Why are people stronger after adjustment?” They typically speculate that increased circulation is at work but the idea of increased circulation does not look likely. That wouldn’t explain why adjusting the lower back benefits the strength of muscles up stream in the neck and shoulder girdle (2,3).
It is my opinion that there are two contributing factors to this phenomena:
1) Decreased muscle inhibition, and 2) the effect of stability on strength.
1) Muscle inhibition (MI)-
Would you rather lift a weight with 90 or 99% of your available muscle cells? Decreased muscle inhibition as was demonstrated in the above studies (4,9) means that you have access to a greater percent of your total muscle mass. Inhibited muscle is the percent of your muscle cells that are dormant even during maximum effort. When you decrease MI you are firing on more cylinders. This factor has far reaching potential for long-term strength gains far superior to the acute effects documented in these studies. Accessing and training a greater percent of your muscle mass chronically would have a potentially compounded training effect.
“Why are muscles inhibited in the first place?”
Injury frequently results in muscle inhibition. You could also argue that our modern lifestyle is one that actively fosters MI. How many hours a day do you spend in arch supported shoes and low back supporting chairs?
2) The effect of stability on strength: If the hips are out of alignment and it is potentially dangerous to have the strength to pull 300 pounds over your head your body may have neurologic controls to ensure that you don’t have the muscular strength to over shoot the limitations of your stability. Having a huge overhead press and no lumbar curve is like having a cannon on a canoe.
The old adage “the iron never lies” explains why post adjustment strength is an excellent outcome to measure objectively. The previous studies isolate the effect of an adjustment on a single muscle or group of muscles involved in a motor task but the measurable impact of an adjustment is most likely body wide as is demonstrated by Giggey, Tepe (3) in a 2000 study that exhibited an 8.18 lbs. increase in cervical muscle extensors following a sacroiliac adjustment. This is also evident from the 2009 study by Smith and Dianoff (8) that demonstrated a 9.2% improvement in fine motor skills with a movement time test (rapidly point a pointer at a target on a computer screen) post adjustment compared to control groups.
To better understand the body wide effects of the chiropractic adjustment on the body, a more diverse set of outcome markers that include more motor units would be essential. The above studies only use isometric/static contractions to measure strength changes and it is likely the case that the sort of neurological adaptation facilitated by adjustments is best displayed with explosive movements that involve motor skills and maximal muscle recruitment. Olympic style functional movements such as snatch and clean and jerk would assess both motor skills and muscle strength.
All of your basic body functions may very well benefit from these same adjustments just as skeletal muscle does but it is not as easily studied or measured. The general strength of your immune system for instance may be enhanced post-adjustment but until a “maximum effort contraction” of the immune system is devised we won’t be able to quantify that effect. That will take some clever research design and I will report back when it happens.
1) Hillermann, Gomes, Journal Manipulative Physiological Therapeutics – 2006
2) Morningstar, Grand Blanc, Journal Chiropractic Medicine, Autumn 2003; 2(3):137-41
3) Giggey K, Tepe R., Journal of Chiropractic Medicine 2009 June
4) Keller TS, Colloca CJ, Journal of Manipulative Physiological Therapeutics. 2000, Nov-Dec
5) Jorgen Sandell, Palmgren, Journal of Chiropractic Medicine. 2008 June
6) Suter, McMorland, Herzog, Journal of Manipulative Physiological Therapeutics. 1999. March-April
7) Suter, McMorland, Herzog. Journal of Manipulative Physiological Therapeutics. 2000 Feb
8) Smith, Dianoff, Smith. Journal of Alternative and Complimentary Medicine 2009 March
9) Wang SS., Meadows J. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics. 2010 Feb
The Ghandi Deadlift Project
Many of you may already know that I grew up on a strict vegetarian diet. My parents have been eating vegetarian for the past forty years and meat was not really considered food in my childhood. This is not such a big deal now but back in the 80’s in rural Washington in a hot bed of meat, mullets, and musk it was a much bigger deal. It was a rare meal that I had without someone asking a brilliant question that warranted an answer such as:
“Well that’s a good question but no, turkeys are not effing vegetables so no, I don’t eat them.”
This continued through undergrad where I played division I men’s rugby. It blew my mind how a person who I just literally spent an entire afternoon kicking around a field would inform me after that “you can’t grow muscle without meat.” Rage. Blind Rage.
Despite medical advice from authorities the vegetarian diet worked fine for me until my early 20’s when I met my beautiful, meat cooking wife Alicia. I now eat large pieces of flesh at every meal and I will admit that I am significantly stronger now then I was in my early 20’s (ten years ago.) I’m the same size and weight that I’ve always been but my training is more intense and focused on strength gains so to determine if it is the meat or the training that has me strong I am undergoing what I call:
4 weeks strict vegan (not vegetarian) diet
Intensive deadlift training similar to deadlift cycles I have done over the last several months.
Culminating in a deadlift single rep max attempt to beat my current record which stands at #440 on 5/1/10.
This lift was a #25 pound jump for me and was the result of a 6 week long deadlift strength program.
For this experiment to be a success and prove that Ghandi most likely had a SICK deadlift I will have to make a jump that big in only 4 weeks instead of 6 bringing me up to #465.
The project begins Monday, August 9th.
The max is on Monday September 6th. I’ll report back then.
Barefoot Running Part II: Nike joins the party
Always one step ahead of the curve, Nike provides 3 shoes that fill the gap between what I referred in the last posting as the “modern shoe” and the minimalist approach of barefoot and Vibrams. I hope that is clear from the last post that a gradual transition is absolutely necessary in order to harden the intrinsic ligaments of your feet as well as the tendons that flex your ankles. You’ll notice that the heel remains raised in both the 7.0 and 5.0 versions and is not significantly lower until the 3.0 model. This gives the gastrocs and achillis tendons time to adapt to the significant increase in tension placed on them in a flatter shoe. Because of this the Nike Free series may be the most comfortable way to progressively reduce your foot’s dependence on external support.
A friend at Nike provided me with the following review of the Nike Free series in response to my last posting. It looks like round #2 goes to Nike.
Nike Free Shoes
The Revolutionary Running Shoes
The first shoe in the Nike Free shoes series is the 7.0, which is designed for Beginning Foot Strength Training that provides excellent everyday support.
1. Nike Free Barefoot Running Concept For Stability
Nike Free Shoes Among the Nike Free shoes, this shoe is the one that provides the most support, which makes it great for starters of the barefoot running concept. The Nike Free 7.0 is very flexible and has a very strong surface grip for better stability.
The shoe helps the foot retain a stable position, which assists in the natural transition of the feet from the strike of the heel to when the toe sets off. The 7.0 also distributes the impact of landing well so that impact will not hurt the legs and knees a lot. Both men and women can benefit from the offers of this shoe.
Let us look at some of the other editions :
Nike Free Running Shoes: The 5.0 Edition
The Nike Free 5.0, the second shoe in the series, is for Increased Foot Strength Training and provides medium support. It has deeper grooves for greater flexibility both on the forefoot and the rearfoot, thus allowing the feet to move the way it wants to. Despite this, the Nike Free 5.0 provides adequate support to the foot where it’s needed.
The shoe provides additional cushioning for shock absorption. The sturdy but comfortable cushioning also gives a stronger and more solid thrust forward to the foot, which propels the runner on a faster, more powerful stride. Even with the flexibility that the shoe has, it still provides sufficient protection on the sole for when you are running on rough surfaces. The shoe also comes with a comfortable upper with a suede feel. Even this small detail is specifically designed to move as your feet do. Most users remark that the shoe fits like a glove but still does the work that a good running shoe should do.
This is great for runners who want to feel the freedom of running practically on bare feet but still need support and cushioning for their feet. If you find that this is the shoe for you, check out the special training schedule for the shoe that Nike has prepared to help you ease into the shoe.
Nike Free Shoes: The 3.0 Edition
And for Advanced Foot Strength Training, there’s the Nike Free 3.0, which provides minimal support. This shoe is highly responsive. Using it is almost like running barefoot, and it can also promote foot strength. The shoe is more widely known for its track spikes minus the weight.
Very comfortable and very lightweight, the shoe also offers an unexpected cushioning support centered on the compression-molded EVA midsole.The shoe also has two panels of mesh and synthetic leather for a snug fit and a BRS 1000 outsole.
Barefoot Running Part I: The Cheap Shoe Revolution
I bought my beige Crocs at noon the next day.
objects. Four decades of technology and innovation have brought us motion control, arch support, inflatable parts-don’t forget the Reebok Pump, and heel cushions made of gel, air, foam and springs resulting in the modern running shoe. The result: nothing. Today runners experience the same injury rate as they did before these technologies were introduced.
This is a great topic because it is very difficult to demonstrate in a study the superiority of either barefoot/minimalist or the modern shoe. In my mind, the only way to demonstrate such superiority is to show a causative relationship resulting in greater injury prevention and improved performance. The data is there but great care must be taken in order to establish a causitive relationship. For instance an observational study that shows that those in worn shoes ran faster in a given race may do so because they run more often thus always having shoes that appear “worn.” Or, those same results may have been caused by the fact that people with injuries seek motion control shoes and it is the injury that is causitive, not the footwear.
Many intervention studies are flawed as well such as when a group of heel strikers is taught to run on the balls of their feet to see if they are faster and less prone to injury. Well they’re not faster and they often get hurt because in a short 2 week study they are thrown into taking the lion’s share of the impact in their untrained achillis tendon and gastrocs. There are many clever studies out there that demonstrate a causitive relationship. We’ll look at some that support and some that dismiss the utility of the modern running shoe.
2) It’s “natural” to run barefoot.
Again, it may be true that bare feet is natural but before you march your Reebok Pumps to your local shoe burning keep in mind that Leprosy is natural and so are poisonous berries. Nature has more interests than your health and safety. Until there is some data to sink our greedy little teeth into we’ll curb this line of logic under the “interesting but irrelevant” category.
It turned out that when subjects thought they were landing on the soft, high-tech material (Deceptive trial), the impact forces were actually HIGHER than in the Warning trial when they expected the cheap and ineffective material. And barefoot had the lowest impact forces of all. The other amazing finding, as is shown in the graph above, is that in the barefoot and cheap material trials, the impact forces get lower and lower as the subjects repeat the step, which shows a learning effect that is not present in the ‘Deceptive’ trial where subjects thought they were landing on a soft material. So this is remarkable – it shows how an expectation of impact can actually alter impact, and again, it supports what Benno Nigg and others are saying about anticipation of impact, with the ability to adjust muscle activity to defend some other variable.
Motion control shoe delays fatigue of shank muscles in runners with overpronating feet.
Cheung RT, Ng GY.
Running in new and worn shoes: a comparison of three types of cushioning footwear.
Kong PW, Candelaria NG, Smith DR.
Proprioception and stability: foot position awareness as a function of age and footwear.
Robbins S, Waked E, McClaran J.
Is your prescription of distance running shoes evidence-based Richards CE, Magin PJ, Callister R.
Foot strike patterns and collision forces in habitually barefoot versus shod runners. Lieberman DE, Venkadesan M, Werbel WA, Daoud AI, D’Andrea S, Davis IS, Mang’eni RO, Pitsiladis Y.
Hazard of deceptive advertising of athletic footwear.
What Happens when a strength althlete runs 26.2 miles?
Rock ‘N’ Roll Timeline:
December 12th 2009- The last time I ran further than a mile- At that time it was as far as I’d ever run: 5 miles for time down 48th to Lowman Park.
October- February 2010- Began training in earnest for the Crossfit Games. Read Mark Rippetoe’s Starting Strength, and Practical Programming. Abandoned all cardio conditioning and focused on my barbell weakness with Texas method linear progressions on all major lifts.
March 2010-Present- After the NW Crossfit Sectionals, began training at Crossfit West Seattle in a strength cycle that runs at 100% intensity for <20 durations. Runs kept under 800 meters and usually loaded down with heavy awkward objects.
May 2010- Got crazy idea to attempt the Rock N Roll Marathon in June- Looked into it- sold out already- forgot about it.
Thursday, June 24th- Research for a blog posting on barefoot running and cheap shoes- Planted seeds in my mind that will later cause me significant physical discomfort.
6 am Friday, June 25th (three days ago)- Participate in my Friday morning patient metcon (The Sevens: 7 rounds for time- 7 #60 d-bell thrusters on each side/ seven inverted burpees.) After which a friend talks me into baniditing/stealing the marathon the next day. (Thanks Jimbo)
Noon Friday, June 25th- Score a marathon bib for $50 on craigslist.
- Seriously consider acquiring “running gear.”
- Stop by CFWS for support: bought a book to record heavy lifting in. What was I here for again?
7-11pm, Friday June 25th- Date night with Alicia: Nachos, margarita, and Shutter Island.
7am Saturday, June 26th- Run the Rock N’ Roll with a goal of 4 hours. Someone told me that was “good” and I’m “good” right?
- The same cheap Nike indoor soccer shoes that I’ve been training in for the last 6 months
- A sleeveless Pineapple Classic shirt
- Awesome knee-high tube socks
Mile 1-5: Awesome.
Mile 6-10: New PR for distance ran. Trochanter and TFL pain. Still tolerable but noticeably less awesome.
Mile 11-14: Severe foot pain. Experience violent mood swings, bipolar peaks of ecstasy and agony. Re-evaluate my life and abandon initial delusional goals of a 4 hour finish.
New goal: Keep running.
Mile 15: Significant hunger and desperation. Physical and emotional distress. Saved by angel with salvation in a large shining bowl of Gummie Bears.
Mile 16-20: Fight my way uphill joyously chewing gummies.
Mile 21: Locking cramps set in: lose all motor control of my lower
extremities. Develop a new gait- Zombie/ Frankenstein/ Ben Johnson. Begin to receive concerned looks and frantic encouragement from strangers.
Mile 23.5: Break down and walk for the first time.
Mile 24-26: Uphill? Seriously? Head down. Elbows out bull rush for the finish line. This was a super-slow motion bull rush though. (Picture a geriatric power walker chasing down an adversary who has stolen their orthopedic shoes.)
Mile 26: While geriatricbullrushing down the hwy 99 off-ramp toward the finish line, catch inspiration from a WAY FIRED UP Sean O’Donnell.
11:30am, Saturday, June 25th- Finish in 4 hours, 30 minutes, 12 seconds- engulfed by medical staff “Really I’m fine.” who promptly quarantine me in the medical tent as if buffoonery were a contagious disease.
11:31am, Saturday, June 25th- Swear-off cardio forever. Look forward to returning to strength program when I can walk again.
Monday June 28th- Ice feet and heinous blisters continuously. Write ridiculous time-line blog and plan for next act of physical buffoonery/ marathon.
Conclusion #1: The Crossfit Football style training that we do at CFWS is sufficient cardiovascular conditioning to do anything.
Conclusion #2: Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should.
Conclusion #3: My gym needs Gummie Bears.
