Studies? We Don't Need No Stinkin' Studies (to Live Barefoot)!

One bit of opposition I keep hearing from podiatrists and other experts who oppose barefoot activity is that there isn't enough evidence to support it. Studies have not been able to show that going barefoot is better for you than wearing shoes.

Now wait just a minute.

Photo: Podiatry Today

Does anyone ever say "We don't have enough research to prove it's better to breathe environmental air rather than from an oxygen tank."

No one ever says "The evidence is inconclusive whether living without a neck brace is better than regular use of one."

Ever heard someone say, "Until we have evidence that going barehanded is more beneficial, best practice will be to recommend regular use of gloves."

See where I'm going with this?

I was in a Twitter conversation today with a barefoot supporter who said of the lifestyle, "We just need hard science to back it up, not just anecdotes." Many barefooters feel this way. My response?

No, actually we don't.

Really, since when do we need scientific evidence to use an inborn part of our bodies? How in the world did our society's thinking about feet become so "bass ackwards" that footwear supersedes our natural condition when it comes to the scientific burden of proof?

The feet we were born with are the baseline, friends. Why should we be forced to prove that we should be able use them the way they are?

We don't have studies showing why we should go barefoot, but we really don't need them. Barefoot is what we already are.

The onus is on those who claim we can't go barefoot. If footwear makes feet so much safer against injury, prove it. If arch supports improve the long-term health of the feet versus feet that never wear shoes, prove it.

This method of showing proven benefit over our innate condition has worked in other areas of the body:

• Prescription glasses and contact lenses alter our natural condition and improve our sight.
• Orthodontics effectively straighten the teeth and assist with their proper alignment.
• Cochlear implants give hearing ability to those who've lost it or never had it.
• Hip or knee replacement surgery gives pain-free mobility back to those who suffer from degeneration in these joints.

These results are proven. What's more, doctor's don't recommend those therapies above if you have 20/20 vision, straight teeth, you can hear, and/or your joints are fine.

On the flip side, listed below are a few widely-accepted results of healthy people regularly wearing footwear (and, I think, reasons that "experts" are reluctant to approach foot health from the baseline of our human condition):

• Footwear -- even sandals -- raises the temperature of the feet, causing sweating and providing optimal conditions for fungal growth.
• Shoes often squeeze or rub the feet in harmful ways, exacerbating or causing conditions such as bunions, hammer toes, neuromas, corns, blisters, and more.
• The soles of footwear block the feet from feeling textures and objects on the ground below (exteroception), eliminating our natural safety mechanisms and altering our ability to sense where our feet are in space (proprioception).

So we have a good idea about why we shouldn't wear shoes. Despite those issues above and so many more, podiatrists and other experts around the world still recommend that people regularly wear shoes and "avoid going barefoot."

"BUT WAIT!," you may shout. "What if we do find a problem with the feet that needs fixing? What if someone goes barefoot all of the time and still has fallen arches, plantar fasciitis, bunions or something else that orthotics or surgery could help with?"

In those cases, yes, research to discover the best therapy would be warranted -- and those data exist. Even still, it seems to me that the goal would be to use whatever physical therapy, bracing, taping, orthotics, or even surgery that can help rehabilitate their feet so that that going barefoot can continue as the default condition.

"BUT WAIT ONE MORE TIME!," you may shout. "Those with peripheral neuropathy and Raynaud's clearly shouldn't go barefoot in certain conditions because it could create a health risk for them. Footwear is the only therapy that can't prevent serious problems."

Look, I get it that living barefoot isn't the end-all be-all for everyone. I get it that it truly isn't advisable for some select people to be barefoot in specific circumstances.

The bottom line is that the burden of proof lies with those who think footwear, orthotics, arch supports, braces, taping, etc. is inherently better for everyday living than our own two feet. While these things can provide therapeutic relief from specific medical conditions, they should not be considered for long-term, everyday use. What's more, everyday use of footwear has been shown to be detrimental and each person should think critically about whether remaining barefoot -- the human condition -- might be the best option until proven otherwise.

Shoe Claims Are All Backwards: Brief Thoughts About Recent Settlements

The sound of heads shaking is echoing throughout the barefoot/minimalist community after news of Vibram's settlement of a class-action lawsuit accusing them of making baseless claims that their Fivefingers line of minimalist footwear could reduce injury and strengthen foot muscles. Now the company has put aside $3.75 million dollars to pay back customers who didn't see such results.

This is what happens when you sell products, folks. If you're going to be taking people's money, you'd better be darned sure that what you claim it can do is scientifically valid. When it comes to footwear, we've seen this before with Sketchers Shape-up line of shoes and FitFlop's sandals.

I'm sure so many podiatrists are laughing about all of this. The most vocal of them take great pleasure in getting on their anti-barefoot-running Websites, their Twitter accounts, and other outlets to essentially say, "See?! The evidence isn't there that minimalist shoes are good for you! We've been saying it all along!"

I totally get it. It's academically dishonest to make claims that using a product aids the feet in reducing injuries and getting stronger when there's no evidence. That makes sense.

As I type this, I'm wearing one of my FOUR pairs of Vibram Fivefingers. Why? Because I have to wear closed-toe shoes for my job. Otherwise I'd be barefoot.

Bare feet are the human condition. Let's all keep remembering that. We were born with bare feet. People have lived for millenia with no shoes and done fine.

In everything we do, going barefoot should be the baseline and any shoes should be added only as necessary. Any claims about what those shoes or orthotics or braces or whatever can do should be based around improving the human condition and they should be backed by evidence.

So instead of:

"Vibram Fivefingers strengthen the feet and reduce injuries" (compared to standard shoes) ...

The claims should be:

"Vibram Fivefingers increase traction on many surfaces and protect the feet while preserving most of the foot's natural function."

See the difference? It's easy to get into legal hot water with the first statement -- obviously, because it happened. It's a lot harder with the second.

I wear Vibram Fivefingers, among other brands of minimal footwear, when I need something on my feet for protection, warmth, or to fulfill a policy when it's not okay to challenge the system. I wear them because they add little to the feet -- NOT because they are so much less bulky or injurious than normal shoes.

As the Barefoot Alliance says in it's main hashtag, #BarefootIsHuman. Let's stop making baseless claims that hurt the underlying intent of the barefoot/minimalist movement and start behaving as if shoes add to the feet instead of barefoot being the subtraction of shoes.

It's more accurate all around, and more honest.

Things That Make You Go Hmm...: The Barefoot Edition

One of the most frustrating things for me as a barefooter is that so many of the claims criticizing barefoot activity are made without the critics giving any thought to what they are actually saying. I know that the following observations are a bit snarky and pointed, but they're worth thinking about:

Lots of people have told me that they successfully went barefoot "all the time" as a kid, playing on rocks and gravel, in dirt, and around all kinds of dangerous things. Then they insinuate that the flat, smooth surfaces of the adult world (e.g. concrete, asphalt, tile, linolium and carpet) are too dangerous for going barefoot.

Hmm...

There's a prevalent thought that going barefoot is terribly unsanitary and can spread disease, yet most diseases are spread through direct contact from our hands to our faces, or from face to face. Still, no one insists that we all wear surgical masks and gloves during the height of flu season and no one polices public restrooms to make sure that we've all properly washed our hands when leaving.

Hmm...

Lots of people think it's "gross" or "disgusting" to go barefoot, but then put shoes on that their feet have sweated in day after day and which act as incubators for problems such as athlete's foot and toe fungus.

Hmm...

Going barefoot in a store is supposedly very unsafe and a high risk for injury, yet high heels -- which put 20,000 women a year into hospital ERs and often have no traction at all on their soles -- are acceptable footwear.

Hmm...

Many people claim that they "hate feet" and can't stand the sight of them, yet they're fine when others wear open-toed shoes. It's only when the small amount of shoe material is removed that the sight of the feet is offensive. The exception: bare feet are rarely hated at the pool.

Hmm...

Countless women have told me that they don't go barefoot because they have "sensitive" feet, yet are willing to wear shoes which cause regular pain and blistering in and on their "sensitive" feet.

Hmm...

Podiatrists and other experts say that there's no evidence to support claims that running barefoot leads to less injury. There is also no evidence to support claims that running with standard cushioned shoes causes less injury, yet they are fine recommending those.

Hmm...

Many people think that going barefoot puts feet at a high risk of injury, yet many people regularly close car doors, use sharp steak knives and scissors, light matches and more without wearing protective gloves.

Hmm...

Naysayers claim that there's loads of broken glass, sharp rocks, nails, and even hypodermic needles strewn about all over the place, yet they can never point out where any of it is when asked.

Hmm...

Though many podiatrists say that our bare feet aren't capable of properly supporting us, countless athletes successfully compete barefoot in gymnastics, martial arts, dance, running and more.

Hmm...

Some people believe it's inappropriate for someone to shop a store barefoot, yet customers are regularly allowed with offensive shirts and tattoos, bad body odor, loud children and more.

Hmm...

A common thought is that bare feet may make business floors excessively dirty. A person who regularly goes barefoot cleans their feet at least once a day. People who wear regularly wear shoes rarely, if ever, clean the soles of their footwear.

Hmm...

You know who -- or what -- is allowed barefoot into a store? Service animals. It may be "no shoes, no service" for people, but guide dogs are allowed on the very same unsafe floors AND they cannot be made by management to wear protective booties, per a blog post I wrote a while back.

Hmm...

Speaking of bare feet being inappropriate, it used to be that women should only wear skirts, children should only speak when spoken to and flip flops were only for the pool or shower room. My, how things change.

Hmm...

Do these things also make you go "Hmm..."? Does it give you a different perspective on bare feet? What would you add to the list? Am I off base with some of them? Please leave your comments in the section below.



Image: graur codrin / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Driving Barefoot May Noticeably Improve Gas Mileage

With gas prices in the U.S. on the rise and warmer weather becoming more regular, I wanted to revisit a topic I blogged about almost two years ago. I decided to do a little experiment to more definitively find out if the act of driving barefoot has any real impact on gas mileage. I wasn't terribly surprised by the results.

Driving barefoot may improve your gas mileage by double-digit percentages and, although it's believed by many to be against the law, it's perfectly legal in all 50 states, Canada and the UK to drive without shoes. The one exception is in Alabama, where motorcycle riders must don footwear.

Methodology

I conducted a generally unscientific study over the course of a month with my own vehicle, a 2003 Hyundai Sonata GLS with automatic transmission, to see what noticeable difference I might find driving shod versus barefoot. I set up a strict set of rules in order keep everything as equal as possible. This would ensure that the results would be more accurate and better comparisons could be made. The test involved driving on two subsequent tanks of gas. With the first, I drove with minimalist shoes on almost the entire tank and with the second, barefoot almost the entire tank.

While I would have liked to drive every bit of each tank only with shoes or barefoot, the logistics of making this happen were quite unrealistic. For the most part, however, driving with the opposite foot condition was very limited and ended up being only a few miles maximum.

The following rules were used in ensuring near equal conditions for both tanks:

• Both tanks were filled to near capacity, allowing for a few "clicks" of the pump when finished filling.
• I would drive with similar patterns of accelerating and braking with both tanks.
• A very small amount of driving - only a few miles - with the opposite foot condition would be allowed with each tank for logistical reasons.
• I would only record the mileage driven up to the point that the gas indicator light came on while in the process of driving. (The gas indicator light comes on when approximately two gallons of gas remain in the 17.2-gallon tank.)
• Similar routes would be used for driving to and from work each day.
• A near identical mix of city and highway driving would be attempted.
• No maintenance would be conducted on the vehicle during the test. (e.g. No car washes, oil changes, tire pressure adjustments, etc.)
• The same brand and grade of fuel would be used for each full tank.
• I would use the air-conditioning unit, radio and other ancillary systems for a similar number of miles.

And so I proceeded to drive. It took approximately 2 weeks to burn through each tank of gas. When all miles were driven and the test was complete, I did see a difference.

Results

Driving barefoot showed an improvement of 2.1 miles per gallon, a difference of +11.3%. In total, I drove 31.7 miles farther on a tank of gas without shoes.

This may not seem like much, but over time the savings would add up. According to AAA's Website, the national average for a gallon of gas in the U.S. on Wednesday, April 20, was $3.84 per gallon. When you figure out the difference in cost per mile (two cents, based on the MPGs from the results) and extrapolate that out to annual savings based on the U.S. Department of Transportation's annual mileage data, an average American could save about $284 a year, or almost $11 per bi-weekly paycheck, just from driving barefoot in a car similar to mine. That doesn't include any other fuel-saving measures that could save additional money. What could you do with an extra $11 in each paycheck?

Conclusions

The apparent increase in fuel efficiency from driving barefoot makes sense for a couple of reasons. I can tell you from experience that driving barefoot gives the best feedback from pedals to foot that anyone can achieve. Wearing shoes, I only feel the inside of my shoe. When barefoot, I'm able to use the thousands of nerve endings and dozens of bones, joints and soft tissues in the foot and ankle to add or remove the slightest degree of acceleration or braking that is necessary. With shoes on, much of this sensation and movement is limited or eliminated, and then I must use only larger groups of bones, joints and muscles to make adjustments. Essentially, if you can feel the pedals better and exert only the exact pressure necessary, you will use only the gas you need and save fuel over time. Think of it as kind of very intelligent cruise control.

Based on all this, I have a few thoughts on my results and what they mean for the "bigger picture."

• Was this experiment scientifically valid and can we make solid scientific conclusions based on this information? Absolutely NOT. Don't flame me because I didn't do this or that to conduct a proper scientific experiment. This was a test conducted by one person in one car with two tanks of gas. I'm no Mythbuster. That said...
• This data and my previous experiences driving shod vs. barefoot all do point in the direction that driving barefoot does provide better gas mileage. Though I've never kept solid numbers except for this experiment, I can tell you that I notice an uptick in my mileage the more often I drive barefoot. I really do think there's something to this.
• A person who begins driving barefoot after using regular (read: non-minimalist) footwear could see even bigger numbers than I did. Remember that I only wore minimalist footwear during the shod test. These types of shoes provide better ground feedback than regular shoes do, so it's not far fetched to say that going to barefoot from regular dress shoes or sneakers with thicker heels and less flexibility could show an even bigger improvement. Heck, there might even be cause to say that just switching to minimalist shoes for driving would provide it's own uptick in gas mileage.
• With current gas prices as high as we've seen them in three years, why not try whatever you can to save gas? If a combination of fuel-saving measures, including driving barefoot, can show at least some noticeable positive difference in mileage, it seems prudent to try them out and see what it can do for your pocketbook. Remember, driving barefoot is absolutely LEGAL.
• I really want to see someone scientifically study this. There's a lot of anecdotal evidence and vague postings out there to support the idea that driving barefoot saves gas, but my study is the closest thing to scientific analysis that I've seen on this topic. Maybe this very blog entry will spark some auto club or group to look further into this. I think it's safe to say that there's plenty of people who drive barefoot when flip flop weather comes around. Now let's see some real data to find out if they happen to be saving themselves money. Maybe I should ask the Mythbusters...

What do you think? Do you drive barefoot and, if so, have you gotten better gas mileage because of it? Can having direct skin-to-pedal contact really allow for finer sensation and adjustment of the pedals? If you disagree with my assertion that there's something to this, why so and what do you really think the difference is between driving shod or barefoot? Please leave your comments in the section below.

Most Facebook Users Would Go Barefoot in Public: Poll

About half of Facebook users would "almost always" go barefoot in public if it were socially acceptable and the weather was nice, according to a recent online poll answered by 533 respondents on the social media site. Another quarter of responders replied that they would go barefoot "some of the time" under the same circumstances. The poll begins to give a better view of people's perceptions of going barefoot and it's societal acceptance. (The results hold a 95% confidence level with 4% margin of error.)

Methodology: Asking the Right Question

A barefoot shopper. (Photo by
colorblindPICASO on Flickr)

I've been very interested for a while in getting some kind of good data about people's impressions of barefoot living. As founder and president of The Primalfoot Alliance, I very strongly believe in advocating for those who want to go barefoot - even in public places where so many barefooters are discriminated against. The first thing I wanted to find out when researching all this is how many people actually would go barefoot if given the chance. Knowing that could influence how much effort The Primalfoot Alliance should put into our...um, efforts.

But what should be the first question? Well, I have my feelers out all over the internet when it comes to hearing people's thoughts on bare feet. I'm friends with numerous people who live with and without shoes, I watch a Twitter search related to all things "barefoot," and I get daily emails of Google search results related to the topic. A consistent message that I hear from a lot of people out there is their desire to go barefoot if it were only "socially acceptable" or if they "could." Furthermore, many people have told me that they would go barefoot more often if they lived in a better climate - specifically, warmer conditions. There are other factors that people take into account as reasons they don't go barefoot, but those two seem to be the foundational reasons why going barefoot isn't an option for them. I figure that for every person that says it, there may be many others who at least are thinking it.

So I asked the question, "Would you go totally barefoot in public if it was socially acceptable and the weather was nice?" I included the caveat for nice weather to make it more reasonable to imply that the basic conditions for personal comfort are favorable enough that they'd feel comfortable going barefoot in the first place. Notice that I made no mention of sharp objects, diseases or any other issues that naysayers bring up against going without shoes. I wanted for respondents to answer while keeping those concerns in mind. Finally, a key word in this question is 'totally.' I thought it was important to clearly state that there would be nothing on their feet. This eliminates the possibilities of socks, flip flops, minimalist footwear or anything else being considered.

The answers were written to be simple and few in number. I wanted to get a good cross section of responses in which anyone and everyone could find a comfortable answer. Respondents could choose "No, thank you," "Sure, some of the time," or "Absolutely, almost always."

The Results: Surprising Even to Me

It turns out that one out of every two people on Facebook would frequently go barefoot in public if their perception of social acceptance was achieved. Furthermore, about three out of four people would go without shoes publicly at least some of the time. Only about a quarter of the respondents indicated that they still would not go barefoot.

But there's more to these results: One thing I wanted to know was how skewed the results might be based on the ratio of responses from my friends versus those who I'm not friends with on the service. Basically, did those who know me and my barefoot lifestyle mess up the numbers. Interestingly enough, the responses were almost identical all the way across the board. The biggest deviation in responses from friends versus non-friends was about 2%. Not bad.

Let's look at some charts. First, here's a pie graph of the overall answers to the question with all 533 Facebook users who responded represented.:

Next up, here's a visual breakdown of each the responses by those who I'm friends with on Facebook (red) versus those I'm not (green).:

A full 83% (444 people) of the 533 total responses came from people with whom I am NOT friends on Facebook. The remaining 17% (89) are.

So how accurate are these results? I wondered that myself. Using a sample size calculator from Creative Research Systems, I determined that for Facebook's more than 500 million active users (using 500 million as the population size), the results hold a 95% confidence level with 4.25% margin of error.

Conclusions

With everything I've written and presented so far, what does all this actually mean? I have drawn a few conclusions of my own, but yours may vary. (Don't berate me because your conclusions don't agree with mine.):

• Because this poll was based only on Facebook users, it's hard to know exactly how it translates to the general populace. Although there are 500 million users on Facebook worldwide, only slightly more than 116 million of them are from the U.S. It's difficult to know how breakdowns of nationality, age, gender, political and other characteristics vary between Facebook's user population who responded and the general population. Without anything better to go on at this time, however, I believe it's reasonable to draw some conclusions about the general population from a good sample of 500 million users. After all, that's more than the entire population of the United States.
• If one questions whether going barefoot in public is "socially acceptable," I have to conclude that it probably IS. If you assume that those who are willing to do it are fine with others doing it, too - a reasonable assumption - that means that most of the public really are okay with others' public barefootedness. The number may even be higher if you consider that those who don't want to go barefoot themselves may still be fine with others doing it, though there's no data to support that assumption (i.e. That's another question to ask).
• There is widespread mistaken assumption that most of us are opposed to people going barefoot in public. It goes back to the notion of perception versus reality. People may not think it's socially acceptable, so they don't go barefoot in public. The problem is that a LOT of people think that and therefore the perception continues. I'd bet that this perception translates to business managers and security who think they're keeping the other patrons from being offended. It's pretty likely that a vast majority of the other patrons actually don't care. In all actuality, they would probably rather be barefoot, too.
• I find these results to be VERY surprising. I expected that there could be 20-30% of people who would go barefoot most of the time, but not half of all responders. The fact that three out of four people would go barefoot in public at least some of the time tells me that people do have a respect for their feet. The results back up two big sentiments that I hear on a regular basis: "I LOVE going barefoot," and "I used to go barefoot all the time as a kid." Even though they say these things, they DON'T go barefoot in public. Maybe the reason for this is because of perceived social norms. That said...
• We need to educate people that going barefoot in public is okay and that others are supportive. If people who prefer to go barefoot understand that they have the support of many others behind them, the visibility of bare feet in public could skyrocket in the next few years. As more people choose to go without shoes in public, there will be more pressure on businesses to allow them as patrons.
• We need to educate businesses that many people would prefer to go barefoot while out and about and that they are not a threat to the bottom line. I really do believe that many managers and security base much of their discrimination off baseless thinking that other patrons will be offended by seeing people go barefoot. I've experienced it myself when an art gallery manager -- after I shot down all his other reasons for denying me -- told me he didn't want other patrons to be offended...in an art gallery that had a number of potentially offensive/disturbing pieces on display.
• More research and polling needs to be done about these topics. There's so much more I'd like to know about people's stances on bare feet. For instance, what are people's primary reasons for opposing the idea of going barefoot in public? What do people see as the primary use for shoes? Are men or women more accepted when they go barefoot? The clearer the data we can get on all this, the better.

What do you think of these results? Do these responses surprise you? Do you think I made a mistake and these results aren't reliable? What can we take away from this poll? Please leave your responses in the comments section below.