Metabolic cost of running barefoot versus shod: is lighter better?

  title={Metabolic cost of running barefoot versus shod: is lighter better?},
  author={Jason R Franz and Corbyn Marie Wierzbinski and Rodger Kram},
  journal={Medicine and science in sports and exercise},
  volume={44 8},
PURPOSE Based on mass alone, one might intuit that running barefoot would exact a lower metabolic cost than running in shoes. Numerous studies have shown that adding mass to shoes increases submaximal oxygen uptake (V˙O(2)) by approximately 1% per 100 g per shoe. However, only two of the seven studies on the topic have found a statistically significant difference in V˙O(2) between barefoot and shod running. The lack of difference found in these studies suggests that factors other than shoe mass… CONTINUE READING
Recent Discussions
This paper has been referenced on Twitter 59 times over the past 90 days. VIEW TWEETS

From This Paper

Topics from this paper.
37 Citations
27 References
Similar Papers


Publications citing this paper.
Showing 1-10 of 37 extracted citations


Publications referenced by this paper.
Showing 1-10 of 27 references

Running economy and kinematic differences among running with the foot shod, with the foot bare, and with the bare foot equated for weight [dissertation

  • RF Flaherty
  • Springfield (MA): Springfield College;
  • 1994
Highly Influential
5 Excerpts

The effect of shoe weight on the aerobic demands of running

  • EC Frederick, JT Daniels, JW. Hayes
  • Vienna (Austria): Urban
  • 1984
Highly Influential
6 Excerpts

The Complete Idiot 's Guide to Barefoot Running

  • C Richards, T. Hollowell
  • New York (NY): Alpha Books;
  • 2011
1 Excerpt

Similar Papers

Loading similar papers…