...among beginner runners.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/the-myth-of-pronation-and-running-injuries/?_r=0
I always love when conventional wisdom is overturned or at least challenged.
In the end, I suspect fit and just how the shoes feel through your gait is the most important.
The thing is- I spent years injured. The question was whether or not I was too injured to run.
Finally I tore my plantar fascia- got orthotics and I have been overuse injury free since then.
I know all the support stuff is supposedly wrong but it works for me.
Maybe you are injury free because you tore your PF and let it heal and it is not due to your orthotics
runn wrote:
The thing is- I spent years injured. The question was whether or not I was too injured to run.
Finally I tore my plantar fascia- got orthotics and I have been overuse injury free since then.
I know all the support stuff is supposedly wrong but it works for me.
When I see studies like this I always wonder if the people run enough for it to be applicable to more competitive runners. Maybe things are different when you start running more. No opinion on whether the substance here is right or wrong, just an observation on methodology.
And to the guy that says orthotics work for him . . . I wouldn't let theory get in the way of practice.
If you are a pronator but are fit for the right type of shoes you generally shouldn't get injured more than someone who is neutral. That's why they make stability shoes, so you can control your foot strike and help neutralize it out.