Slashdot Mirror
Do We Need Running Shoes To Run?
prostoalex writes to tell us The Daily Mail has an interesting look at current research in the field of running and injuries related to running. Most of the evidence pointed at a lack of any need for running shoes. Some of the more interesting points: the more expensive the running shoes, the greater the probability of getting an injury; some of the planet's best and most intense runners run barefoot; Stanford running team, having access to the top-notch modern shoes sent in for free by manufacturers, after a few rounds of trial and error still chose to train with no shoes at all."
Not yet, but she is working on it.
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
Dead on man!
Every single NFL star here would be crying pussies if they were in ONE Australian rules football match.
American football players are girly pussies that cant take real sports.
I am american, I watch a LOT of Australian Football, wow that can get you worked up more than any 15 seconds of play and 20 minute timeout American game.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Which only proves that ID has nothing to do with science. Since is so perfect it appears to be natural; ID cannot be shown to actually exist, because any such proof would only show that it wasn't perfect and undermines the perfection of the designer.
So give it up already. ID is nothing but theology.
If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
Brand loyalty isn't a "silly" consideration. Why would I not be loyal to Nike (or Asics, or New Balance,or any other serious running brand), when they've produced the right type of shoe for my running type for more than 25 years now? Should I give 'Roos a shot, so as not to be branded a "loyalist"?