For 2024 Pilgrims: €50,- donation = 1 year with no ads on the forum + 90% off any 2024 Guide. More here. (Discount code sent to you by Private Message after your donation) |
---|
I don't care what the studies say. As far as I can tell from my sample of one (me), I tend to stumble. When my legs are tired and I'm losing concentration, I can sometimes do a girly, twisty collapse. It doesn't happen every day or every week, but certainly it will happen to me at least once over the course of a multi-week walk. I find that it happens less often when I'm in a pair of boots that support my ankles. And if it does happen when I'm wearing those boots, the ankle doesn't get hurt so badly and I carry on walking without pain.The first is that boots will give you ankle support.
You are absolutely correct. If the users of poles are just tap[p]ing them lightly on flat surfaces they won’t be taking any pressure off their knees. However, if they make the effort to exert some downward pressure onto their poles - this includes not only flat surfaces, but uphills and declines - they will indeed take some weight/pressure off their knees. Not only that, but they will get an upper body workout at the same time..........Ive looked in amazement /amusement walkers trailing these sticks ,taping them lighly on flat surfaces belivieving they are taking pressure off their knees..really?
I'm a huge fan of debunking folklore so I hate to do what I'm about to do but ... with regard to this "myth"
I don't care what the studies say. As far as I can tell from my sample of one (me), I tend to stumble. When my legs are tired and I'm losing concentration, I can sometimes do a girly, twisty collapse. It doesn't happen every day or every week, but certainly it will happen to me at least once over the course of a multi-week walk. I find that it happens less often when I'm in a pair of boots that support my ankles. And if it does happen when I'm wearing those boots, the ankle doesn't get hurt so badly and I carry on walking without pain.
And this is why I will be wearing boots for my next Camino. And using poles.
I am not sure what the evidence is for either of these assertions. I have seen them in posts before, and in my view they have been evidence free assertions. The worst of these turned out to be a fantastic web-site that was effectively the work of a single person as a vehicle for his personal opinions. Unfortunately, as also often happens in other areas of human endeavour, the vocal minority overpower debate by the volume of their exchanges, and not always by the fundamental correctness of the positions they advocate.Then, when these fine folks showed me that trail runners are, for most people, far superior in terms of comfort and have equally good traction, and when they also pointed out that the huge majority of people walking the Appalachian Trail and Pacific Crest Trail wore trail runners.
Ditto.Either way, I don’t care what the evidence says, I am sticking with my poles!
Exactly.However, if they make the effort to exert some downward pressure onto their poles - this includes not only flat surfaces, but uphills and declines - they will indeed take some weight/pressure off their knees. Not only that, but they will get an upper body workout at the same time.
Here's one to invite flak...poles. the theory is that it takes 25% pressure off knees. I met a lecturer in biomechanics on the le puy route he said t h ey were basically a fad with scant, if any evidence. Ive looked in amazement /amusement walkers trailing these sticks ,taping them lighly on flat surfaces belivieving they are taking pressure off their knees..really?
Here's a thought..the manufacturers of skiing poles were looking for new markets..."hey fellas let's tell them it will take pressure of their knees....great idea!"
What 'theory' states this? I have never seen a figure that high in any peer reviewed article. I can just about do it with a static double pole plant in ideal circumstances, which indicates to me that I will be getting less than 50% of that force in regular use, and then only in circumstances where using that maximum is possible. That cannot be sustained. I don't know what a realistic figure is, perhaps 5-7% of body mass, but certainly not the one being suggested here.Here's one to invite flak...poles. the theory is that it takes 25% pressure off knees. I met a lecturer in biomechanics on the le puy route he said t h ey were basically a fad with scant, if any evidence. Ive looked in amazement /amusement walkers trailing these sticks ,taping them lighly on flat surfaces belivieving they are taking pressure off their knees..really?
Here's a thought..the manufacturers of skiing poles were looking for new markets..."hey fellas let's tell them it will take pressure of their knees....great idea!"
Thanks to the postings of many forum members, like @davebugg, @JillGat and @falcon269, I have learned that two of the things I assumed were true were nothing but folklore.
The first is that boots will give you ankle support. These fine folks have posted convincing evidence that that is simply not the case. Since one of the reasons I was wearing boots was because I thought it helped prevent ankle twisting, I moved down to hiking shoes. Then, when these fine folks showed me that trail runners are, for most people, far superior in terms of comfort and have equally good traction, and when they also pointed out that the huge majority of people walking the Appalachian Trail and Pacific Crest Trail wore trail runners, I caved and went last year to trail runners. Unless there is a second coming in the shoe category, I will never wear anything else.
The second is that lower back pain means you shouldn’t carry your backpack. Au contraire, if you have a good backpack, the weight will go to your hips and will never put a strain on your back. In fact, I find that my back likes having the pack there, it seems to keep it warm and cozy. And I learned, this by my own experience, that wearing a 5-6 pound day pack, which many people do when they have their packs transported, is in fact worse for your back. An hour with a support-free day pack and my lower back is shouting out in pain.
Since many of us are getting our stuff ready for an upcoming camino, I thought it wouldn’t hurt to post these words of caution about the commonly accepted wisdom out there and to see if other forum members have more myth-busting information to share. Buen camino, Laurie
My Merrel trail runners do.Laurie:
Do the trail runners have the firm (vibram) soles?
Joe
Not sure that this has been 'disproven'. A 1996 study by the University of Massachusetts for one of the US Army agencies compared two combat boots with four commercially available shoes and boots, and among other things, found that the two combat boots and a Red Wing work boot had the highest rearfoot stability scores compared to Reebok Pump, Nike Cross Trainer and Rockport Hiking Boot that were tested. What was also found was limited evidence that the higher topped footwear was associated with less joint pronation, only one of the elements of ankle support that might be considered.The first is that boots will give you ankle support.
Many have Vibram or other firm rubber soles.Do the trail runners have the firm (vibram) soles?
I like them for balance. Since I’m over 70 they certainly help keep me upright and on 2 feet.Here's one to invite flak...poles. the theory is that it takes 25% pressure off knees. I met a lecturer in biomechanics on the le puy route he said t h ey were basically a fad with scant, if any evidence. Ive looked in amazement /amusement walkers trailing these sticks ,taping them lighly on flat surfaces belivieving they are taking pressure off their knees..really?
Here's a thought..the manufacturers of skiing poles were looking for new markets..."hey fellas let's tell them it will take pressure of their knees....great idea!"
I use poles on steep ascents and rocky descents also for stream crossings, and for all of those they are useful. For most of the rest of the time I sling them on my pack.Here's one to invite flak...poles. the theory is that it takes 25% pressure off knees. I met a lecturer in biomechanics on the le puy route he said t h ey were basically a fad with scant, if any evidence. Ive looked in amazement /amusement walkers trailing these sticks ,taping them lighly on flat surfaces belivieving they are taking pressure off their knees..really?
Here's a thought..the manufacturers of skiing poles were looking for new markets..."hey fellas let's tell them it will take pressure of their knees....great idea!"
How high are your boots? I've done quite a bit of reading on this, and while high boots will give you some support, if they are close fitting and fairly tightly laced the low boots worn by many walkers do not. You could also consider wearing light shoes but using an ankle support.I'm a huge fan of debunking folklore so I hate to do what I'm about to do but ... with regard to this "myth"
I don't care what the studies say. As far as I can tell from my sample of one (me), I tend to stumble. When my legs are tired and I'm losing concentration, I can sometimes do a girly, twisty collapse. It doesn't happen every day or every week, but certainly it will happen to me at least once over the course of a multi-week walk. I find that it happens less often when I'm in a pair of boots that support my ankles. And if it does happen when I'm wearing those boots, the ankle doesn't get hurt so badly and I carry on walking without pain.
And this is why I will be wearing boots for my next Camino. And using poles.
Depends on the trail runners. The ones I prefer do not, I dislike stiff soles. Mine have sticky rubber knobbly soles that are amazingly good on wet roads and rocks, the down side is that those tend to wear out relatively quickly.Laurie:
Do the trail runners have the firm (vibram) soles?
Joe
That's great. I've done quite a bit of walking on this...How high are your boots? I've done quite a bit of reading on this...
Also remember that those thru hikers on the AT and PCT are in the kind of physical condition that the vast majority of Pilgrims are not.
Having poles to me is like holding on to something when I go up or down the stairs. They help me a lot on hills, up an down both. I personally never would do the Camino without them. Today it was raining on the Camino del Norte. I don't think I could have done it in the muddy trail without them.I hope you don’t think I am trying to convince anyone to change their habits, especially if those habits have worked well. I have had two face plants in cities on the Camino, both of which I remember vividly — one was in Figueras on the Catalán, and one was in Gallur on the Castellano-Aragonés. In both cases, I had arrived at my destination, dropped off my pack and went out to see the towns, leaving my poles behind. I am firmly convinced that if I had had my poles, I would not have fallen, but that of course is impossible to know. Either way, I don’t care what the evidence says, I am sticking with my poles!(yet another example where anecdotal evidence has more power than statistically significant evidence, I guess).
I think that the value of posts like this can be more for the newbies who really have no idea what they think and no anecdotal experience to go on —in those cases the myth-busting might be relevant. A good example of this is the sentiment I frequently see along the lines of “I have lower back problems so I will have my pack transported.” That is usually an inaccurate description of cause and effect. As a result, so many people miss the opportunity to enjoy the freedom and spontaneity that comes from packing light and carrying it yourself.
It requires significant downward and rearward pressure on the poles. (through the straps)
Used well, you feel your whole body propelled forwards and upwards.
Great post, @OhSuziq, and good to see that you are getting a full range of benefits from your pole use. Any poles, used correctly, will give their users these advantages. The one great advantage of Pacer Poles is that for new pole users, it is almost impossible to hold them incorrectly. Other parts of good pole technique then follow. Poles with straps seem more difficult to master, aggravated perhaps by the lack of instruction given in retail outlets about their proper use.Poles: I use Pacer Poles, only Pacer Poles. Using them correctly, it helps my posture which means less of the backpacker’s lean that aggravates pinched nerves in my back. The slight stretching lift associated with planting and lightly pushing off with each step helps lessen the heel strike impact all the way up, i.e., knees, hips, pinched nerves. Using them helps me keep what isn’t perfectly aligned and facing forward, better aligned and mostly facing forward esp when muscle fatigue and/or poor sleep are a factor.
Boots vs. Shoes: it isn’t as simple as one or the other, ankle support vs. not, etc..
How high are your boots? I've done quite a bit of reading on this, and while high boots will give you some support, if they are close fitting and fairly tightly laced the low boots worn by many walkers do not. You could also consider wearing light shoes but using an ankle support.
I made the stupid mistake of buying into the advice of inexperienced hikers on my first Camino and wore Merrill shoes. Ended up with a severe case of plantar fasciitis, a Morton’s Neuroma, and Achilles tendinitis in one foot.
If proper usage is crucial it seems many don't know how to use them and seem to think merely trailing them along is taking "25%" of pressure off their knees...surely that is fantasy? Counter the times they are "useful" with going through the hassles of whether airlines will let you carry them on board,number of stream crossings you'll encounter,downhill sections and the percentage of the time they are use f ul is very small...therefore are they necessary?...let alone having to watch a video to learn how to use themWell, it looks like the science is less damning than the biomechanics guy thought. There are web references to studies concluding that they do have a positive benefit.
The Science Behind Trekking Poles
Now here's scientific proof that trekking poles are a hiker's best friend.www.backpacker.com
Another study referenced here — https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/questions/4470/are-trekking-poles-proven-to-be-helpful
I use poles on steep ascents and rocky descents also for stream crossings, and for all of those they are useful. For most of the rest of the time I sling them on my pack.
But as in many things, the devil is in the details — proper usage is crucial to get the beneficial effects. I rationalize what may well be my improper usage by telling myself I am not using poles to reduce muscle fatigue or pressure on the joints, but rather to keep myself in an upright position!
Dave, I have found at least one study that clearly identifies differences, eg in rearfoot stablity, between different collar height footwear. I provided the link earlier.High topped boots do not provide injury prevention support. There is no objectively measure difference in outcome between low, mid, and high-topped boots or shoes. The reasons are detailed in my post.
Work on the role of footwear in the incidence of ankle injuries has been limited and produced conflicting results. Part of this difference may be related to the type of athlete being studied. In basketball players, a high-top shoe with the ankle taped was more effective in preventing injuries than a low-top shoe with the ankle taped. Conversely, in football athletes, a low-top shoe with ankle stabilizer was more effective in preventing injuries than a high-top shoe with ankle stabilizer.
It is a myth that water is good for you. [Link]I thought it wouldn’t hurt to post these words of caution about the commonly accepted wisdom out there and to see if other forum members have more myth-busting information to share.
And in times past, water quality was such that it was safer to drink ale. I suspect the alcohol content might have been very much lower that modern beers, but the brewing process must have removed the pathogens.I think we all suspected that
I like them for balance. Since I’m over 70 they certainly help keep me upright and on 2 feet.
As for the links you provided in your earlier explanation, this appears to be the standard list used by pro-shoe advocates. The mere fact that I was able to easily find just one academic study report that didn't support the 'shoes are better line' not included in this list indicates to me that there is at least the prospect of bias in the construction of the list.
Further, the list is now substantially outdated. Even some of the items under 'scientific articles' no longer link to sources that substantiate the claims being made in the summary that is provided with the list, and some other links no longer work.
The relevance of these sources is also an issue for me. They all appear to be studies conducted on athletes, mainly basketball players in extreme performance conditions, and have not been conducted on walkers. There are clearly differences across sports activities, as is acknowledged in the National Athletic Trainers' Association Position Statement: Conservative Management and Prevention of Ankle Sprains in Athletes which includes, for example, this statement:
In short, the available sources are neither as unequivocal nor as relevant as I think you are presenting them as, and most point to the jury still being out, rather than falling on one or other side.
- "Work on the role of footwear in the incidence of ankle injuries has been limited and produced conflicting results. Part of this difference may be related to the type of athlete being studied. In basketball players, a high-top shoe with the ankle taped was more effective in preventing injuries than a low-top shoe with the ankle taped. Conversely, in football athletes, a low-top shoe with ankle stabilizer was more effective in preventing injuries than a high-top shoe with ankle stabilizer. "
It sounds like you are arguing that walkers on the camino are going to subject themselves to the same stresses that basketball and football players might during competition. I cannot see this is a valid line of argument, and it creates, in my mind at least, the doubt that results obtained studying athletes participating in demanding sports can be easily applied.but comparisons can still be made
It sounds like you are arguing that walkers on the camino are going to subject themselves to the same stresses that basketball and football players might during competition. I cannot see this is a valid line of argument, and it creates, in my mind at least, the doubt that results obtained studying athletes participating in demanding sports can be easily applied.
There are many instances where studies based on sports and the military are extended without any obvious consideration of whether the results scale to less demanding activities. This is but one of them.
@omar504, when @peregrina2000 addressed the issues she had raised, she had the courtesy to provide references we could go to. Are you going to do the same?admittedly this off google and I put in..do I need hiking poles
Many articles quote a 1999 study that says using trekking poles takes up to 25% of the strain off of your knees. The reality for most hikers isn’t that great. In fact, there studies that show that there’s no difference whatsoever between shock absorbing poles, regular poles, and no poles.
indeed@omar504, when @peregrina2000 addressed the issues she had raised, she had the courtesy to provide references we could go to. Are you going to do the same?
My knees disagree, they know the difference, so do my feet and back. They like poles - I only discovered this at 58.admittedly this off google and I put in..do I need hiking poles
Many articles quote a 1999 study that says using trekking poles takes up to 25% of the strain off of your knees. The reality for most hikers isn’t that great. In fact, there studies that show that there’s no difference whatsoever between shock absorbing poles, regular poles, and no poles.
Sorry Doug. I didn't mean to echo your post. I've been traveling and I've been more selective in the threads I've been reading. Sickness in Carrion wasn't a priority. I did wonder though why it went on for so long with so many posts.Hear, here!
There's nothing to apologize for here!Sorry Doug. I didn't mean to echo your post. I've been traveling and I've been more selective in the threads I've been reading. Sickness in Carrion wasn't a priority. I did wonder though why it went on for so long with so many posts.
@Donna Sch, I would love to hear about your Aarnpack components & set up you used on the Camino.My preference is hiking shoes as I am a person who tends to kick things. I only wore boots on my February camino because I was expecting mud and possibly snow. The year before they got blizzards. I got an early Spring with clear pleasant weather and the boots were overkill as a result. And the high sides kept rubbing against an ankle so it became an issue.
I have trail runners at home and they would not last for long caminos and the fronts are not as sturdy. I need a stiffer sole to prevent midfoot problems so hiking shoes are my thing. Poles? I love them. My other half used his on one day to try them out and never used them again. I find them helpful for uphills and very uneven or unstable surfaces. And being on the clumsy side they have saved me usually every second day. And my pace is more consistent.
Re packs, I totally agree that a day back can be more stressful than a real hiking pack for your back. I'm a fervent Aarnpack fan and they balance so well. And the wraparound effect is like another layer of clothes.
Do not blame the poles for people using them the wrong way ;-)Here's one to invite flak...poles. the theory is that it takes 25% pressure off knees. I met a lecturer in biomechanics on the le puy route he said t h ey were basically a fad with scant, if any evidence. Ive looked in amazement /amusement walkers trailing these sticks ,taping them lighly on flat surfaces belivieving they are taking pressure off their knees..really?
Here's a thought..the manufacturers of skiing poles were looking for new markets..."hey fellas let's tell them it will take pressure of their knees....great idea!"
One pole is helpful for balance when walking down tricky/rock paths.Here's one to invite flak...poles. the theory is that it takes 25% pressure off knees. I met a lecturer in biomechanics on the le puy route he said t h ey were basically a fad with scant, if any evidence. Ive looked in amazement /amusement walkers trailing these sticks ,taping them lighly on flat surfaces belivieving they are taking pressure off their knees..really?
Here's a thought..the manufacturers of skiing poles were looking for new markets..."hey fellas let's tell them it will take pressure of their knees....great idea!"
Thanks to the postings of many forum members, like @davebugg, @JillGat and @falcon269, I have learned that two of the things I assumed were true were nothing but folklore.
The first is that boots will give you ankle support. These fine folks have posted convincing evidence that that is simply not the case. Since one of the reasons I was wearing boots was because I thought it helped prevent ankle twisting, I moved down to hiking shoes. Then, when these fine folks showed me that trail runners are, for most people, far superior in terms of comfort and have equally good traction, and when they also pointed out that the huge majority of people walking the Appalachian Trail and Pacific Crest Trail wore trail runners, I caved and went last year to trail runners. Unless there is a second coming in the shoe category, I will never wear anything else.
The second is that lower back pain means you shouldn’t carry your backpack. Au contraire, if you have a good backpack, the weight will go to your hips and will never put a strain on your back. In fact, I find that my back likes having the pack there, it seems to keep it warm and cozy. And I learned, this by my own experience, that wearing a 5-6 pound day pack, which many people do when they have their packs transported, is in fact worse for your back. An hour with a support-free day pack and my lower back is shouting out in pain.
Since many of us are getting our stuff ready for an upcoming camino, I thought it wouldn’t hurt to post these words of caution about the commonly accepted wisdom out there and to see if other forum members have more myth-busting information to share. Buen camino, Laurie
They definitely are helpful to me on hills, especially going down.Here's one to invite flak...poles. the theory is that it takes 25% pressure off knees. I met a lecturer in biomechanics on the le puy route he said t h ey were basically a fad with scant, if any evidence. Ive looked in amazement /amusement walkers trailing these sticks ,taping them lighly on flat surfaces belivieving they are taking pressure off their knees..really?
Here's a thought..the manufacturers of skiing poles were looking for new markets..."hey fellas let's tell them it will take pressure of their knees....great idea!"
You say 'in times past' as if it isn't safer to drink ale today?And in times past, water quality was such that it was safer to drink ale. I suspect the alcohol content might have been very much lower that modern beers, but the brewing process must have removed the pathogens.
So blisters...
(not trolling just interested in an informal polite discussion)
I know the medical sites state friction as a primary cause, but in my experience it's more pressure than friction. Shoes fitting loose but with some movement don't give me blisters at all.
But then the medical sites seem to all agree to not pop blisters when I've overwhelmingly heard the opposite advice from pilgrims. In fact my mother told me to use white thread to pop them. When I asked if blue would do she chuckled and admitted that was just what she was told as a child in Austria.
Thoughts?
Ahh darn it I just noticed the title as boots and backs. My bad. Apologies!
oops!..looks like I forgot to give the link to the article http://thesportjournal.org/article/...n-standard-and-anti-shock-trekking-poles/..of which an early section saysindeed
the study was also without poles...enough references for anyone!..It's The Sport Journal..sounds serious!
Thanks to the postings of many forum members, like @davebugg, @JillGat and @falcon269, I have learned that two of the things I assumed were true were nothing but folklore.
The first is that boots will give you ankle support. These fine folks have posted convincing evidence that that is simply not the case. Since one of the reasons I was wearing boots was because I thought it helped prevent ankle twisting, I moved down to hiking shoes. Then, when these fine folks showed me that trail runners are, for most people, far superior in terms of comfort and have equally good traction, and when they also pointed out that the huge majority of people walking the Appalachian Trail and Pacific Crest Trail wore trail runners, I caved and went last year to trail runners. Unless there is a second coming in the shoe category, I will never wear anything else.
The second is that lower back pain means you shouldn’t carry your backpack. Au contraire, if you have a good backpack, the weight will go to your hips and will never put a strain on your back. In fact, I find that my back likes having the pack there, it seems to keep it warm and cozy. And I learned, this by my own experience, that wearing a 5-6 pound day pack, which many people do when they have their packs transported, is in fact worse for your back. An hour with a support-free day pack and my lower back is shouting out in pain.
Since many of us are getting our stuff ready for an upcoming camino, I thought it wouldn’t hurt to post these words of caution about the commonly accepted wisdom out there and to see if other forum members have more myth-busting information to share. Buen camino, Laurie
I had my mind opened a bit about blisters by Rebecca, the Australian podiatrist who seems to be quite the blister guru. I subscribed to her website, but fortunately her explanation for how blisters occur is on Youtube. Although there are many different theories about blister causation and treatment, her explanation of blisters as not being caused by "rubbing" in the sense that I thought. Her short video is very enlightening. Her website includes videos about prevention and treatment. But the most interesting to me is her description how sheer force actually works. Give it a look and see what you think. I am wondering whether davebugg knows of her work, and whether he agrees.
Folks, don't even mention compeed without finding out what she says about it.I had my mind opened a bit about blisters by Rebecca, the Australian podiatrist who seems to be quite the blister guru.
Folks, don't even mention compeed without finding out what she says about it.
Folks, don't even mention compeed without finding out what she says about it.
Excellent video..I certainly learned that compeed works best on blisters without a roof and the tip to stop roll over is invaluable
interesting but the conclusion mentions..mountain ascent, mountain walking and mountainous terrain so I wonder at the relevance for say, the CFhttps://www.academia.edu/18237927/T...Induced_Muscle_Injury_during_Mountain_Walking
In conclusion, this is the first investigation to examine the efficacy of trekking poles on indices of muscle dam-age; furthermore, to our knowledge, it is also the first documented study to use an ecologically valid environment to test this type of equipment. We have demonstrated that trekking poles reduce RPE in mountain ascent and reduce the extent of muscle damage after a day’s mountain walking.These findings have strong application for exercisers wishing to engage in consecutive day’s activity in mountainous terrains by maintaining greater muscle function, reducing soreness, and, hence, reducing the potential for the prevalence of injury.
Absolutely! I can't believe how many people think that Compeed plasters should be used as a preventative.Folks, don't even mention compeed without finding out what she says about it.
interesting but the conclusion mentions..mountain ascent, mountain walking and mountainous terrain so I wonder at the relevance for say, the CF
Thank you for providing this.oops!..looks like I forgot to give the link to the article http://thesportjournal.org/article/...n-standard-and-anti-shock-trekking-poles/..of which an early section says
No significant weight transfer from lower to upper body was evident regardless of pole design indicating that dependency on hiking poles during load carriage walking on level ground is negligible.
This disturbs me, because it indicates that the forces measured were the combined downward force of the pole and the walking pole. If that is the case, it would worry me were the study to produce any other result!During each successful trial the subjects contacted a piezoelectric force plate positioned in the floor with the foot and contralateral hiking pole.
So blisters...
Her website is fabulous.Her short video is very enlightening. Her website includes videos about prevention and treatment.
@omar504, a good question. In the first place, no experimental process can accurately reflect specific real-world circumstances, and this study is no different. That said, the CF does present three of the four specific challenges the researchers identified. Far better in my view than testing on a flat and level surface, because no real world walk is like that.interesting but the conclusion mentions..mountain ascent, mountain walking and mountainous terrain so I wonder at the relevance for say, the CF
Yeh.... those legends..... I find them crazy.....Thanks to the postings of many forum members, like @davebugg, @JillGat and @falcon269, I have learned that two of the things I assumed were true were nothing but folklore.
The first is that boots will give you ankle support. These fine folks have posted convincing evidence that that is simply not the case. Since one of the reasons I was wearing boots was because I thought it helped prevent ankle twisting, I moved down to hiking shoes. Then, when these fine folks showed me that trail runners are, for most people, far superior in terms of comfort and have equally good traction, and when they also pointed out that the huge majority of people walking the Appalachian Trail and Pacific Crest Trail wore trail runners, I caved and went last year to trail runners. Unless there is a second coming in the shoe category, I will never wear anything else.
The second is that lower back pain means you shouldn’t carry your backpack. Au contraire, if you have a good backpack, the weight will go to your hips and will never put a strain on your back. In fact, I find that my back likes having the pack there, it seems to keep it warm and cozy. And I learned, this by my own experience, that wearing a 5-6 pound day pack, which many people do when they have their packs transported, is in fact worse for your back. An hour with a support-free day pack and my lower back is shouting out in pain.
Since many of us are getting our stuff ready for an upcoming camino, I thought it wouldn’t hurt to post these words of caution about the commonly accepted wisdom out there and to see if other forum members have more myth-busting information to share. Buen camino, Laurie
It really is this simple.go out and try and figure out what works for you.
That was very selective extract! To be more fair to what might have been the intent of @alaskadiver's contribution, here is the advice as she proposed it:It really is this simple.
My advice is don’t take advice on the face of it and go out and try and figure out what works for you.
I used to twist my ankle several times each day in the mountains,with boots. Since I have gone to trail runners,about 7 years ago,I have NEVER twisted my ankle. It seems crazy,but true.Always interesting to get a range of views.
My 2 cents work.......
Poles. I can't walk a Camino without them.
80% of pole users I see on Camino don't know how to use them and are just carrying extra weight.
It requires significant downward and rearward pressure on the poles. (through the straps)
Used well, you feel your whole body propelled forwards and upwards.
I have tested using kitchen scales and estimate the required downward pressure somewhere between 10-15 kgs. It's a lot........
Used that way, poles take significant pressure off knees and other joints.
You can quote whatever scientific study, but I won't walk a Camino without them.
Those who continually bang on about poles being useless, generally have not used them, don't know how to use them, or don't need them.
It's a bit like a young fit person saying zimmer frames are useless......... tell that to the 90 year old who needs one.
Boots. I have worn them on 3 caminos. Love them.
But a physio 1/2 through my last one told me they are only really required on mountainous ground. And the extra weight was not doing me any good.
But I feel they stop me twisting an ankle.
I honestly feel I would have twisted an ankle a couple of times without them.
But.........Next time out I'm going to try trail runners. Based on physio advice.
Well, now we arrive at the crux of the discussion. Namely, that people will rationalize any predisposition (prejudice) to favor their decision to not carry a pack, use those clicking clacking poles ( I think they find the noise and rhythm metronomic), choose footwear etc... in the end everyone has a different experience in mind and that’s fine for them- but only them! Take the information and make your choices, but if you’re looking for approval- walk softly and make your own decision on the stick.I am not sure what the evidence is for either of these assertions. I have seen them in posts before, and in my view they have been evidence free assertions. The worst of these turned out to be a fantastic web-site that was effectively the work of a single person as a vehicle for his personal opinions. Unfortunately, as also often happens in other areas of human endeavour, the vocal minority overpower debate by the volume of their exchanges, and not always by the fundamental correctness of the positions they advocate.
I like poles because when I pause to catch my breath, I can lean on themHere's one to invite flak...poles. the ...."
And mine have rubber tips; they never click clack.I like poles because when I pause to catch my breath, I can lean on them
I have done that many times!I like poles because when I pause to catch my breath, I can lean on them
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?