It's time to ditch 'shrink it pink it' approach to shoes - study
Women's running shoes could reduce performance and increase chances of injury as they are based on a man’s foot.
A study into women's running shoes shows current designs are likely to reduce performance and increase chance of injury and discomfort because they are based on a man's foot.
The study of 21 runners found the process of adjusting designs for women - known as "pink it and shrink it' - needs to be ditched to address the real differences in women's foot anatomy; biomechanics and life stage.
“What we wanted to investigate is not just the anatomical difference, but what about the biomechanical differences that may be partly due to a different anatomy,” the paper’s author Chris Napier from Simon Fraser University in Canada, told RNZ's Midday Report.
Most running trainers are designed for and tested on male athletes, research reveals.
Andres Ayrton from Pexels
“For instance, in running… women have a wider pelvis and so that changes the positioning of the hips as they run. And that can have sort of follow-on effects onto the way that the loads are distributed through the foot and the lower limb.
“Can we make shoes that are going to distribute those loads better rather than assuming that a shoe that was designed for a man can do the same?”
Both professional and recreational runners were studied, in an attempt to learn what their preferences were when it came to selecting shoes and how those needs and preferences evolved over their lifespan.
“We know there are anatomical differences [between men and women’s feet]; women have narrower heels and wider forefeet. They have a higher arch,” Napier explained.
Researchers found the majority of women at various stages of their running “careers” essentially found ways to adapt to shoes - which were typically designed based on a man’s foot - either by buying half a size larger, or different lacing techniques or adding an extra insole - “but all adaptions to make the shoe fit their foot, rather than having the shoe fit their foot from the first instance”.
“The one clear thing about women, which is probably one of the reasons why there has been less research in general on women, is that they’re not static,” Napier says.
That is to say, women’s footwear needs shift over time.
“Whether it’s changes in anatomy and physiology on the monthly cycle, through the menstrual cycle, or whether it's through pregnancy or postpartum, their bodies change and their feet change with them. And so, during pregnancy and postpartum, feet commonly become longer and wider as that arch height drops and the stiffness of the foot decreases.”
In this focus group, researchers found many of the women that had been through those life changes reported needing more room in the toes, while still having a snug heel. Others required extra cushioning during that period.
Older women, meanwhile, needed or wanted more cushioning.
“The poor fit probably results in shoes not being comfortable to run in; maybe hot spots, blisters, cramped toes, slipping heels - that sort of thing,” Napier says.
While that all probably makes running less enjoyable, it can also lead to injuries and results in reduced performance.
“But… we don’t know that until we start making these shoes that are actually designed for and tested on women, what might be being left on the table from a performance perspective.”
There are some companies that are starting to embrace this way of thinking; Napier explains this particular study formed part of funding from a local company in Vancouver that has designed a female-specific running shoe.
He also points out Lululemon recently released a women’s shoe - which they launched before their men’s shoe - while UnderArmour have also released women-specific shoes.
“They are not all fully invested in it though,” Napier says. “I think there’s reasons for the lack of investment in it.
“You have to double your production. You have to do a lot more research to make it work.”
While a lot of companies are hesitant, there is growing interest, he says.
