http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=running-barefoot-is-better-research-2010-01-27 I haven't read the actual article (don't have access) but I find some of the claims a bit dubious. For one, they say that a heel-strike could lead to more injuries, but only because it is painful to strike heel-first when not wearing shoes. Obviously, it's comfortable enough to heel strike when wearing shoes, so perhaps with shoes it isn't damaging. This is also interesting because the graphs they show in the video don't make that clear (there's never even a side by side comparison). Sure, there's a sharp spike in force when the heel hits, but why not be clear on what is causing the damage? Does a large change in force (jerk) cause injuries for some reason? All their explanations just seem wishy-washy to me. On a slightly related note, I run more toe-to-heel but I wear running shoes. Wonder what this study means for me?