Richard Chou wrote:
...科學研究貼出來看看 IEEE 哪家期刊的
...
按妳的理論, 汽車應該不要裝避震, 改用鋼梁衝擊更小?
(恕刪)
跟人體健康醫學有關的研究怎麼會登在電機的 IEEE?
這種研究隨便搜尋也不只一篇,
而且長年來多項研究都有一再重複一致的結論.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4405580/
Increased Vertical Impact Forces and Altered Running Mechanics with Softer Midsole Shoes
<== 這篇應該算最符合科學原理的, 他們實際抽換各種鞋墊去測衝擊力.
http://www.sportsci.org/jour/0103/mw.htm
...Measurements of the vertical component of ground-reaction force during running provide no support for the notion that running shoes reduce shock. Robbins and Gouw (1990) reported that running shoes did not reduce shock during running at 14 km/h on a treadmill. Bergmann et al. (1995) found that the forces acting on the hip joint were lower for barefoot jogging than for jogging in various kinds of shoe. Clarke et al. (1983) observed no substantial change in impact force when they increased the amount of heel cushioning by 50% in the shoes of well-trained runners. Robbins and Gouw (1990) argued that plantar sensation induces a plantar surface protective response whereby runners alter their behavior to reduce shock. The less-cushioned shoe permitted increases in plantar discomfort to be sensed and moderated, a phenomenon that they termed "shock setting". Footwear with greater cushioning apparently provokes a sharp reduction in shock-moderating behaviour, thus increasing impact force (Robbins and Hanna, 1987; Robbins et al., 1989; Robbins and Gouw, 1990)...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5992812/
...Runners exhibited increased impact forces and loading rate when running in a maximal versus neutral shoe. Because increases in these variables have been associated with an increased risk of running-related injuries...
...
...
(以下不是科學結論, 而是一些人的個人意見)
雖然不必鞋子的存在, 人體自己內建就有避震功能,
不過一定硬要拿汽車來比喻的話,
你會開避震不好的車去越野讓自己全身撞的酸痛嗎?
反過來說開避震很好的車去越野, 就不會傷車/傷身嗎?
所以重點是 "不要去越野", 不是 "避震要好".
鞋子太 "好", 你用實際會傷害自己健康的技術去運動你感覺不出來 (鞋子 "好" 到你根本分不出來你是不是在用 "越野" 傷害自己的技術在運動).
