This article is rather scant and hyperbolic.
> “… was dominated by an aggressive mob mentality around barefoot running”
Really? Most of the barefoot running enthusiasts I encountered were super friendly and open-minded.
> “… the appeal to nature fallacy: a logical fallacy in which a subject is claimed to be good simply because it is natural”
I’m not sure it is a fallacy to revert to tradition (proven heuristics) in a complex realm of limited first-principles understanding. Much of the barefoot running enthusiasm (and general naturalist or anthropologically-oriented problem-solving) is less oriented to proving various theories and more so trying to find gains with a clear awareness of uncertainty.
Personally: I suspect simple shoes best honor the immense structural complexity of the feet and legs (and the integration with the rest of the body). I wear thin-soled shoes in order to maintain healthy lower limbs. As a lover of walks for a clear mind I advocate for simple, thin-soled shoes (but I don’t believe we need an inquisition and I haven’t yet started collecting funds for a mission).
The few times I attempted to wear shoes with significant support I noticed dangerous knee strain that went away upon returning to simple shoes. While there’s no overwhelming body of evidence there and I probably can’t write a paper about it, that’s sufficient signal for me to stick with simple shoes.
Yeah, labelling this as a hysterical mob going after people is weird. Runners are pretty chill as a group. There was certainly a fad, but this article exaggerates it to the point of dishonesty.