Expensive trainers are a waste of money - cheap ones are better, say scientists

Joggers who buy expensive trainers to improve their running performance are wasting their money, say scientists.

Trainers costing £40 were found to offer better protection from injury than those costing up to £75, as well as being just as comfortable.

The study tested mens' trainers from three major sportswear companies in sizes 8-10 - the most common foot sizes in the UK.

A team led by Dr Rami Abboud of Dundee University tested shoes in three price brackets: low-cost (£40), medium (£60-£65) and expensive (£70-£75).

The trainers were fitted with an electronic insole that measures pressures on the heel, mid-foot and big toe, before being given to 43 male volunteers to wear while running on a treadmill.

All logos and branding on the shoes were taped over, so that the test subjects would not know which shoe they were testing.

Writing in the British Journal of Sport Medicine Online, Dr Abboudstated: "It would appear from the shoes studied that performance, in terms of cushioning, is not related to cost.

"In fact plantar pressure [impact on the sole of the foot] was lower overall in low and medium-cost shoes.

"Even though this difference is small, it may be significant over time with repetitive impact.

"This may suggest less expensive running shoes not only provide as much protection from impact force as expensive running shoes, but that in actual fact they may also provide more."

Rating the trainers for comfort, volunteers found the cheap makes were the equal of their pricier counterparts.

Dr Abboud told the Daily Mail that the trainers were from three of the biggest manufacturers, saying: "They are shoes that consumers will buy off the shelf of any sports shop."

However, he said he would not reveal the makes until he had conducted further tests on the wider athletic shoe market.

Dr Abboud said that he had also conducted similar tests on even more expensive trainers up to £150 - which found even they were no better for the feet.

Asked why more expensive trainers seemed not to gain better ratings, Dr Abboud said: "That is a question for the manufacturers. Is it the design, or the material, or just the publicity and the marketing?

"There is a perception that if you pay more, you get more, but that is highly questionable."

He added that trainers of all prices were usually made with similar materials in the same factories in China.

Around two-and-a-half times our bodyweight in pressure is put on our feet when we run.

Inadequate support can result in injuries such as knee pain, shin splints, stress fractures, tendinitis and muscle tears.

Compared with running barefoot, a decent pair of trainers reduces the impact on feet and knees by around a third.

Dr Abboud said that his research was supported by previous findings that found wearing shoes that boasted advanced safety features in fact often led to runners suffering greater injuries.

He said: "It has been suggested that the advertising of advanced safety features and protective devices of more expensive running shoes is deceptive; runners subconsciously subject themselves to greater impact forces, thereby increasing the risk of injury.

"This accounted for a 123 per cent greater injury frequency observed amongst runners who trained in expensive running shoes compared with those running in less expensive models or brands."