Fact Check: Are NMDs running shoes?

Fact Check: Are NMDs running shoes?

Published May 7, 2025
VERDICT
False

# Are NMDs Running Shoes? ## Introduction The claim in question is whether Adidas NMDs can be classified as running shoes. This inquiry arises from t...

Are NMDs Running Shoes?

Introduction

The claim in question is whether Adidas NMDs can be classified as running shoes. This inquiry arises from the popularity of the NMD line, which has been marketed as a lifestyle sneaker. However, the distinction between running shoes and lifestyle footwear is crucial for consumers who may be considering NMDs for athletic purposes.

What We Know

  1. Product Overview: Adidas NMDs, introduced in 2015, are primarily marketed as lifestyle shoes rather than performance running shoes. They incorporate Adidas's Boost technology, which is known for its cushioning properties 14.

  2. Design Intent: According to Adidas, the NMD line is designed for "metropolitan exploration" and is influenced by the brand's heritage in lifestyle footwear 2. This suggests that the shoes are not specifically engineered for running.

  3. Performance Comparison: Various sources indicate that while NMDs share some characteristics with running shoes, such as cushioning, they lack the performance-oriented features found in dedicated running shoes like the Adidas UltraBoost. The UltraBoost is noted for its responsive cushioning and a snug fit, which are essential for running 36.

  4. Expert Opinions: A review from Steady Foot states that NMDs are urban lifestyle shoes, contrasting them with the UltraBoost, which is tailored for running performance 3. Similarly, a piece from ShoesThink emphasizes that NMDs are more akin to fashion footwear than traditional running shoes 5.

  5. Consumer Perception: Despite their casual design, some consumers have reported using NMDs for running. However, experts caution that this is not their intended use, and they may not provide the necessary support and durability for running activities 910.

Analysis

The evidence surrounding the classification of NMDs as running shoes is mixed and requires careful evaluation of the sources:

  • Credibility of Sources:

    • Adidas's Official Statements: The company's own descriptions 24 provide a reliable perspective on the intended use of the NMDs, though they may also reflect a marketing bias.
    • Expert Reviews: Articles from Steady Foot 3 and ShoesThink 5 offer insights from footwear experts, but their conclusions may be influenced by the authors' perspectives on lifestyle versus performance footwear.
    • Consumer Reviews: Sources like PhilAthletics 9 and Decent Foot 7 include anecdotal evidence from users, which can be valuable but also subjective and potentially biased based on personal experience.
  • Methodological Concerns: The lack of standardized testing comparing NMDs directly with established running shoes raises questions about the reliability of claims regarding their performance. For a more definitive assessment, controlled studies measuring factors like cushioning, support, and durability in running conditions would be beneficial.

  • Conflicts of Interest: Some sources may have affiliations with brands or retailers that could influence their portrayal of NMDs. For instance, articles that promote NMDs as suitable for running may be motivated by commercial interests rather than objective analysis.

Conclusion

Verdict: False

The claim that Adidas NMDs can be classified as running shoes is false. Key evidence supporting this conclusion includes Adidas's own marketing, which positions NMDs as lifestyle footwear rather than performance running shoes. Expert reviews consistently highlight the lack of essential features found in dedicated running shoes, such as the UltraBoost, which are designed specifically for athletic performance. While some consumers may use NMDs for running, this is not their intended purpose, and experts warn that they may not provide adequate support or durability for such activities.

It is important to note that the evidence available is primarily based on expert opinions and marketing materials, which may carry inherent biases. Additionally, the absence of standardized performance testing comparing NMDs to traditional running shoes limits the conclusiveness of these findings. Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate information and consider their own needs when selecting footwear for running or other athletic activities.

Sources

  1. Adidas NMD - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adidas_NMD
  2. What Does NMD Stand For? - adidas US. https://www.adidas.com/us/blog/342742-what-does-nmd-stand-for
  3. Are NMDs Good For Running? How Do They Compare UltraBoost? - Steady Foot. https://www.steadyfoot.com/are-nmds-good-for-running/
  4. NMD Shoes - adidas. https://www.adidas.com/us/nmd
  5. Are NMDs Good Running Shoes or Waste? - ShoesThink. https://www.shoesthink.com/are-nmds-running-shoes/
  6. Beginner's Guide to adidas NMD - GOAT. https://www.goat.com/editorial/beginners-guide-to-adidas-nmd
  7. NMDs: Are They Running Shoes? Performance, Comfort, And Sneaker - Decent Foot. https://decentfoot.com/are-nmds-running-shoes/
  8. EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE ADIDAS - YouTube. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=igfThg-4m50&pp=ygUGI25tZHFo
  9. Are NMDs Good For Running? The Pros & Cons Of This Stylish Sneaker - PhilAthletics. https://www.philathletics.org/are-nmds-good-for-running/
  10. Are NMDs Running Shoes? Let's Know About These Incredible Products Here! - ShoeFilter. https://shoefilter.com/are-nmds-running-shoes/

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
100% Free
No Registration
Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: Are NMDs good running shoes?
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Are NMDs good running shoes?

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Are NMDs good running shoes?

May 7, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: There are no larger long-running crime series about everyday small systemic crimes in democracies
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: There are no larger long-running crime series about everyday small systemic crimes in democracies

Detailed fact-check analysis of: There are no larger long-running crime series about everyday small systemic crimes in democracies

Aug 15, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Running not effective way to lose weight "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1295906/full" "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1295906/full"
False
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Running not effective way to lose weight "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1295906/full" "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1295906/full"

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Running not effective way to lose weight "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1295906/full" "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2023.1295906/full"

Aug 14, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript
00:00
911 was a false flag. For the
first 10 years, I did not think
anything other than the
official narrative then after
being shown a video, a close up
video of building number seven
coming down and that got me
going because it's obvious to
me that building seven was was
a controlled demolition because
the building collapses from the
bottom down. The trade centers
were unique in that they were
designed to withstand the
00:33
impact of a a a jet. From what
I understand the the outer
skeleton of the building. The
outer columns was like a a fish
net and you had these inner
core columns which was
substantial thick steel beams
to withstand four or five times
what the loads were. Got it.
The engineers always over
design a building. No steel
frame building has ever
collapsed before or since 9/
eleven. So that should say
something right there. And it
said that building seven it was
01:05
aggressive collapse that it was
caused by fire but progressive
collapse unlike the twin
towers, the twin towers
collapse from the top down.
That's a progressive collapse.
Sure. Floor by floor by floor.
But if you look at the videos
of building seven collapsing,
it collapses uniformly, it's
collapsing from the bottom, the
building stays intact all the
way to the bottom of the ground
and you could see the sides
caving in on it. For a building
to collapse uniformly which the
video show all the load bearing
it would have to have failed
01:36
simultaneously. Now, fire
doesn't act like that. I came
across an analogy of the twin
towers and if you could
visualize cast iron stoves
stacked. One on top of each
other. The stoves up at the
top. Yes, there's fire and
they've been damaged but the
stoves on the bottom, they
haven't been damaged. Okay. So,
the structure underneath all of
that is intact. So, it's
impossible for a building to
collapse near free fall speed
and increase. Without a
02:07
controlled demolition. You're
running into the path of most
resistance. I something else is
going on. I don't believe that
it was just the planes or the
fires I think that and they
examine the dust and they found
what they call thermitic
material which is like a
explosive incendiary which was
in the dust samples and that's
documented. There were reports
of the buildings were
undergoing a extensive elevator
renovation in the two or three
years prior to all kinds of
02:40
workers they had access to the
the core the cores of the
building and on the day of the
attack the the elevator company
would not assist in the
operations of the elevators and
the elevator company was the
elevator company it
subsequently went out of
business and a couple of years
after that
False

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Obama is secretly running the country through a shadow government.
False

Fact Check: Obama is secretly running the country through a shadow government.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Obama is secretly running the country through a shadow government.

Jul 14, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: JD Vance's running video ended his political career.
False

Fact Check: JD Vance's running video ended his political career.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: JD Vance's running video ended his political career.

Jul 14, 2025
Read more →