PreClinical Clubfoot Deformity Identified in A.Sediba which Lived 2 Million Years Ago

What I meant, said perhaps a little clumsily, is that rearfoot varus is the norm - and that the concept of a vertical calcaneus in ST neutral is somewhat fanciful. An inverted calcaneus is entirely normal in all apes, including humans (though to a much lesser degree). It is my opinion, for whatever that is worth, that the normal ontogenetic changes in talar and calcaneal morhology, and indeed the interplay between the two, has been re-interpreted, one might even say misinterpreted by certain people.

 

Rob,

Your comments are well received and appreciated.

If you are equating rearfoot varus with calcaneal supinatus, then I agree with you. My research has led me to the conclusion that a vertical calcaneus (e.g., no structural twist in the posterior aspect of the calcaneus) is not common. I refer to that foot structure as a plantargrade foot, which I have linked to a non-distortional posture.

You suggest that calcaneal supinatus (inverted calcaneus, rearfoot varus) is normal in all apes, including humans, I agree. IMO, we have not yet evolved out of that structure.

Calcaneal supinatus is the structural hallmark in the PreClinical Clubfoot Deformity. And it is this PCFD that I have linked to the severest postural distortions and resulting chronic pain.

The structural variances we see in the talar head and posterior aspect of the calcaneus has been the focus of my research. Whether the conclusions resulting from my research, (regarding the clinical symptoms, I suggest, resulting from the retained embryological twists in the talar head and calcaneus) are correct, or not (misinterpreted by certain people), only posterity will determine.

 

I did not used the expression "calcaneal supinatus". Looking at an isolated fossil tells you nothing about the normal ontogenetic shape changes that got it there. I would be grateful if you would explain what ontogenetic studies you have undertaken re: talar and calcaneal angular changes, and what hominoid samples you used to achieve this. Finally, in which refereed journal are they published?

 

Any basic embryology textbook describes the ontogenetic changes that occur in the foot during gestation. My research is center on the torsional changes that occur in the first trimester. If you want to read about this in detail, I would direct you to the paper I published in 2002 (JBMT). Once you have read that paper, I would be delighted to answer any questions you may have.

Interesting enough, in the past 2-3 years, papers have been published, confirming the medial column supinatus I first described in the paper below. This was accomplished with 3d radiographs. I have had correspondence with several of those authors and can direct you to their publications.

All of my research has been clinical, evaluating gait patterns (pressure plate analyses) and resulting postural deformation which I have linked to chronic pain patterns in patients I identified as having either RFS or the PCFD. If you are interested in this area of my research, I can direct you to papers I have published.

• Rothbart BA, 2002. Medial Column Foot Systems: An Innovative Tool for Improving Posture. Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies (6)1:37-46

 

With respect, no they do not. Do they report on the "angular changes in the primate talus"? Do they report on the changing relationship between the talus and calcaneus during development - well maybe, but not in terms of numbers and angular values. It is many, very many years since the first studies of the angular changes in the primate talus were published - in properly referreed journals, yet I do not see you referencing them. Perhaps the work of Bill Straus? Perhaps the work of Peter Lisowski? Where is it?

 

Apparently, I have not been successful in answering your questions, because you keep repeating them. So, I will give it one more try.

A large part of my research was based on my hypothesis that structural aberrations found in the foot were in large part due to angular changes in the talar head and posterior aspect of the calcaneus. I suspected these structural aberrations due to these angular changes, were in large part, responsible for (what I termed) gravity drive pronation, and it was gdp that distorted the posture and led to chronic musculoskeletal pain. This is, in a nutshell, where my research started and, at the time, there were no publications I could reference, looking specifically at these same issues. (I later termed these structural aberrations Metatarsus Primus Varus deformity, which bears my name, and the PreClinical Clubfoot Deformity)

I believe I am the first researcher to suggest this chain of events. Fast forward 30 years of research studies (and publications of my findings), my other research teams are becoming progressively more interested in my studies. This is well documented on Researchgate which you can see for yourself. How my research will play out in time, as I have said many times, only posterity will answer. I appreciate that you are a sceptic of my research, so be it. I am not here, on this forum, to convince you of anything.

My hypothesis that high torsional angles in the talar head was linked to supinatus in the medial column of the foot was recently confirmed by published studies using 3d radiographs. IMO, this is a huge step in the validation of my research. I have referenced those publications on prior posts, and they are easily downloaded from Researchgate.

The normal ontological development of the foot, during the first trimester, was instrumental in my research, because it established a norm which I could use as a standard for speculating deviations that could result in foot deformations.

I am familiar with the publications of Lisowski, Straus (and others). As I have said before, I am an armchair Palaeontologist. I strongly suspect that A.sediba is in the direct lineage of H.sapien. And I strongly believe that calcaneus supinatus is the smoking gun that can be used to map H.sapien ancestors. Time will tell how this plays out.

 

There is zero evidence that any of the fossil record is a [direct] ancestor or anticedent of any other in the record, including Homo sapiens. You have yet to present any evidence of "calcaneal supinatus" (a state which I have problems with) actually exisits, certainly with respect of the fossil record.

 

If I remember correctly, you had problems with the existence of medial column supinatus. However, recent publications of 3d foot radiographs proved this structure does indeed exist in the human foot.

Currently, I appreciate that you have problems with the existence of calcaneal supinatus in homo sapiens. Hopefully, in the near future your doubts will again be quelled with 3d radiographs of the human calcaneus.

My research on the perturbations in human gait, facilitated my discovery of RFS (hallmark being medial column supinatus) and the PCFD (hallmark being calcaneal supinatus). I can refer you to a publication that goes into detail regarding the evolution of my research over the past 50 years leading to these discoveries.

I disagree with you regarding zero evidence of calcaneal supinatus in the fossil record. I refer you to the photo in post number 37 (taken from A.sediba) which clearly shows this calcaneal structure. But no need to belabour that point here.

(Again, inverted calcaneus is a misnomer, the correct term is calcaneus supinatus)

 

Simon,´

Is this your circumlocutorily fashion to admitting that you have flagrantly violated the forum rules (on many occasions, I may add)?

 

Brian, is this the same paper that you no longer agree with?

Brian did have a 2002 paper where he stated that 95% percent of the population have the "deformity".
It was pointed out to him that if that many people have it, it would be normal. It would also be a very poor predicter of pathology.

 

That estimate was presented at the 1995 national convention of the American Academy of Pain Management in which the research team I was associated with estimated that upwards of 95% of the population had Mortons/Rothbarts foot structure.

Fast forward nearly 30 years, IMO, that estimate was too aggressive. These two-foot deformations are common. However, further research needs to be done before a more realistic estimate can be provided.

The fact that many people have calcaneal or talar supinatus, does make it "normal" (however you may define normal). These two-foot structures are very old, present long before the emergence of H.sapien. I suggest H.sapien is slowly evolving away from supinatus towards a plantigrade structure, a foot structure without calcaneal or talar supinatus.

I could not disagree with you more regarding your statement that "It would also be a very poor predicter of pathology." Contrarily, my research has shown that these two-foot deformations (RFS/PCFD) are inexorably linked to the development of chronic musculoskeletal pain.

 

Brian, if you no longer think that paper is valid you should stop asking people to read it to explain what you are thinking now.

Yes, everyone who comes in with pathology has this deformity. However, if everyone who has no pathology also has the same deformity then the "deformity" is a poor predictor of pathology. If you only look at subjects with pathology you would erroneously conclude that they were linked.

Your statement:
"Fast forward nearly 30 years, IMO, that estimate was too aggressive. These two-foot deformations are common. However, further research needs to be done before a more realistic estimate can be provided."

Really Brian, you think the "deformity" is linked with pathology and you haven't even looked at the asymptomatic population?

It does make one question of whether you have actually been doing research.

 

Another member who obviously has no moral compunction to violate the Forum Rules.

 

The fact that “calcaneal inversion (which is a misnomer for calcaneal supinatus) is a routine fining in all great apes” is very significant. In the paleological publications I have read, the calcaneal supinatus was only found in A.sediba, not, for example, in H.naledi.

If my theory is correct, that calcaneal supinatus is the “holy grail” for tracing the lineage of H.sapien, then we would find this calcaneal supinatus in every A.sediba. And because calcaneal supinatus is present in many H.sapien, the conclusion that A.sediba is a direct descendent of H.sapien is a valid supposition.