Should Podiatrists Think More Like Engineers?

Dennis:

I don't think that many of us here on Podiatry Arena would be so against you and what you claim if you simply would not make things up. Those that don't make things up out of thin air with no research evidence to back up their claims fare quite well here on Podiatry Arena. Those like you who bend the truth for their own monetary gain, tend to get hammered.

A number years ago, another podiatrist came onto Podiatry Arena, named Ed Glaser, and acted almost exactly like you. He was arrogant, claimed his orthoses were better than everyone else's, had no research evidence to defend his claims, made absolutely no friends, then left to go hide under a rock somewhere to make more money selling orthotics. You appear to be cut from the same mold as Ed Glaser, wherever he is now.

Instead of wasting your time here telling all of us who lecture nationally and internationally on foot orthoses that we are wrong and you are right, why don't you do something useful and actually take the time to do some research showing that your Silicone Dynamic Orthoses are indeed better than traditional orthoses. Otherwise, all the energy you are expending here is just going to dig you a deeper hole of infamy and will not sell you one more SDO.

The way you carry on, a rational observer would think that you had some special knowledge regarding foot and lower extremity biomechanics and foot orthosis biomechanics. I order to determine if you have any special knowledge regarding foot and lower extremity biomechanics and foot orthosis biomechanics, please answer the following simple questions, yes or no.

Have you ever published any paper in a peer-reviewed scientific journal?

Have you ever held a faculty position at a podiatric medical institution?

Have you ever written a book or book chapter on biomechanics or foot orthoses?

Have you published anything in your 70 years of life for the podiatry profession that did not discuss the merits of a product you held a financial interest in?

Remember, Dennis, yes or no will do.

Good luck selling your Silicone Dynamic Orthotics, Dennis. Come back on Podiatry Arena when you want to carry on a rational discussion that is based on scientific fact and research, and not on anecdote and wishful thinking.

 

Aloha,

Welcome back from Poditry Today Kevin and Rough Em Up Posse. You forgot your shoes when you left and we wondered when/if you would return for them.

Kevin i am formally putting a ban on the Hatchet Man, it has had its fun but it is agressive in nature and does not promote healthy and free dialog, sorry, those who live by the axe will...

JR Hotrod Dobbs, thank you for your compliment to claim i am a minister,, I guess when we all took our oaths to become caring physicians we all agreed to minister to the sick and needful. Perhaps you will allow me to minister to you now. Jesus Loves You.
I hope you heard my wisper...

Dr. Fuller shame on you for siting a "study of 0 of 5 teachers not liking Dennis's technology. We expect more from someone getting a salary teaching our future students. Demand and produce real science please.

Dennis the best thing to do is spend a bit more money and get a good $20k worth of recent research testing done at a good biomechanics lab then publish the results.

Here are a few great labs you could use/hire. Now i will tell you the data you get is the data and you cannot complain or manipulate it but you are given some room to interpet it and improve on where you could do better, because all of us should.

http://www.biomechanigg.com/facility.php

http://www.nwbiomechanics.com/content/about

Mahalo,
Steve

 

Aloha,

Ok now back to thinking like an engineer.

When thinking like a true engineer it is always important to assume that any claim could be right and it is our duty to not negate it if sufficient testing has not been done to negate the claim, we must remember that testing takes time and money... but be careful what you claim,, you could get a $40 million lawsuit for not burning enough butt fat.

http://www.topclassactions.com/laws...-toning-shoe-class-action-lawsuit-settlement/

I like the concept of fluid dynamics during gait and it has caused me to think about it a bit.

The first equation that comes to mind is pv=nrt. I think we can assume that your fluid is noncompressable and in itself cannot return engery imparted into it.
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/39706/what-equation-of-state-is-needed-for-liquid-states

Energy return could come from the wall lining the fluid much an elastic balloon though.

I think you may have an advantage over Kevin's system with more evenly distributing load on the bottom of the foot which may have diabetes and ulcer care possibilities.

One way to look at it is as an Waboba "Water Bouncing Ball". The ball is able to deform/conform to load bearing surfaces fast enough to flatten out and skip on water. This theory is untested but worth a look. I would not claim you can run on water with these yet without a little devine assistance because i do not think humans can run fast enough. Some lizards can and boy do they move to do it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mp1R4Lxoj5c

Waboba enginnering science.
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/nstv/2011/11/-brightcovecreateexperiences.html

Would believe the claims these guys would make without seeing it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axVN6Goaitg

It is great these folks caught the attention of the US Navy now let's see if we can get them interested in blast resistant composite based combat boots perhaps IF their subject matter experts to think like engineers...
http://www.livescience.com/43917-toy-physics-waboba-ball.html

A Hui Hou,
Steve

 

Wow,

You boys Down Under are definately gifted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pv2WkJy-7Bk

A Hui Hou,
Steve

Kingetics- Ultimate Born Spirit Driven...TM

 

Aloha,

Here is a great group of lads we should support.

http://www.howridiculous.org/

It is amazing what they can accomplish with a little extra "SPRING" on 40 degree Perth day.

A Hui Hou,
Steve

 

It is spelled "definitely"

English, Dr!

 

Simon,

I want to apologize for calling you stupid. You're a well educated individual that said something stupid to me.

FYI

 

Steve

The first equation that comes to mind is pv=nrt. I think we can assume that your fluid is noncompressable and in itself cannot return engery imparted into it

Talking like an engineer, equations are not my bag. Restate: fluid is noncompressable and in itself cannot return engery imparted into it

Energy return could come from the wall lining the fluid much an elastic balloon though.

The energy return I only know are the GRF generated by Newton's 3rd law as the silicone acts as a medium.

I think you may have an advantage over Kevin's system with more evenly distributing load on the bottom of the foot which may have diabetes and ulcer care possibilities. ---

I agree. The pressure scans with and w/o the fluid tech demonstrate that very principle of physics that deals with increased area and reduction in force per unit area (I don't have the records, but I am aware of other case Hx that have used
this tech for that purpose.


The ball is able to deform/conform –I think the fluid is displaced by the load and simply moves like
that tsunami wave of water that happened in Japan. When it got to the higher point it just flipped up.
If that were the arch space the fluid would compress until the full load is on it (this would be midstance)---in a ball type thing, it wouldn't be able to conform

 

The pressure scans with and w/o the fluid tech demonstrate that very principle of physics that deals with increased area and reduction in force per unit area

I'm sure I can get my “cherry picked” professor of physics to explain this the way only a physicist would. If someone else thought they prefer to ask another credentialed physicist the same thing—go right ahead.

 

Steve,

elastic balloon though.

then yes, because the full load is midstance

 

How do you know if my podiatric training is all that I know. You make the erroneous assumption that I've learned nothing since being in school. Have you read my paper on the center of pressure and it's theoretical application to foot pathology. The paper would be useful to you in helping you explain how a silicon orthtoic might work.

You are back to the game of "I know something you don't know." If you are going to claim that we don't understand pressure scans then you should give us the information to understand them. Or, we can point out where you are wrong in your assumptions related to the pressure scans. Then we can all move forward.

Sure you can measure how much silicon there is in the bag. Yes you can quantify that. But is the same silicon in the bag going to affect every foot the same? No it's not. Rigid orthotics are quantifiable. I can measure how high the arch of the orthtoic is at the navicular tuberosity. Is either of these quantifications relevant.

Minor point. Kevin wasn't in the CCPM biomechanics department at the time Marty gave us all silicon orthtoics. How do you know that Marty just let us go?

I was the one who explained pressure scans to Marty. He took a tape recording of what I said so that he could repeat it. He may have understood what I said eventually, he may have just been parroting it. Do you have any newer understanding than Marty did of pressure scans. It would be quite ironic if you said those here on the arena didn't know how to interpret pressure scans when I was the one who provided you with the information that you have.

I didn't really have a bad experience with the silicon orthotic. I actually preferred wearing it as opposed to no orthotic when walking straight ahead. The problem comes when you have to stand or do sports with lateral movement. I had them in when I was building a deck for my house and there were some foot positions that were almost unsafe. If your foot is in a position where you want the load on the lateral side of your foot all the silicon will be pushed under medial side and this will try to invert you. I was conscious of how hard I had to work to keep my foot from supinating further. I don't know what you mean when you say these increase stability. When I wore them they certainly did not increase stability.

I'm quite sure that a little bit more or a little bit less silicon would have altered my experience. You can adjust patient's expectations, but you don't have a lot of adjustment when it comes to the device. When I treat patients, I much prefer the range of adjustment that a rigid device gives me in treating patients. I can separately alter the heel cup shape, lateral column height or medial column height of the orthotic. You can't do that with a silicon device.

So, you say there is a lot to know about silicon orthotic devices, but you aren't telling us. Don't tell us there is something there, tell us what is there. What modifications can you do beyond altering the amount of silicon.

In a recent series of lectures on how orthotics work I used center of pressure, force couples, forces, moments, pressure. That is more than on principle of physics. I've measured the change in center of pressure in stance under the heel with a wedge placed under the heel. It is not a big leap of faith to assume that a varus wedge shaped heel cup would create the same changes. A medial shift in the center of pressure will increase supination moment. That's a predictable change. You can't predict what change you will get with a bag of silicon.

Interesting claim. bag of silicon orthtoics "work exactly the way an orthotic should" Are you going to explain that or just expect us to just believe it?

Would you refer to post number where you fully explain the tech, biomechanics, and physics. I've seen a lot of claims of use of physics, but very little actual physics. Simon's questions were valid and you called him stupid. It doesn't look good for you to insult people who ask valid questions and then not answer them.

Eric

 

I haven't said anything stupid to you Dennis. What about answering the questions, rather than trying to deflect attention away from the deficits in your knowledge base and ignoring the fundamental error in your paradigm? To re-iterate when are the bones of the midfoot 3-dimensionallly stable during the contact phase of gait? Please mark the graphs I posted previously to indicate your choices.

 

Kevin,

Get off your high horse. So you only think it's science if there's been a research study attached? You mean our scientific backgrounds doesn't give us the right to examine other technologies without research attached?

You accuse me of “making stuff up”?--What a joke—Because you can't always understand me, because you don't understand that the difference in our technologies has taught me the difference between your technology and mine.

I finally realized what it is that you think I'm making up—My reference about the greater range of motion at the TNJ than the STJ. I neglected to explain, (although I'm sure it will fall on a “DUH” response) is that the reason I believe this reference supports my claim (MTJ=primary STJ-secondary) is at midstance with the foot in it SJN position (and what ever supplemental post and you have on a shell orthotic) and the forward momentum allows pron/instability at the TNJ.

and it is this “instability” that in my opinion is “overpronation” )--, Root (if you can believe him), spoke (and typed it someplace), pronation movement has a retrograde effect that occurs in all 3 segments (forefoot-midfoot-rearfoot), if any segment even partially unlocks or destabilizes, you don't have “stability”.

So, in my opinion the stabilization of the MTJ is primary (because it has the greater range of motion)...additionally,there is an instability of the forefoot, occurs at the moment of “heel off”--with no further support under the MTJ (when wearing a shell orthotic)--”destabilization”. Believe it or not Kirby—a shell orthotic is inadeqaute and faulty.

With trad tech—you have two areas of instability (in the gait cycle), the first occurs at midstance, the 2nd occurs at heel off.--the kinetic chain will now sing “shake rattle and roll”--appropriate. That's how I see it.

 

Simon,

Just wanted to let you know I'm tired of you. You're going on my ignore list (if I can find the button)

 

I'll take it then that you are incapable of answering the question because you lack the pre-requisite knowledge. Ta Ta Dennis.

 

now I'm beginning to understand why this blog is called "podiatry arena".

 

We can only hope that when those that know no better are searching the internet for the name Dennis Kiper or for information about his silicone orthoses they come across this thread and see it all for what it really is.

 

Eric,

How do you know if my podiatric training is all that I know. You make the erroneous assumption that I've learned nothing since being in school.

What makes you say this? No one's podiatric training should be all they know. And no, haven't read your paper.--do you have a link to it?

You are back to the game of "I know something you don't know." If you are going to claim that we don't understand pressure scans then you should give us the information to understand them

I'm not here to teach you what I know. Are you kidding, when I have offered up some information, I just got negative responses, many personally directed. Why would I enjoy to continue that?

But is the same silicon in the bag going to affect every foot the same? No it's not.

I don't know what you mean by affect every foot the same. But the fluid is going to move exactly the same way dynamically and bio- mechanically FOR EVERY FOOT (anomalies aside)


Rigid orthotics are quantifiable. I can measure how high the arch of the orthtoic is at the navicular tuberosity. Is either of these quantifications relevant.

It's relevent for your technology and it certainly allows you to make a device to as good a fit as you can, but clinical studies have not shown a great difference between your custom and genericdevices.


Minor point. Kevin wasn't in the CCPM biomechanics department at the time Marty gave us all silicon orthtoics.
Not a big deal, but Kevin said that he was a resident in the dep't when he met Marty (who was “peddling”) the SDO. Maybe I got it wrong.

I was the one who explained pressure scans to Marty. ---

this is interesting to me, because I was at a seminar with Marty on the east coast (around 88/89?) and walking around found the “Pedobarograh”
out of Boston, MA. I actually found it first and told Marty to go look at this—I knew this was what we wanted to show the hydro-dynamic effects on the fluid orthotic. He was very excited because we did some tests that day and weekend and were immediately able to determine a lot of biomechanical info.

Don't know more than that.


The problem comes when you have to stand or do sports with lateral movement –

Yes, thats correct,
I don't recommend fluid for lateral movement sports, Marty thought it was good for everything even basketball. He was too excited. He would have realized with more experience like myself.

Standing, the fluid is under constant wt bearing and pronatory forces to compress, so it can get a little uncomfy as a lump in the arch, with motion this constant reset of the fluid is comfy.

I have told people who stand i.e. cashiers etc to shuffle side to side to reset the fluid or even lightly stamp the foot. It's not a horrible problem, it's a nuance of the technology.


building a deck for my house and there were some foot positions that were almost unsafe.
Absolutely, I always warn fireman I've had, they can wear them in their turn out boots on the ground, but not on angled surfaces, esp on roofs (if angled)


If your foot is in a position where you want the load on the lateral side of your foot all the silicon will be pushed under medial side and this will try to invert you. I was conscious of how hard I had to work to keep my foot from supinating further.

I don't know your type of foot or why you'd want the load on the lateral side, but if you had a cavus or near cavus foot, then this is a very very precise fitting, because it's easy to over correct.--Sounds to me like you were over corrected.
(BTW--the silicone is not just pushed to the medial side--this is not correct--we can have another discussion later)


but you don't have a lot of adjustment when it comes to the device.

(meaning the silicone)--correct, first of all there are a couple adj you can make that are listed in the article. But with fluid technology, you don't need to make those kinds of adj that you make with a shell orthotic. The hydro-dynamics self posts the foot and hydro-dynamically aligns the forefoot to the ground--what other adj do I need to consider?


In a recent series of lectures on how orthotics work I used center of pressure, force couples, forces, moments, pressure. That is more than on principle of physics. I've measured the change in center of pressure in stance under the heel with a wedge placed under the heel. It is not a big leap of faith to assume that a varus wedge shaped heel cup would create the same changes. A medial shift in the center of pressure will increase supination moment. That's a predictable change. You can't predict what change you will get with a bag of silicon.

I disagree, adding fluid, raises the TNJ and supinates the foot, reduction of fluid does just the opposite in cases of over correction.

 

We can only hope that when those that know no better are searching for the name Dennis Kiper or for information about his silicone orthoses they come across this thread and see it all for what it really is.

I can only hope

 

Dennis:

Seeing the way you answered above and didn't answer any of my very-easy-to-answer questions, I'll answer them for you.

Dennis Kiper, have you ever published any paper in a peer-reviewed scientific journal? Answer: No.

Dennis Kiper, have you ever held a faculty position at a podiatric medical institution? Answer: No.

Dennis Kiper, have you ever written a book or book chapter on biomechanics or foot orthoses? Answer: No.

Dennis Kiper, have you published anything in your 70 years of life for the podiatry profession that did not discuss the merits of a product you held a financial interest in? Answer: No.

Now that wasn't so hard was it, Dennis?

It is quite funny that you tell me to "get off your high horse" when it is, indeed, you who are the one who is acting quite superior to the rest of us, even though you have no credentials other than you sell silicone-filled bags of plastic to the public and then somehow expect all of us to believe everything you say. Let's take a few choice examples from your website where you just make things up!!: www.drkiper.com

The Silicone Dynamic Orthotic (SDO) "matches the way the foot walks"?? What exactly does "matches the way the foot walks" actually mean...the SDO pronates and supinates, plantarflexes and dorsiflexes and inverts and everts during gait?? Or does it mean it moves out of the way of the foot allowing it to function any way it wants to? Sounds like something you made up since not only is it imprecise but is also ambiguous and unclear.

Please provide one scientific reference which supports your contention that most orthotics do "not allow the foot to move naturally." Another claim from your website you just made up. If not, please provide scientific references which support your claim.

Please provide kinematic and/or kinetic data which supports your claim that the SDO "matches and decelerates" pronation of the foot. I know, you can't, you just made this one up also.

Please provide references or a logical biomechanical discussion of how the SDO keeps the foot "stable and functionally aligned". I almost forgot, you made this one up also since you have not a shred of scientific evidence which supports this claim also.

Again, Dennis, please provide us with anything other than your salesman language where you expect us to believe you just because you said it that the "the Silicone Dynamic Orthotic also has the long-term benefit of helping realign your body and slowing down wear and tear throughout." Ooops, I forgot, you make up a lot of things, this statement included.

Dennis, Dennis, Dennis...where did you come up with this statement: "The arch is the "center" of all pronation/postural problems."?? I would love you to get up in front of an audience of podiatrists and make that statement without being laughed off the stage. I know, you just made it up.

Sales talk alert....not true...Dennis made this one up also!

Really, Dennis, you are indignant when I say that you make things up?! Yet here on your website where you are selling your silicone-filled bags of plastic to the unsuspecting public for $399.00 by mail order you make up one statement after another and after another.

Do you think we are stupid? (Too bad you called Simon stupid because he is one of the smartest podiatrists on foot orthosis function that I know.) You don't think we can read your drivel and tell what games you are trying to play here.

Go peddle your wares somewhere else, Dennis Kiper....and keep making stuff up to sell your insoles...it is one thing that you are very good at.

 

I'm going to go ride my bike--talk to you tomorrow

 

I said that because you questioned my and others ability to read pressure scans.

Here are two papers that more accurately reflect what I think about foot biomechanics when compared to our similar education to get our degrees.

Fuller, E.A. The Windlass Mechanism Of The Foot: A Mechanical Model To Explain Pathology J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 2000 Jan; 90(1) p 35-46

Fuller, E.A. Center of pressure and its theoretical relationship to foot pathology.
J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1999 Jun;89(6):278-91

Well the negative response could be because you are wrong. If you don't want to defend your opinions that's ok up until you start calling some of stupid for not agreeing with you. If you refuse to state why you believe what you believe it makes it much harder for us to show you where you are wrong. Is that the point? The point is not enjoyment, the point is whether you actually know any physics. You claim some physical principles apply to your devices. Tell us what they are.

Dennis, when you push up on the plantar medial arch of the foot not every foot is going to respond the same. You can read about the supination resistance test that Kevin described a long time ago.

Teckscan? What biomechanical info did you learn?

Marty came to CCPM around 1991-3 soon after we got the EMED pressure scanner. That's when I explained to him what a pressure scanner could do. So, what is your experience with pressure scanners?

So, it's only good walking on flat level surfaces. Is that on your website?

Dennis this statement was in response to your statement that

Another oops moment. Dennis, a lot of people on this website understand physics and they use that information to inform how they make their orthotics.

A rigid device can apply force to the skin inferior to the TN joint just as a silicon orthosis can. And you can wear the rigid device on roof tops and while playing sports and still get some benefit.

Eric

 

Marty came to the CCPM Biomechanics Department in 1984 when we had a meeting and we heard his spiel about how great his silicone-filled plastic bag "orthotics' were. If I remember correctly, at the meeting were Drs. Ron Valmassy, Jack Morris, Paul Scherer, Chris Smith and John Weed. We all got to try one out in our shoe and walk around in them. After Marty left, no one was very impressed with the product or with Marty, for that matter, since he seemed somewhat like a used car salesman, much like Dennis Kiper seems now.

It's too bad since if the silicone-filled orthoses weren't marketed as the best orthotic on the planet, as Dennis Kiper claims on his website, it may actually work well for some patients. What really troubles me is that Dennis' silicone-filled insoles do not appear much different from the many water-filled insoles, Amazing Insoles and Liquid Insolesand AquaSoles, or these glycerin-filled insoles, Massaging Insoles, which sell for about 1/10th to 1/20th of the price ($20.00 - $40.00) of Dennis' fluid-filled insoles.

Dennis, why are your fluid-filled insoles any better than these much cheaper fluid-filled insoles? Is it the silicone that is better than water or glycerin? Or, more likely, is it because you are the one selling it and you make up things much better on your website than do the water-filled and glycerin-filled insole salespeople?

I want to hear what your explanation is for that. Can't wait!:butcher:

 

Herein lies the fundamenatl flaw in Dennis's thinkng: a) the bones and joints of the midfoot some how "lock" b) that "unlocking" is a bad thing c) that his insoles "lock" the joints and this should be seen as a good thing.:morning:

Here's what the best available data actually demonstrates: the bones of the tarsus are constantly rotating and translating in 3-dimensional space relative to one another during the contact period of gait. Viz. they are never "locked" nor should they be. Instability is required for the necessary movements of the tarsal bones to occur.

 

Let's try to simplify this a little. Attached is a kinematic graph for the subtalar joint (couple of sets of data- if memory serves the green line is Wright's data, the red is McPoils N.B. neither sets of data show the STJ to be in "neutral" at midstance). When is the subtalar joint stable in these graphs? This is not a trick question, there are some points here where the subtalar joint is demonstrating stabiity. Anyone want to add some X marks the spots to the graphs?

 

Eric

I said that because you questioned my and others ability to read pressure scans.

Maybe you weren't following the full thread, and you didn't see where David and I were at it. I questioned him on some scans he or Spooner showed, and he didn't know how to answer “my” question about what was in the scans. In addition Kevin came on and also said something referring to the scans, which also demonstrated to me, that because of your technology, you're group (not necessarily you)--if you want to post a pressure scan of a pt w & w/o an orthotic of yours, we could give it a try.

The point is not enjoyment, the point is whether you actually know any physics. You claim some physical principles apply to your devices. Tell us what they are.

Have you read either my article or description of fluid motion and biomechanics?? Why are you asking me to repeat myself—this thread is full of those descriptions.

Dennis, when you push up on the plantar medial arch of the foot not every foot is going to respond the same. You can read about the supination resistance test that Kevin described a long time ago.

Eric, first—why are you pushing up on the plantar medial arch??--what does the supination resistance test tell you? How does that apply to fluid technology??
You asked me is the same silicon in the bag going to affect every foot the same , I fully explained it to you. Did you need further clarification?--read it again, it's complete.

Teckscan? What biomechanical info did you learn?

Marty came to CCPM around 1991-3 soon after we got the EMED pressure scanner. That's when I explained to him what a pressure scanner could do.

Eric, here again, I don't think you're reading my responses to you.
I stated Marty and I found the Pedobarograph in'89/90??? (you can see the one scan I posted in my article (BE CAREFUL, when you look at it, you might actually see biomechanical function in a gait cycle.(maybe you've got some scans that would show me, what I've shown you—Marty and I were both leasing and learning, long before the E-med even came out.--I don't know why Marty acted like you were teaching him, maybe you did show him something he wasn't aware of, after all this was new technology and there was lots to see and learn thru pressure scans.--???

So, it's only good walking on flat level surfaces. Is that on your website?

It's for walking and running, doesn't have to be a flat surface. Many of my runners like to run trails.
It's not for mountain climbing or adventure racing (although I did have a couple of elite triathletes who did use them for adventure racing against my advice. Fortunately thay never had a problem, but I still would advise against it.—


You can't predict what change you will get with a bag of silicon.

I disagree, adding fluid, raises the TNJ and supinates the foot, reduction of fluid does just the opposite in cases of over correction.

Dennis this statement was in response to your statement that –so what do you think about the fact that that adding or reducing fluid IS PREDICTABLE?

How come after you ask most questions that I answer, you have no follow up? You seem to only be looking for something else to get me with?

 

Kevin


Marty came to the CCPM Biomechanics Department in 1984 when we had a meeting and we heard his spiel about how great his silicone-filled plastic bag "orthotics' were. If I remember correctly, at the meeting were Drs. Ron Valmassy, Jack Morris, Paul Scherer, Chris Smith and John Weed. We all got to try one out in our shoe and walk around in them. After Marty left, no one was very impressed with the product or with Marty, for that matter, since he seemed somewhat like a used car salesman, much like Dennis Kiper seems now.

Marty was not prepared to discuss the full scientific basis of fluid technology. He was so excited because he knew this technology worked. There was no technology to confirm it at that time. He couldn't explain the fluid and biomechanical movement. He thought you “scientists” would put it together yourself and recognize or at least raise an eyebrow and say HMMMMMMMM? Maybe we should look at this, after all it's got a ton more science behind it even if we don't understand it, than a trad orthotic. He gave you more credit than you deserved. The technology of fluid was just too radical
and he wasn't prepared.----------I am!

Dennis, why are your fluid-filled insoles any better than these much cheaper fluid-filled insoles?

First the viscosity of the fluid.--It comes the closest to be able to transfer the motion of the foot
Two, the cheaper insoles are made by a mfgr—no foot specialist consulted.
Three, The volume of fluid used is generic (there are only a total of maybe 8 sizes for the entire population)
Four, the silicone is a prescription. (there are over 1000 Rx for sizes 5--13)
Five, the seal used in the cheaper models is not as well constructed.
Six, It takes a foot specialist to properly fit a pt.
Seven, because biomechanical optimal position changes over time, the Rx can also be changed (with greater accuracy, than the way a trad orthotic is made with physics???
Eight, when a Rx needs an adjustment, it's just a matter of more or less fluid, you can't do that with those cheaper types.

Is it the silicone that is better than water or glycerin

Both water and glycerin are not viscous enough for the transference of motion.

 

This guy is a real candidate for minister status at the Church of the Sub-Genius. See how he out-wits the Pinks, see how his focus is not waivered by the opportunity to sell. These so called "experts" have nothing on Dennis, he's looking at every market and seeing that market, right from the comfort of his own arm chair. Sub-genius people, bow down and exalt him (ignore the fact that he's just making things up). Anyone want to buy a Kirby vacuum cleaner?

 

Kirby vacuums are old technology, like your thinking.

 

1) Really? So any incompressable fluid, such as water, cannot "transfer motion"= pile of crap, Dennis.
2) "No foot specialist consulted": you sell via the internet, the only consultation is via the internet = pile of crap Dennis.
3) The volume of fluid you add is a guess as to how much might be right, assuming your insoles are doing anything postive in the first place = pile of crap, Dennis.
4) Who cares if the silicone is prescription, it's a viscous fluid and there are many, many viscous fluids and you stumbled across the best one because... Pile of crap, Dennis.
5) And you know the seal in the cheaper ones are not as good as yours because you've carried out physical testing...not. Pile of crap, Dennis.
6) it takes a foot specialist... who has never seen the foot in-vivo to fit your insoles. Anyone knows that this is a "quite extraordinary" claim. Pile of crap, Dennis.
7) There is no such thing as one biomechanical optimal position since any biomechanically optimalised position is a function of genotype plus environment plus the interaction beteween the genotype and the environment at any given time. Viz. it's another pile of crap, Dennis.

You sir, are a charlatan, end of story. No scientific evidence for any of your statements, you are simply making it up as you go along. Here is the reallity, you came on here thinking that you could sell your products via the "blinding with science" method, you perceived that you could baffle the understanding of the collective minds here; you where very much mistaken. End of story. Go and find a less sophisticated audience, little man.

 

Get selling Dennis, don't worry about the Pinks, they don't know what they are talking about. We both know that the first patent for liquid fille insoles was only a couple of weeks ago. A new sale dawns, never forget that.

 

Aloha Dennis,

If i could advise you.

First,
Do not fight fire with fire on this site,, it is one of the tools the mechanical sharks use to devour you. They will bait you until you start to make personal attacks,,just don't do it. You will always loose to them.

Second,
I would advise you not to use your own research to support your claims. Interpenting pressure scans is more than than looking at art on the wall. There is alot of mathematical data and equations behind the scans that we will need factored.
So hire an outside lab to get your data captured.

Now thinking like an engineer the first questions these labs will ask you is "What do you want to test for ??" you will need to be specific if you want good data. Not just ahhh i want this orthotic tested...?

Now the California College of Podiatric Medicine has a nice shiny and new gait lab in your state. Why don't one of these "professors" from the school offer you their assistance and expertise. Perhaps this could help the school pay off the debt from buying all that nice new equipment and could help us determine if your gait technology is better than Kevin's. Perhaps Kevin could do the same to see if his gait technology is better than yours.

A Hui Hou,
Steve

 

It's funny but I posted a very similar response to Simon's so there's no point in being redundant. I have some experience with Dennis' SDO for any of you unfamiliar with the previous thread on the topic.

I met Dennis personally at PFOLA 2008, this was during a time where a couple of DPM's, pedorthists and I were all having a very heated discussion with him regarding his product and claims. Dennis did fit me with an SDO and I wore it for a few weeks but had to discontinue use due to pain. It simply exacerbated a flexible, forefoot valgus and created plantar fasciitis symptoms in my case. Dennis had offered to add more fluid to the device but at that point I was done and not taking any more chances with my feet.

The TekScan rep was a vendor at PFOLA and Dennis created the oddest scene I've ever encountered at a professional conference. The debate went on from there on a web board devoted to foot pain and I wrote in response to Dennis' outrageous and unsubstantiated claims:

So here you are again 6 years later and no progress Dennis. You are the one who should stick around and learn something.

 

Aloha Kevin,

Perhaps you did not hear me well enough. The hatched buther man is not needed in any of your posts any more.

More than once i have seen you get frustrated when you cannot communicate or with a fellow doctor that has not had the privilage of staying a year behind in school to further study plastic shoe inserts and their influance on gait.

So now you will feel the blunt end of my Peace Studies training i had at Saint John's Univeristy while learning to become a better US Army officer and spellar.

 

Hi Simon. One question....Mc Poil study demonstrate there's no neutral STJ position in midstance. So.... if it's a normal pronation is discriminate by the absence of pain??

---

 

Kevin

Now I understand what the problem has been. You have been reading my web site and asking questions like a non-scientific patient. I responded, as a Dr to a patient. Speaking in language a pt should understand. But, then you reject anything as the Dr yourself. We're not in the same language together.

When in my own inimitable way I explain to a pt:

I have a way of calibrating the space in your arch from my armchair.
That support will fill you comfortably and precisely, so that when you walk, you're actually healing.
It will guide and assist your arch as you step on the floor.
It will match the way you walk.
It's easy to wear, even in your slippers.

Most patients say “THAT MAKES SENSE”---------You guys have to admit that's pretty slick—HUH?http://www.podiatry-arena.com/podiatry-forum/images/smilies/biggrin.gif

If you want to speak with me as a credible scientific colleague, then you have to read my article. Other wise, you're the patient, I'm the Dr, speaking about a technology you have very little experience with.

 

Fabio

Originally Posted by Simon Spooner
7) There is no such thing as one biomechanical optimal position since any biomechanically optimalised position is a function of genotype plus environment plus the interaction beteween the genotype and the environment at any given time. Viz. it's another pile of crap, Dennis.
8)

This post might have confused you Fabio, Simon, for all his smarts some how equated my words biomechanical optimal position and assumed I'm talking about “ONE” position. I've been practically lecturing here about “dynamic stability”--and Simon chose to say the above—it's your crap Simon.

 

Steve

Thanks for your advice, but CCPM would never consent to this, because deep in their souls
they'd be too afraid of what the results would be.

As I stated before, Marty should have done this a long time ago, he should have written the article. As Kirby pointed out I'm 70, I'm a little tired to be doing research, but I could do the fitting (from my armchair-of course)

 

ATTN: Wedermeyer

It's funny but I posted a very similar response to Simon's so there's no point in being redundant. I have some experience with Dennis' SDO for any of you unfamiliar with the previous thread on the topic.

I met Dennis personally at PFOLA 2008

From this point forward, any truths are twisted like a Hobbits Tale, the good thing about the internet is our Hx is on HEELSPURS.COM

 

Dennis be very careful calling me a liar, I can substantiate what i say and Dr. Wander would be more than happy to come here and confirm the veracity of what I am saying as truth.

1. I did wear an SDO you provided me.
2. There was a thread years back on PA where you wee similarly trounced.
3. I did meet you personally at PFOLA 2008, Dr. Davis can confirm this.
4. Shortly after that you were banned from Heelspurs for making incredulous claims and trying to profit off a help site.

Dr. Wander will be along shortly Dennis, tuck your shirt back in and wipe the drool off mouth breather.