Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Challenging SALRE

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by Robertisaacs, Nov 20, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. EdGlaser

    EdGlaser Active Member

    I think that the lack of soft tissue compression is a major flaw of off weight bearing pop casting.

    Ed
     

  2. Ed:

    Can I just start calling you "Mr. Straw Man"?! If, again, you would finally take the time to carefully read my paper on SALRE theory (Kirby KA: Subtalar joint axis location and rotational equilibrium theory of foot function. JAPMA, 91:465-488, 2001.) you will see the following:

    1. SALRE theory takes into account the three dimensional spatial location of the subtalar joint (STJ) axis. SALRE theory is not a two-dimensional theory, it is three-dimensional.

    2. Foot posture is not ignored in SALRE theory. Instead SALRE theory, due to limitations of space constraint in a peer-reviewed scientific journal (which you obviously know nothing about since you have never published anything in a peer-reviewed scientific journal) had to be abbreviated to only include the salient and important biomechanical factors of the three-dimensional spatial location of STJ axis on the kinetics of foot function. Scientific journals don't allow a book to be published in one journal article. In fact, I had to fight to get the SALRE paper published in JAPMA since the reviewers thought it should be shortened, even though the paper eventually won the Scholl award for the best published paper in JAPMA for that year. If you want to learn more about my thoughts about what you call "foot posture", then you should start reading my other numerous published scientific articles, books, and book chapters so you can see how "foot posture" affects the biomechanics of the foot.

    3. Why do you think that my SALRE theory has anything to do with what you say "sacrificing function for symptom masking". Please review all my published works over the last 20+ years and show all of us where I have stated that I don't consider foot function when designing foot orthoses for patients. Unlike you, I don't subject alll of my patients to gouging, excessively-high arched foot orthoses, with no regard to their inability to wear your painful, century-old Whitman brace type orthosis, which you continue to say are "revolutionary". As an ethical clinician, I must consider pain relief, symptom relief and functional improvement in my custom foot orthoses.

    4. Please explain to me how SALRE theory "leads doctors down a dismal abyss to a place where prefabs = customs". Your logic is one-of-a-kind, Ed. You build these straw man arguments against one paper I wrote all for the sole purpose of building up your business and boosting your ego with no basis in fact or science. Why don't you do like you ask others to do to you...stick to the facts, use scientific logic, stop making SALRE theory out to be more than it was ever intended to be, and quit being motivated by your quest for self-glory and financial reward for your company. Please do make a logical, factual critique of SALRE theory with scientific references without all the straw man arguments, Ed. I welcome it! So far, you don't seem to even understand its basic concepts which surprises me since you claim to be a mechanical engineer.

    On that note, Ed, I have a question about your claim of being a mechanical engineer. You have said on numerous occasions that you are a mechanical engineer....but didn't you graduate from undergraduate college at SUNY Stonybrook with Bachelor of Science degree in Biology?? How does one become a "mechanical engineer" with a Bachelor of Science in Biology?? Where did you get your mechanical engineering bachelor's degree from, was it from SUNY Stonybrook or from another undergraduate college?? I know at the University of California, Davis, where I received my BS in Animal Physiology in four years (1975-1979), that it would have been virtually impossible to major both in mechanical engineering and biological sciences due to the conflicts in course work and classes required (I was peer advisor for the Animal Physiology Department at UC Davis my senior year). Please explain.
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2008
  3. efuller

    efuller MVP

    And would you also agree that orthoses effect the moments about those joints? So, if you claimed that an orthosis plantarflexed the 1st met cunieform joint and the 1st cuneiform navicular joint you should be able to describe how an orthosis creates a plantar flexion moment at those joints. How, does an orthosis plantar flex the first ray?


    Wrong Ed. SARLE fails at explaining 2nd met stress fractures because it was not designed to look at the second met. We have told you repeatedly that SALRE is not a 2-d depiction of the joint. When you make this criticism you are criticizing something other than SALRE. Prefabs, customs? How does this relate to SALRE?


    Ed, stop looking at one diagram. If you look at whole descriptions of the theory you will see transverse plane projections of the axis as well. When we describe medial and lateral deviation of the axis we are looking at the transverse plane. In order to describe a 3-d representation on paper you need to use at least 2 planes and those of us who have used SALRE have used diagrams in 2 different planes. This criticism does not fly. :bang:


    So, it looks like we are in agreement that you should look at the position of STJ axis in which the patient is standing. When the foot is in a more supinated posture the projection of the STJ axis will be more laterally positioned and that is why there is "less force to control the foot" about the STJ. You are right it is just physics as explained by SALRE.

    Now the big question I have about changing the posture of the foot. How many degrees of calcaneal inversion can you see, see on average, see at a minimum, when you stand on one of your orthotics as compared to when you are standing on the ground alone?

    I disagree with the block of wood coment. When a person is seated in a chair with their foot pointed toward you, you can push, with your finger on the fifth metatarsal head, and if the force vector is lateral to the STJ axis the STJ will pronate even though there are several other joints between the point of application of force and the STJ. If you pushed on the foot from a more medial position you would create a smaller pronation moment at the STJ. This statement is true whether or not you know the location of the axis.

    You have again misstated Kevin's belief. Even if he did believe what you state you still don't have a valid argument that addresses SALRE. If someone thougth that the STJ axis was the most important, or even only, axis in describing foot pathology, you still have to explain why this assumption is wrong. The complexity of the foot argument doesn't work either in view of the simple experiment I described in the paragraph above.


    Ed, how does an orthotic apply enough force to the foot to affect position prior to forefoot contact?


    You are misstating SALRE again. :bang: SALRE looks only at STJ moments and how those moments might effect foot structures.

    I really did not understand your last paragraph. Can you explain
    "function of the STJ would be most likely be sacrificed"
    How do you sacrifice function?
    What is a dysfunctional axis?
    What does your end of pronation comment have to do with 1:1 rotation criticism of SALRE? Could you exand on your last sentence, I'm not sure what your point is?



    I'm looking foreward to your explanation of why MASS is better.

    Regards,

    Eric
     
  4. joejared

    joejared Active Member

    Just a cursory glance, but...

    Your theory explains why I get headaches. I always wondered who thought up distorting the met pads in order to obtain a "good" casting of a patients foot. Most labs hammer your fingers out of the cast, fwiw, because it interferes with the ability to make a good orthotic out of fingers and feet.

    :craig:


    For customers that insist on getting their fingers into the plantar surface, I'm already resigned to the fact that the only thing I will ever try to provide for them is a cast scanner, or a vendor who does cast scanning. It's really a pita from any laboratory perspective.

    Seriously, and for purpose of automation and headache reduction, I recommend using the tendons on the navicular and calcaneus surface to determine foot positioning and not anything on the plantar surface. Again, that's just from a cursory glance of your paper, so I could be talking out of my proximus.
     
  5. I have no idea what you are talking about here or how this relates to my statement about CoP velocity and vectors? Perhaps it might be helpful if you started by introducing yourself? Having browsed your posts to this site, about 7 in the last 24 hours, a common thread seems to be emerging; that you are selling foot scanners, am I correct?
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2008
  6. joejared

    joejared Active Member

    First, and when I market scanners, they will be marketed the right way, using advertizements both here and on other podiatry sites and periodicals. Yes, I sell complete orthotic manufacturing systems which are available but severely backlogged, but that wasn't the point in any of my threads nor have I begun marketing of the scanner, as my current customer base is still evaluating it for improvements and there are only limited sales at this time. For this particular thread, I noticed a distinct similarity between your finger positions and that of plaster casts I have seen in casts supplied to my customers, and I was merely making a comment on it. I sincerely hope you didn't think I was personally attacking you but merely jesting about the pretty pictures.

    As for your article, and how it applies here, I'm quite sure I'll be gaining a customer base that uses more than root style casting, but my preference is the root style of casting. Even your article would qualify to help me make the perfect wrench for every nut. ;-)
     
  7. joejared

    joejared Active Member

    Out of curiosity, was the pain in the cuboid region or along the midtarsal joints, or was the pain higher in the foot? It would make sense if the foot was severely supinated that undue pressure would be applied to the cuboid, and that since the cubiod moves longitudinally when the foot is pronated or supinated that there might be a stress point there that gets inflamed, or alternatively, that it would stress the lateral column or the ankle.
     
  8. efuller

    efuller MVP

    The pain was in the posterior tibial muscle and the medial arch.

    Eric
     
  9. I have no idea what you are talking about, there are no photographs of me here and certainly no photographs of my finger positions or my casts. None of my publications are linked to this thread either. I think you need to read the thread again and address your comments to the correct individual. Nice start here Joe, you've managed to put my back up already. Lets hope your marketing is more accurate. Nob:bash:
     
  10. joejared

    joejared Active Member


    I noticed that after the fact, and thought of emailing an appology to Mr. Kirby on that point, but from my perspective it was funny to see casts with impressions exactly like his article's 'drawings'. The article itself is good reading, don't get me wrong. As I read this thread both times, a lingering thought came to mind. Some good has to come from it. The clashing of strong opinions and ego may never get resolved, but if it makes people think then it is serving a purpose. For my particular product, I would obviously be interested in the different casting methods, and the pros and cons of each and it does make me think about what my customers have to work with, so if nothing else, it makes me think and helps me to stay in tune with this market and its needs.
     
  11. joejared

    joejared Active Member

    Was the longitudinal position of the arch correct? That sounds like it was pinching at the wrong point in the arch, possibly twisting the tibia and not conforming to the arch shape as well. Obviously it's just a guess since I don't see your foot nor the orthotic itself.
     
  12. Yeah, alternatively you could apologise to me you... but no, too much ego and too much marketing to do. What a twat you are.
     
  13. joejared

    joejared Active Member

    You're actually far from the truth on that, but to be honest, there's alot of testosterone to go around. I just chose not to participate at this level. As to name calling, well, I might attack thoughts but I hope to never be accused and guilty of attacking the person.
     
  14. Lets take a quick look, you've come here, used a quote from me completely out of context, made negative suggestion with regard to my clinical practice. I've pointed your error out to you and you've not even had the decency to apologise. Nice. You're just too busy trying to sell foot scanners that nobody really wants. Go away and come back when you're good. As for name calling,I haven't even got warmed up yet as I've only just come back from playing rugby, and witnessed some of the boys ****ting more substantial things than you... have a nice life cock whit. Go ahead, make my day, attack my thoughts... except your only thoughts are on selling foot scanners. Great.
     
  15. joejared

    joejared Active Member

    Am I? If you feel as though I've attacked you personally, that's one thing and never intended, but the fact of the matter is that I am not trying to sell foot scanners here, and when I do, as I posted earlier, I will do so through the ads. As to the 'no one wants' part, I'm backlogged severely with sales, and my purpose here is just as I said, to get to know what the podiatric community thinks about podiatric issues and to actually participate in some of the discussions.

    Up to recently, I've had a laboratory perspective on orthoics, but it would be a good idea to educate myself about in-office practices, simply because that is where my new product is going. It would be natural for me to have a focus on the data aquisition systems out there, simply because that is my specialty, automating orthotic manufacturing. I also would like to think I have a sense of humor too, but perhaps that's just a dillusional thought and perhaps that humor is lost on you. Either way, and if you in fact did feel hurt or angered by my postings, it wasn't intended and hopefully in the future you wont see me as attacking you.
     
    Last edited: Dec 6, 2008
  16. Sorry?
     
  17. Steve The Footman

    Steve The Footman Active Member

    I still don't see an apology in that.

    Most messageboards and online forums are infiltrated regularly by unscrupulous posters with hidden agendas. While sometimes they are just trolls looking for ways to get a reaction, others are trying to gain a financial advantage. That is why I have always been against anonymous posters. If you have a conflict of interest then it should be included at the bottom of each post. Joejared you say that you are an inventor but are you a podiatrist or pedorthist? How long have you been involved in biomechanics? Have you any academic qualifications? Or is this the latest get rich quick scheme you are involved in? I would be happy for you to prove my suspicions wrong.
     
  18. joejared

    joejared Active Member

    Once I have confirmation that there is no problem with me advertizing my product on this site, I will let my product speak for itself. I doubt seriously, however, an $800.00 True 3D scanner is a get rich quick product, when the cost of materials is $321.30, and the cost of labor is $125.03 per unit, with an 11.6 hour machine build time and the only real profit I make is in royalties paid by my client/server sites. I have been working in the industry since 1995, and in business for myself since 2000, with electronics being my "training", followed up with self taught programming, self-taught machining and followed guidance of both lab technicians and 2 podiatrists to develop my product.. As to my own accomplishments, I built my own router from raw materials and designed and established all programs to automate production of scanners here to provide the highest quality scanner at the lowest possible price. Once I've finalized the servo motor upgrades to my router, it is quite likely that not only will I have the first high quality and accurate 3D Cast/foot scanner on the market, but it will also likely drop closer to $500.00 in keeping with my business model.

    How I reduced the cost of scanners is simple. First, I didn't set out to build the scanner because by hand it would be too difficult to produce repeatably and accurately. First, I built a 4 axis router and designed the programming language to be simple for any machinist to understand. (See also http://www.oretek.com/micromill/user.shtml ). Then I set about to design the scanner, drawing it all entirely in 3D, and lastly, programmed each component into my own machine such that all machining expenses and labor are inhouse.

    Recent pictures of this latest accomplishment can be found at http://www.oretek.com/images/20081207/ including assorted snapshots of the manufacturing process and that of one of my employees actually producing parts that a machinist would normally.

    Yes, I did drop out of high school in favor of obtaining a GED, but before doing so in math was educated as high as pre-calculus, completed a 7 month full time class in electronics in 4 1/2 months back in 1985, and continued to study various skills so that I could be here, right now, and tell you this high school dropout has produced a device that rivals that of the big companies.

    As to the biomechanics, I follow the direction of the experts in the field, not claiming much in that area, other than to develop code as needed to suit their objectives. The only actual code I claim is that of my mid-stance orthotics, designed specificly for long hours standing in place, in which case the weight of the patient is uniformly distributed, providing comfort in tasks involving standing in place for hours at a time. I did that for myself, simply because I am often found standing in front of a machine working on it. I don't need a degree to understand biomechanics. I simply need to listen to those with degrees and follow their guidance.

    Lastly, and rather than defend my accomplishments because of someone's suspicions, I personally would rather not talk about my scanner. I'd rather talk about technical issues related to compensating for a patient's problems. I'm listening.
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2008
  19. Dave sorry to take so long to come back to this, please see document attached. I hope this makes sense.
     

    Attached Files:

  20. No. Nor do I Steve. I've not seen a post when Joe doesn't mention foot scanners either.:deadhorse:
     
  21. David Smith

    David Smith Well-Known Member

    Simon

    Oh I see where your coming from now!

    In your analysis convention you have two applied forces, a horizontal and vertical force relative to the inclined plane. Therefore you can take the resultant vetor of these forces and this vector can/is able to change angle as the magnitude of the applied forces change (unless they change equally and proprtionaly). Therefore you can say that as the coefficient of friction changes so can the angle of the resultant force because this allows a greater horizontal force to be applied.
    The resultant force vector will then have an equal and opposite resisting force vector, which is the resultant of the horizontal and vertical (relative to the incline)resisting forces. This was the start point of my analysis technique and therefore however the applied force vector changes the resultant resistive force vector will always be equal and opposite and does not change relative to the each other as the coefficient of friction changes.

    Its all perspective:dizzy:

    Cheers Dave
     
  22. joejared

    joejared Active Member


    They're on here. I think I understand your reaction and that of others here. Immediate perception of anything new is probably assumed to be snake oil until proven otherwise. Given the technology that is out there, I can understand that perception and bias. From what I see, your starting opinion is very justifiable.
     
  23. Joe, my starting opinion is that you used a quote from me out of context and then erroneously made disparaging comments regarding my casting technique and you've not had the decency to say sorry even when I pointed this out to you.

    For your information, I worked on the development of laser based foot scanners back in the early nineties. I've used contact scanners, piezo-electric and and light source scanners over the last decade or so. You have no idea about my perception and bias on this topic since you have not stopped to ask, rather you continue with your often nonsensical monologues, that are frequently out of context of the thread they are posted within. Hence my starting opinion has nothing to do with the technology, rather it is to do with you. Thus far, I find your approach to be rather ignorant and arrogant.

    Since you are obviously keen to talk about the relative merits of foot and cast scanning, why don't you just start a thread on it?
     
  24. Sorry to disappoint you but there are already lots of high quality and accurate 3D cast /foot scanners on the market, so you won't be the first as you state above. As for low price you can frequently pick them up from e-bay for a few hundred £.
     
  25. joejared

    joejared Active Member

    Oh, oh well. I sit corrected. I wasn't aware that there was a scanner that offered both cast and foot scanning. I'm assuming that the original stated price of their scanners, however, was significantly higher than what was on Ebay, however.
     
  26. But not apologetic.
     
  27. Good form that man. This is certainly not the place to come and try to crowbar a description of you product and link to your website into an academic discussion! I admire your propiety!:drinks

    Quite right, no need to put sales info on here when we can go look at it if we want to buy one!:good:

    Ah. :rolleyes: Belay my last.

    You are the second to claim this in recent weeks. An optical or surface scan DOES NOT uniformally distribute weight uniformily any more than the fact that the ground is flat under the forefoot makes the weight evenly distributed over this area. When a 500kg guy sits on a flat seat his bum is flat as is the seat. Does'nt mean the weight is evenly distributed.

    Nor, come to that, is this necessarily a good thing!

    With respect, the above statement displays that you DON'T understand biomechanics.

    Mind you, who does?:eek:

    Respectfully
    Robert
     
  28. Thanks Robert, I missed that one. Why are they called mid-stance orthotics? How many feet are on the ground during mid-stance, Joe? I knew a girl like a flamingo...
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2008
  29. I think its also worth stating that Mid stance is not the same creature as Static Weight bearing. Interesting thought that, they so often are used synonomously! Be easy to check with a VLS.

    Robert
     
  30. admin

    admin Administrator Staff Member

Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page