Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

I saw this on another forum

http://www.happyfeet.net/clinical_study_02.php

and wondered if the experts here knew anything about these gadgets ?

 

That entire article is plagiarized from the New York Times, which we had a thread on. They running huge risk of litigation over illegally reproducing the NY Times content without permission.

I have had several pieces of my work plagiarized on other websites and this sort of thing really pisses me off ... so I am off to tip off the NY Times.... they deserve to get what will be coming there way.

 

On the Happy Feet website that they claim success in treating a variety of common foot disorders that we treat with CFO's. Many of us are familiar with fluid filled insoles, we had some discussion a few years back with one of these companies and his representations about the product were ludicrous.

They are misrepresenting a lot of research here, the diabetic section alone should be reported to the FDA. Clinical Study 1 reports a "Some participants were documented to have increased circulation in the lower extremities as much as 115%". Incredible.

The persons named on the study are a retired thoracic surgeon, an ultrasonographer and the 3rd party's credentials are unlisted. Happy Feet funded the study, no surprise there.

Clinical Study 2 is just as Craig commented plagiarism. It is also not a study but an opinion piece with a prominent researcher quoted out-of-context and does nothing to prove their claims that happy Feet are anything unique nor effective.

It is actually a straw-man argument, the likes of which we see from almost all of those who wish to sell their own little miracles and have nothing substantial to base it upon.