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. Everything that you are ever going to want to know about running shoes: Running Shoes Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Have you considered the Critical Thinking and Skeptical Boot Camp, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. 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.

Kirby article and the midfoot

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by maxants33, Mar 15, 2012.

  1. maxants33

    maxants33 Active Member

    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    Hello, I was just wondering if anyone knows of a document out there by Kevin Kirby DMP that accompanies his 'Subtalar Joint Axis Location and Rotational Equilibrium Theory of Foot Function' - but - focuses on his thoughts on midfoot and MTJ function ?
    I've had a good hunt around but don't know if Im looking in the right places....
    Many thanks!

  2. RobinP

    RobinP Well-Known Member

  3. Admin2

    Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

    Here are all the midtarsal joint threads
  4. This thread on Podiatry Arena is fairly long but contains some good information.

    Midtarsal Joint Equilibrium Theory

    Here, for the first time, is the lecture I gave on midtarsal joint equilibrium from my lecture at the 2007 PFOLA Meeting in San Diego. Hope this helps.:drinks

  5. maxants33

    maxants33 Active Member

    Thanks Kevin!
  6. drsha

    drsha Banned

    When you state that your article provides "some good information", I would prefer you state that it provides information that needs further research.

    This is not a peer reviewed article yet you seem to posture as if we should consider it Evidence Based and immediately valuable.

    It reflects an opinion of the midtarsal joint and its function and merely paves the way for potential research and eventual proof because it, like you claim Dr Root's work, must stand the "test of proof".

    Since it was presented at a conference in 2007, do you have any proof that it has any clinical relevance or applications in population studies or is this just anecdotal and professional opinion that unless a reader is biased towards SALRE and TS would give it any more credence than Root?

    Evidence would help me give it more power.

  7. maxants33

    maxants33 Active Member

    I thought the work of Nester, Lundgren, Findlow etc complemented Kevin's work? That's a good backbone of evidence to extrapolate on surely? I am just student thought...

    P.S I'm also keen just to know Kevin's thoughts on the midfoot, I like his explanations
  8. drsha

    drsha Banned

    As Kevin often states, we are all standing on the backs of those who preceded us. That includes us all, not just Kevin.

    As are you, I am keen to read Kevin's work as his work has much merit. I extrapolate things from him to apply to my work. i.e., I live on his back as you do.

    One example would be that I updated a drawing of Kevin's that related to grf and the first ray.

    It led me to develop my forefoot SERM-PERM test because it made me realize that I needed my reference point to be the fifth metatarsal and not the 2nd metatarsal as described by Dr Dananberg in his FHL work. His picture is what the closed chain version of my Flexible-Stable and Rigid Forefoot Functional Foot Types look like (see attached).

    My point for you to absorb is that IMHO, much of Kevin's work is self published (his precision intracast books), self proclaimed, poorly referenced beyond his own promotion, not well researched and has little high level EBM to back it up. In spite of these factoids, once again in IMHO, he holds others like me accountable to a higher standard when visiting our work or comments made on The Arena???


    Attached Files:

  9. maxants33

    maxants33 Active Member

    Well - he seems like a nice guy to me! :drinks
  10. Max:

    I am in Washington, DC, for a few hours before I head to Brussels, Belgium to lecture along with Simon Spooner and a few others at a couple of seminars there. I am glad that you, early in your education, can see the utility of trying to understand foot biomechanics by using basic biomechanics terminology such as forces, moments, rotational equilibrium, moment arms, etc. The concepts of rotational equilibrium can be applied to any joint of the body and this forms the basis of the study of "statics" which can be directly then applied to "dynamics".

    The bottom line is that every time you look at a foot, and it has a medial longitudinal arch (MLA) shape and is not totally flattened out, the concept of rotational equilibrium should tell you that there must be some forces holding the MLA in the shape it is currently in and prevents if from flattening out completely. This is a very powerful concept that can be used to analyze the equilibrium of rotational forces (i.e. moments) acting across the joints of th foot and lower extremity in order to better understand the forces and moments acting across these joints.

    You would also probably be helped if you went through all of my "Thought Experiments", one by one, and see if you can solve them. Here is the first one. There are nine of them.


    Always ask questions and use common sense with these mechanical analyses..and you will go far.:drinks
  11. blinda

    blinda MVP

    Hi maxants33,

    We`re all "just" students here ;) As clinicians/researchers we`re always keen to learn, so don`t put yourself down. Your recent posts on this and a couple of dermatology related threads demonstrate your admirable thirst for knowledge based on current and scientific evidence. You`ll find the Arena an invaluable source in aiding you with your studies. Just wish I knew about it when I was at uni!


    PS. Yep. Only met him once before, but I`d agree that Kevin is a nice guy :drinks Learnt a helluva lot from him, Eric, Craig, Simon, Robert, Mike, etc, etc.
  12. maxants33

    maxants33 Active Member

    Gosh! Wow! Thank you Kevin and Bel! And a big thank you to PodArena, the wealth of humour, knowlege and enthusiasm of its many users is definitely inspiring! It sure is a golden resource for us students! Thanks! :drinks
  13. Max:

    The easiest way to understand the forces acting through the foot is to do an analysis of the forces and moments (i.e. rotational forces) acting within the foot during relaxed bipedal stance. In relaxed bipedal stance, the center of mass of the body and the center of pressure under the foot is anterior to the ankle joint axis causing an external ankle joint dorsiflexion moment. In order for the ankle joint to maintain rotational equilibrium in relaxed bipedal stance, there must be also an internal ankle joint plantarflexion moment from some source to counterbalance the ankle joint dorsiflexion moment from ground reaction force (GRF). This internal ankle joint ankle joint plantarflexion moment is normally caused by contractile activity of the gastrocnemius/soleus complex (GSC) in relaxed bipedal stance.

    However, the GSC also causes a internal rearfoot plantarflexion moment which must be counterbalanced by some source of internal rearfoot dorsiflexion moment in order to "keep the calcaneal inclination angle constant" and not let the longitudinal arch collapse during relaxed bipedal stance. The source for this intenal rearfoot plantarflexion moment is the compression force at the midtarsal joint pushing the talus and calcaneus posteriorly and the plantar fascia, plantar ligaments and plantar intrinsic muscles pulling the plantar calcaneus anteriorly. This is one of the ways that the bipedal human achieves midtarsal joint sagittal plane rotational equilbrium during relaxed bipedal stance.
  14. maxants33

    maxants33 Active Member

    Like I said !!

    That's a very thorough and informative dissection of the balancing forces at play here, thanks for posting it! Forces/moments seem to be the future, and I'm keen to give myself a clear and (eventually) clinically applicable understanding of them. I think from what I've read of your work - its very valuable to the undergraduate, particularly in helping us to appreciate the relevance (and not too scariness) of looking at forces and moments (and of course rotational equilibrium!) .

    I will try to get through more of your work and throw some questions at you very soon. At the moment though I've a fair bit of course work to chomp my way through too!

    Thanks again!

    P.S - enjoy Belgium!
  15. Ever before the time of Sir Isaac Newton, forces and moments have always been important when considering the biomechanics of the foot and lower extremity. The problem in the past and currently in podiatry, is that most podiatrists do not have a firm enough grasp of basic mechanics/physics so that they are "scared off" by basic physics concepts such forces, moments, moment arms, rotational equilbrium, stress, strain, etc.

    As a result, many podiatry schools around the world, in the past and currently, teach biomechanics based on "abnormal structure of the foot and lower extremity" without first teaching students how one can simplify the process of foot and lower extremity biomechanics by first understanding, for example, how forces and moments cause rotational acceleration and stability of all the joints of the foot and lower extremity. I feel that this "abnormal structure" approach, which, unfortunately, was the approach I was taught as a student, is a mistake for today's podiatry student who should be very familiar with basic mechanical concepts before they try to understand concepts such as "compensations for abnormal structure" so that when more complex subjects, such as how a foot orthosis works, the student can more completely and clearly understood these important concepts.

    Don't be deceived by those who are trying to teach their "system of foot biomechanics" (there is one such person here currently on Podiatry Arena trying to do so) that is not based strictly on Newtonian mechanics. Things should make sense mechanically, and if they don't, question your professor or anyone who is trying to "educate you". I questioned my professors throughout my podiatry student years and, a few times, I was right and they were wrong. The driving force for me has been, and still is, to find the truth in how things work. This is what still motivates me to this day and keeps me deeply involved in foot and lower extremity biomechanics.

    Keep up the good work Max and keep asking questions. That is how we all learn.

    Good luck with your future studies.
  16. drsha

    drsha Banned

    I am at The American Academy of Dermatology Annual Meeting for the second time delivering an update of my 2006 lecture on "The Biomechanics of Toenail Dystrophy" and a new classification system for dystrophic toenails in San Diego, Ca. as I write this posting.

    The lecture is based on Structural and Functional Biomechanics an upgrading and massaging of Dr Roots work that Dr Kirby wishes to bury.

    My warning to students about someone who is taking so much time to try to devalue one of his colleagues and his bloodline instead of focusing on his/her own work and its merits and growth is to not speak against him or out of turn.

    If you are building a car, you had best pay some attention to the body of the car before you mechanize it if you want it to last and perform well over its lifetime.

    I, unlike Dr Kirby wish to shed light and not Master.

  17. Max:

    Here is an illustration that I made to describe the rotational forces (i.e. moments) that act across the midtarsal joint within the sagittal plane during relaxed bipedal stance with the center of pressure anterior to the ankle joint axis. Note that ground reaction force (GRF) produces a rearfoot plantarflexion moment and a forefoot dorsiflexion moment. The reaction force of the tibia on the dorsal talar dome produces a downward directed force vector that causes a rearfoot plantarflexion moment. This tibio-talar reaction force that will increase as Achilles tendon force increases. Together the forces from GRF, the Achilles tendon and the tibia will cause a longitudinal arch flattening moment (i.e. rearfoot plantarflexion moment + forefoot dorsiflexion moment).

    Now, due to the principle of rotational equilibrium, if the foot is noted to have a longitudinal arch height that resists complete flattening (i.e. which happens in nearly all feet), then we know that there must also be some simultaneously occuring longitudinal arch raising moments in the foot being observed. These longitudinal arch raising moments come from the tension force within the plantar fascia, plantar ligaments, plantar intrinsic, posterior tibial, flexor hallucis longus, flexor digitorum longus and peroneus longus muscles. Without these longitudinal arch raising moments, the longitudinal arch of the foot would totally collapse and flatten.

    Hope this helps to better explain the concept of rotational equilbrium across the medial-lateral axis of the midtarsal joint.
  18. maxants33

    maxants33 Active Member

    Hello Dennis
    As a student its hard not to admire your enthusiasm for your new theory. But, I did read M.L Roots obituary the other day. Here are some quotes I felt were very important to me:

    "This author personally heard Dr.
    Root on several occasions express a willingness to
    adjust his thinking as research and sound deduction
    proved the value of new ideas. He never intended to
    be the final authority; rather, he wanted others to
    continue and improve on what he had started."

    "Whether they agreed or disagreed
    with his ideas, all became more interested in

    Unfortunately I'm too young to have met Root, but I get the impression that if he felt his ideas needed updating (or even replacing!) then he would have accepted the situation with humility. From talking to people and from my limited understanding of the research, I get the impression that things are changing, and this change will be both drastic and essential. I appreciate Dr Kirby's work because it compliments my understanding of what is yet to come.

    Here is a youtube vid that is tenuously linked to this discussion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWlcRN0CwPw

    Max :drinks
  19. maxants33

    maxants33 Active Member

    P.S In response to your last comment

    "I, unlike Dr Kirby wish to shed light and not Master"

    So far all I have seen Kirby do is try to shed light!
  20. drsha

    drsha Banned


    The historical piece that you are leaving out is the Dr Root took us from being orthopedists making arch supports into being biomechanists making custom foot orthotics.

    Now everyone makes custom foot orthotics and I think even Kevin would admit that his "phizzics" isn't well understood by all and that he has another language he uses to "converse" with patients, consultants, insurance companies and the governmental agencies.

    "Here is an illustration that I made to describe the rotational forces (i.e. moments) that act across the midtarsal joint within the sagittal plane during relaxed bipedal stance with the center of pressure anterior to the ankle joint axis. Note that ground reaction force (GRF) produces a rearfoot plantarflexion moment and a forefoot dorsiflexion moment. The reaction force of the tibia on the dorsal talar dome produces a downward directed force vector that causes a rearfoot plantarflexion moment. This tibio-talar reaction force that will increase as Achilles tendon force increases. Together the forces from GRF, the Achilles tendon and the tibia will cause a longitudinal arch flattening moment (i.e. rearfoot plantarflexion moment + forefoot dorsiflexion moment).

    Now, due to the principle of rotational equilibrium, if the foot is noted to have a longitudinal arch height that resists complete flattening (i.e. which happens in nearly all feet), then we know that there must also be some simultaneously occuring longitudinal arch raising moments in the foot being observed. These longitudinal arch raising moments come from the tension force within the plantar fascia, plantar ligaments, plantar intrinsic, posterior tibial, flexor hallucis longus, flexor digitorum longus and peroneus longus muscles. Without these longitudinal arch raising moments, the longitudinal arch of the foot would totally collapse and flatten."
    doesn't fly.

    Architectural terms and language are far more understandable in general than "Phizzics".

    I so appreciate The Arena as a research/academic and teaching vehicle but physicians, patients, the blues and the government couldn't learn very much here compared to foot typing and foot centering theory.

    "in architecture, an arch has two equal sides and a central keystone. It is symmetrical and stands forever. In order to function, nature had to shorten the back half of the foot, lengthen the front half and offset the keystone backwards in order to better leverage our muscles.
    This means that in order to have a life of function we have given up a lifetime of support.
    Some feet are weak in the back, some in the front, some both and some neither so I am going to perform a foot typing on you to determine your functional foot type. That way, I can better offer you custom services tailored to your needs" and then I will give you a brochure on your foot type to explain your biomechanics in simple terms that you can process".
    That is what I offer as an upgrade of Dr Root and STJ Neutral Biomechanics and to TS as well.

    FFTing fascilitates, educates and markets biomechanics all over the world, every day. I left 20,000 dermatologists better educated about biomechanics and podiatry, for you.

    Prevention, performance enhancement and quality of life upgrading in addition to waiting for a symptom (TS).

    Good fortune to you, no matter what.

  21. Probably the most important reason for learning the answer to the question of "why doesn't the medial longitudinal arch (MLA) collapse" is that, now armed with the knowledge of what forces acting within the tissues of the foot and lower extremity help support the MLA, the podiatrist can understand exactly how foot orthoses work to produce their therapeutic effects. This is a question that earlier podiatric authors had never attempted to answer. This may seem strange to a podiatry student of today ,but 30 years ago, when I asked the same question during my podiatry student years at CCPM from 1979-1983, the answers I got were the following:

    1. Orthotics lock the midtarsal joint.
    2. Orthotics make the foot function in the subtalar neutral position.
    3. Orthotics prevent compensation for rearfoot and forefoot "deformities".
    4. Orthotics help prevent medial longitudinal arch collapse.

    I would be interested if anyone following along can produce any documentation from papers or book chapters published before 1985 that describes a mechanically coherent explanation of how foot orthoses actually worked. (By the way, hypotheses #1-4 listed above are not mechanically coherent explanations of how foot orthoses actually work.)

    Now with a basic undestanding of modelling and how external and internal forces acting on and within the foot can produce not only static joint alignment but also produce joint accelerations, it is fairly easy to arrive at mechanically coherent explanations of how foot orthoses work to not only affect the internal forces and moments that cause pathologies but also how they can affect the kinematics of the foot and lower extremity. This written explanation did not exist, to my knowledge before 1985, and, to me, is the single most important reason why the podiatrist of today needs to understand these concepts: to understand how foot orthoses actually work so that they can design better prescription foot orthoses for their patients to relieve the pathological stresses on the injured tissues of their patient's foot and lower extremity.
  22. efuller

    efuller MVP

    In response to a mechanical engineering explanation Dennis wrote:
    Physics and mechanical engineering explains things. For example, how birds are able to fly. (Google it, Dennis) Architecture just describes things.

    Engineering can explain why some arches stand longer than others. Every arch has its load limit.

    Dennis, leverage is an engineering term that has a meaning. Can you explain what you mean by "better leverage our muscles"

    The term weak foot is meaningless. You could define that in terms of stiffness if you wanted to use physics, but architecture doesn't have a way to meaure weakness.

    So, Dennis when are you going to attempt to explain how you customize an orthotic based on foot type? Your system, at this point, lacks that explanation and is therefore not really a system for treatment. How is this an upgrade?

    Even blood letting had an explanation. When you bleed a patient you are trying to remove the bad humors. The explanation wasn't very good, but they had a reason for doing what they do. Why foot type>>> it's a basis for treatment. How is it a basis for treatment? >>> silence.... It's an upgrade. Repeat. Dennis, I know one part of functional foot typing better than you and that is there is no logical basis for treatment based on typing the feet using SERM and PERM.

  23. RobinP

    RobinP Well-Known Member

    I'm not really one for using "smileys" - they irritate me somewhat.

    However(and this is a measure of how I feel about this), Eric, I feel your pain :bang:
  24. David Wedemeyer

    David Wedemeyer Well-Known Member

    Yet again Eric you hit the nail on the head. Describing the structure of a car does not describe how it produces motion. You should be given an award for patience.

    What Dennis fails to understand, although he has been told otherwise countless times, is that "architecture" has been repeatedly proven not to be predictive of pathology. Given this, systems which reduce the complexity of the lower extremities to static observations about the shape and position of its sum parts, cannot produce predictable, relaible and repeatable results in vivo. FFT also cannot explain how it alters function dynamically, which TS (using physics) does.

    Even IF Dennis could finally answer your questions, FFT is a draconian step backwards in custom foot orthosis therapy (although I do see a place for it in the prefab market).
  25. drsha

    drsha Banned

    My criteria for measuring the value of a biomechanical theory differs from yours, Dr Fuller.

    I base the acceptability, applicability, validity and reproducibility of these theories (lets say Tissue Stress and Foot Centering) on the evidence at hand (EBM) as well as its clinical success.
    I do not base it on the explanation (spin) of its creators and followers (You, I, Kevin and The Arena).

    So as you so well defined, are you stating that TS being explainable is akin to blood letting, both being explained?

    Root, for me, gave the greatest explanation of a biomechanical theory in my lifetime and possibly history and yet you and Kevin offer that his work should be retired, revamped and replaced.
    Apparently, his explanations (like yours and mine) hold no scientific weight.

    I will answer your immature demands when you give me proof of how and why your TS orthotics work along with peer reviewed literature that proves clinical and scientific acceptability, reproducibility, validity and reproducibility.

    If not, please accept, IMHO, the fact that your work sits lateral to mine and not above it.


    I'm please to announce the birth of my grand daughter, Hannah Colette Zanlin, born yesterday (se attached, being held by her sister, Julia Hope

    Attached Files:

  26. congrats on the extra Grand Kid Dennis.


    I honestly believe that the value you place on a biomechancial theory is how much money or notoriety you gain from it
  27. RobinP

    RobinP Well-Known Member

    Congratulations Dennis - beautiful photo

    The way I see it, you are offering a treatment regime based on your FFT. And nothing else. Tissue stress explains the mechanism of injury and how you devise a treatment plan to reduce the tissue stress is largely unimportant(obviously not causing probs elsewhere)
  28. drsha

    drsha Banned

    I was Associate Professor of Medicine at NYCPM from 1981-88
    Associate Directior of Podiatry at Jewish Memorial Hospital from 1971-74
    Residency Director, Prospect Hospital, Bronx, NY 1974-76
    Chief of the Podiatry Section, Beth Israel Medical Center, NYC 2002-2004
    Volunteer Podiatrist, U.S. Supreme Court Malpractice Panel, 1984-87
    NY State Approved Precepteeship in Podiatry at the time when we had too few Residency slots for all Podiatry School Graduates 1981-1993
    Self supported Lecturer at over 50 Podiatry and Paraprofessional Conventions/ Conferences in the last 40 years.
    Volunteer Podiatrist at over 25 races/charity events, etc. over 30 years
    Unpaid Biomechanics Editor, Present Podiatry, the teaching arm of American Podiatry Residency Programs 2009-2012
    Sponsor, NYSPMA Conference 20+ years

    and many more I prefer not mentioning as you will consider them an attempt to gain notoriety.

    Dr Weber, IMHO,your opinion of me (and others here on The Arena) is like your opinion of my work, a fictional representation of the truth.

  29. efuller

    efuller MVP

    I was just pointing out that if you do have an explanation it might not be very good. The nice thing about tissue stress is that most people can understand it. It also is easy to devise research questions using the theory.

    Dennis, I don't know why you want for me to provide evidence before you finish presenting your theory. These are not immature demands. I'm trying to help show you how you could advance your theory and show others that you don't have a theory yet.

  30. drsha

    drsha Banned


    I'm sorry to inform you that there are many in the Biomechanics Arena, The Running and Barefoot Community and American Podiatry that I meet in my comings and goings that would disagree with you.

    They, unlike you, posture that Kevin is trying to promote his name, his work and his image (my area of disagreement) rather than allow the great teaching and light shedding that he has accomplished and continues to accomplish over his illustrious career (my area of attachment) rather than let them speak for themselves.

  31. drsha

    drsha Banned


    So your opinion is that you have a better one page explanation for your theory and that TS is more understandable than Foot Centering.

    Kevin's stand seems to be that TSers will not lower their standards for language, protocol and delivery downward for others so they will better understand. It is the job of the rest of us to raise our language, engineering and physics skills, research skills forsaking everything that brought us to this moment biomechanically.

    By most people do you mean other professionals, the general DPM community, patients, insurance companies? Because if you do I think I can build a rather strong case that Wellness Biomechanics and Foot Centering, even by their very names are more understandable than Tissue Stress.

    That said, the bottom line is that you, as I, am entitled to our opinions.

    My opinion is that I agree that Tissue Stress has a better one page explanation than Wellness Biomechanics (Foot Centering) as I cannot put down on one page 40 years of accomplishment.

    TS has very little clinical application or upgrades for me to apply in practice.
    TS remains difficult for me to fully understand.
    Tissue stress is not well understood in the medical, insurance, DPM and foot suffering community.

    Tissue stress, although it drives many interesting and thought provoking research ideas as you state, has actually delivered very little research into existence.

    Your biased assumption that you could sit to judge my work or that I have time to divert from it to respond to your reinforced calls for explanations of it don't deserve my response in print any longer.

    To paraphrase Kevin from another Podiatry Arena thread:
    "I don't like being told what I need to do any more than you like it. Just remember this fact when you start giving me advice about how I am to become more knowledgeable in a subject that I already specialize in and am asked to lecture in quite frequently".

    Alternatively, I suggest we seek a mechanism where our two theories can live more harmoniously.

    I stand ready to debate any of you, especially in live, peer reviewed environments.
    The reason is that we sit lateral to each other in the grand scope of things.
    The fact that your ego sits you above me rather than alongside reflects the biggest wedge to teamwork.
    I have consulted many as to how I can advance my theory who view at least some of its many pieces as worth incorporating into biomechanics. To my knowledge, I don't think I ever consulted you.

    Finally, you have exposed your bias quite openly in stating that you are spending energy planning, thinking, scheming and dreaming of ways to "show others that Foot Centering is not yet a theory".

    When Kevin states on this very thread as a warning to students:
    "Don't be deceived by those who are trying to teach their "system of foot biomechanics" (there is one such person here currently on Podiatry Arena trying to do so) that is not based strictly on Newtonian mechanics", it reveals the insecurity of SALRE and TS and their agenda to close the students mind to biomechanical concepts and thoughts that question or compete with them.

  32. maxants33

    maxants33 Active Member

    I dunno Dr Sha. I read a few post by you in the etalk Podiatry.com forum discussing your foot typing system and the patent you secured, I also noticed your frequent use of the word 'profit' and its related forms. That kind of thing undermines your credibility in my eyes (I say that as an idealistic young student), sorry to be so harsh.
    Kirby et al seem to be looking to the future in a pragmatic way that compliments my understanding of what the future of pod biomechanics will look like. Most of my knowledge of Kirby comes from his work and posting on Pod arena, I've yet to see a post that makes that makes me think he's anything but a nice guy interested in furthering the profession.
  33. drsha

    drsha Banned

    So well said, Max.
    You are not being harsh, you are being what you say you are, an idealistic young student.

    I wish there wasn't a profit motive involved in life for us all.
    As a DPM advocate, too many of us have been given false promises of the lifestyle we would enjoy as we sacrificed for our communities. Too many of us have made poor choices in setting financial goals and in accepting as fact the spins we received from our schools, our communities and our peers and find ourselves behind the proverbial eight ball.
    I am not embarrassed to say that I have spent a decent amount of energy in
    fostering the financial health of my family and my profession.
    I'm not sure why you find that idealistically unacceptable.

    I think you have made a fine choice in following the teachings of Kevin et al. I don't think I ever told you to stop.

    I followed the dogma of my time (Rootian Biomechanics) and early on, like Kevin, questioned the holes that it exposed for me as I do those in TS, SALRE and Foot Centering.

    I have kept an open mind and continue to add to the list modern Biomechanists like Dananberg, Glaser, Jones, Nigg and Payne upon whose shoulders I stand trying to perfect biomechanics. I have rejected others such as Rothbart and Levine.

    My plea to you is to not blindly accept the words of your professors, teachers and masters so that your idealistic vision and potential are best served.

    Let's see what happens when you or one of your peers raise doubts about TS and SALRE that question its foundation. That will be a day when your idealism may morph into reality.

    I ask you one simple question:
    Have you ever actually Functional Foot Typed a living foot?
    If so, what did you think?
    If not, what are you waiting for? it's so bloody simple.

    I practice elements of TS and engineering and Newtonian science and physics every day, never said I didn't.

    Advice to ponder:
    Keep your course as it is a good one but keep your eyes open and your mind expanding and never totally lose your idealism.
    "Do not let yourself be tainted with a barren skepticism".
    Louis Pasteur

  34. efuller

    efuller MVP

    Dennis, your lack of logic continues to amaze me. Wellness is simpler but you can't put it on one page because it's so complex?

  35. David Wedemeyer

    David Wedemeyer Well-Known Member


    Anyone considering Dennis' motives should read this:


    That knowledge coupled with the knowledge that Dennis approached me just last year claiming "you are just the guy to help me to get FFT into the chiropractic market" (not verbatim but what I recall), should remove any doubt as to Dennis' claims of altruism for his profession. When I balked at Dennis' lack of a coherent explanation of how these FFT observations would improve clinical outcomes etc., he became combative and claimed chiropractors and pedorthists were incapable of understanding FFT.

    He is irrational and inconsistent. He has never been able to answer Eric's polite questions. I feel he continually picks arguments so that the learned will eventually provide him the answers that he does not possess by engagement..

    I don't need to defend Dr. Kirby's contributions, this is not a compare and contrast and one is not appropriate nor even logical. It is merely my opinion having reviewed the material sent to me by Dennis, my interaction with him and actually using theoretical constructs that make physical sense in practice and which are repeatable. Tissue Stress is one example. Dr. Kirby's articles on Subtalar Joint Equilibrium and the paper on the mid foot provide the rationale for furthering our understanding of these complex subjects and can be observed and applied clinically. The reductionist thinking found in FFT is not on the same level, it is more suited for OTC devices IMO

    Good luck Max, you're already way ahead of the game in your desire to learn, to question and most of all to think for yourself.

    Attached Files:

  36. maxants33

    maxants33 Active Member

    Cheers David!
  37. drsha

    drsha Banned

    Oh boy. Max, this discussion has been held before but here we go again.
    First I'm disappointed in your thanks of Davids post. It reveals your lack of open mindedness which you should not have given up yet as a student. I remeber another one like you named Sampson. I wonder how he is thinking today.

    1. Please note that David's URL is from 2000, 12 years ago.
    Also, please note by my signature at that time, I was also listing my C.ped certification as I became a part of that group to absorb their biomechanics. I denounced my C.ped publicly after three years stating that this group was dinosauric educationally, practically and biomechanically and have never felt sorry or rebuffed.
    2. Please note that Davids Degree is as a Chiropractor and that he is a certified pedorthotist. IMHO, he is a frustrated non DPM and it was after saying that to him in phone conversations that his opinion of me degenerated "as I recall".
    I wonder David, if TS is so easy to teach and practice and your pedigree is so well prepared biomechanically, why aren't you teaching Chiro's and C. peds and publishing in their journals and lecturing at their conferences on TS?
    3. I became the biomechanics editor of Chirosmart in 2000 to monitor the biomechanical skills of the Chiropractic profession and after about three months of contact and a formed opinion that Chiro's are educationally and practically impotent as a profession biomechanically something happened.
    Jason Kraus, another non DPM, of Langer Biomechanics fame, posted on PM News that he was exposing me as Chiro friendly because of IMHO, the fact that Langer and other "Podiatry" Labs were starting to accept casts from other professions and that they were reducing their allegiance to Podiatry.
    I published what I am publishing here in rebuttal on PM News and relinquished my Chiroview position as I had been exposed.
    I have not worked with a Chiropractor in practice or in my lab in these last 12 years.
    4. Kevin, please tell these folks that I have two passions academically. The first is that I am pro-biomechanics and the second is that I am Pro-podiatry.
    5. I have patented my science so that wanna be's like Dr. Wedemeyer cannot, in the U.S.A., work with my science. I have in print stated over and over that Foot Centering, by profession, can only be practiced by podiatry.
    6. Dr. Wedemeyer, on his website states that he has "extensive training" in custom foot orthotics. Beyond Chiropractic College and IMHO, the incredibly impotent requirements for taking the C.ped exam, what kind sir, is that training.
    7. Dr. Wedmemeyer lists one "article" to his credit on his website which is anecdotal, level 5 at best. He lists no teaching accomplishments.
    Please weigh his "he said, she said" argument against me appropriately after reviewing my C.V.
    8. Dr. Wedmeyer, by his own admission in the very posting I am quoting states that his thoughts about my relationship with him are "not verbatim but what I recall" . Kevin, do you honestly think that the intention of me calling a Chiro/C.ped in California (I am an East Coaster) was to after three phone conversations put my reputation on the line by concluding that he was "just the guy to help me to get FFT into the chiropractic market".

    I do not react to Dr Wedemeyer's posts often but like the day, three years ago, when The Arena posted my patent application and trashed it, I had to and will continue to defend myself.

    As for Dr Wedemeyer:

    “You can never underestimate the ability of the Democrats to wet their finger and hold it to the wind.” Ronald Reagan

  38. maxants33

    maxants33 Active Member

    Sorry Dennis, but its hard not say thanks to comments like that!
  39. blinda

    blinda MVP

    Pithy and precise. Yeah, that Dr Kirby is real `sick`;)

  40. blinda

    blinda MVP

    OK, Dennis. Now you got my full attention. As a podiatrist with an unhealthy interest in dermatology, I would be very interested to read more on your classification for nail dystrophy. Have you published any work on this that I can access?


Share This Page