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.

Minimalist Running Shoes for Kids

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by NewsBot, Aug 31, 2012.

  1. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    Blaise, sorry about belated reply (been at conference)

    From the previous page:
    My only objection is that it advocates a one size fits all approach.
    No idea, I never suggest them for kids.
    I have no idea; we (and you) have no evidence to tell us. It is all propaganda and rhetoric and circumstantial evidence that can be twisted either way. The lack of evidence for BSS, does not not mean that there is anything wrong with them. Similarly, the lack of evidence for minimalist shoes does not mean there is anything wrong with them!
    I go with the evidence. We have a Cochrane Review that tells us that orthotics work for painful feet . Are you suggesting that we should not follow the evidence from a Cochrane review? (…given that you are an author of another Cochrane review). I go where the evidence takes me. Do you actually have any evidence that ‘minimalism” is the way to treat this?

    The approach I take to painful flat feet is to treat the symptoms to get them over it in the quickest way possible and then concurrently manage the cause. Using a ‘minimalist’ approach is only going to work if that is the “cause” and it is not going to work in the short term (and remember they are in pain!). To do otherwise is being irresponsible.

    There are a zillion causes of flatfoot and there is not ONE treatment! To suggest otherwise is irresponsible. If it is painful, then the treatment should be directed at the cause:

    - If the problem is an osseous alignment problem in the foot, then only orthotics will work
    - If it is due to tight calf muscles, then only a heel raise (short term) and stretching (medium term) will work
    - If its due to muscle weakness, then minimalism/muscles strengthening will work
    - If its due to low tone pronation, then only orthotics and BBS will work
    - If is a proximal control issue, then only gait retraining will work
    - If it’s a ,….. etc etc (you can see where I am going)

    I not irresponsible enough to advocate one size fits all for every case of painful pediatric flat foot.
    See above; depends on cause; eg, if it’s a low tone problem, then its irresponsible not to use a BBS
    As long as its needed. It varies from:

    1)forever if its an osseous alignment problem on the foot and there is a certain joint axis variation/combination so that the forces are so high that the tissues can never be adapted to the magnitude of the loads
    to:
    2)in the very short term if the problem is temporary in nature

    Again, I think it is irresponsible to advocate a ‘one size fits all’ approach for everyone (this is my real objection to the Jay article).

    At the end of the day, I will go where the evidence takes me. Every single outcome study on foot orthoses has shown that they work. Not one outcome study on foot orthotics shows that they do not work. There is NOT YET ONE outcome study on ‘minimalism’ that shows it works. What should we do? Should we not follow the evidence?

    It interesting that the $ card gets played, that we have a vested $ interest in orthotics. I go with evidence; the evidence tells me orthotics work.

    If you really want to play the $ card, then we all should be aggressively advocating minimalism, as I am making a helluva lot more money now because of it! …. But I am not that irresponsible to do so.
     
  2. CraigT

    CraigT Well-Known Member

    Craig P- :good:
    I concur!

    The only thing I would add is that I am not satified with the use of the term 'BBS'. Blaise uses this to describe any shoe with a heel pitch, cushioning and/or stability features- basically any traditional running shoe.
    There are plenty out there that I would agree have too much cushioning... or rather they are 'too soft'. It is in these situations is where the Robbins-Gouw hypothesis has merit (in my opinion).

    However there are many well designed shoes that are firmer- may also have support features- and therefore are much less likely to have a negative impact on feedback.

    This BBS classification groups these all together.

    In my opnion- the most important feature for children's shoes are-
    FIT- particularly so that the toes are not restricted. Ballet type slip on shoes should be banned for school children. Football shoes need to be closely checked too.

    Weight- not unnecessarily heavy

    Support is much less of a factor unless there are problems. I don't see how a 'supportive shoe' can prevent a problem from occuring in children any more than any other shoe.

    We know (well most of us) there is a huge range of shoes out there and it is our duty to be aware of the pluses and minuses of each design.
     
  3. Griff

    Griff Moderator

    Reading Craig's comments on the 'one size fits all approach' reminded me of an article I read this week on the topic of Crossfit. The closing paragraph could easily be applied to many of the topics we discuss within our profession (including this one):

    Full article: http://slavenation.com/index.php/2009/07/23/cultfit/
     
  4. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Please teach me
    If it's more easy for you, just the name of the author the years of publication... try to surprise me with article I don't know
    :sinking::sinking::sinking:
     
  5. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    If you want to know how big are you shoes, see the TRC rating

    http://www.therunningclinic.ca/blog/2012/09/definition-du-minimalisme-defining-minimalism/

    A TRC rating less that 60% is clearly maximalist and BBS http://lacliniqueducoureur.ca/fr/informations-coureurs/chaussures-recommandees.php?trail
     
  6. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Not Agree

    Why you don't ?
    I never suggest because it's absolutely unacceptable to put that type of shoes on a kids foot... absolutely no good reason

    Agree
    So in one side we have an intervention that change the way the human evolve (the minimalist shoes) and to other side we have another intervention that change more the way the human evolve (the maximalist shoes with a TRC rating less than 60%) The second interventions is bigger, exist since 20 years only, ...

    It's very good evidence for very SPECIFIC pathologies "can relieve pain within three months in adults with rheumatoid arthritis, as well as in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, an early onset form of the disease. Adults with painful highly arched feet or painfully prominent big toe joints also benefited from treatment with orthoses over three and six month periods respectively. Custom foot orthoses can be an effective treatment for a variety of conditions, but there are still many causes of foot pain for which the benefit of this treatment is unclear. There is also a lack of data on the long term effects of treating with orthoses,"
    So please not justify a treatment to common problems with evidence to other specific problem that are not so common.

    No. Minimalisme is not a treatment for acute foot pain. But it's certainly a better way to be sure that children feet will develop properly and will become stronger (more resistance to the stress). If children have no problem, it's certainly better to be the closest of barefoot

    No problem... TREATING the pain is not the same that prevention or treating the cause, that prescribing a treatment with no problem!

    Agree with most
    No idea why you tell that BBS will work for low tone pronation... please justify (biomechanically or clinically or with evidence)
    Can be agree with painful high arch...

    evasive answer...
    There is no reason to perpetuate the idea that a majority of kids need orthotics or BBS on long term. Presently, many podiatrist and PT do the promotion of that... And there is a lot of promotion of BBS for kids.

    1% of the kids?

    Nobody are thinking on one size fit all (Jay, me, ...). It's a weak argument to hide the fact that there is no reason why there is so much BBS for kids

    Orthotics: Not for all, not in prevention, not for kids, not for low back pain, not for ITB, NOT FOR...
    BBS : where are the evidence???

    :dizzy:
     
  7. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    Anyone spot the paradox?

    Blaise, you keep asking for the evidence for BBS, yet you provide us no evidence for minimalism! You object to those that promote BBS with no evidence, yet you have no problem with promoting minimalism which has a similar lack of evidence!

    At the end of the day there are >50 outcome studies that show foot orthotics work and NOT ONE outcome study that shows minimalism works. If you believe in and promote evidence based practice, then what should we be doing?

    Disclaimers:
    -some of those outcome studies are uncontrolled, but they still showed they worked.
    - there is one outcome study that had shown that foot orthotics do not work in children for bunions (despite its flaws)
    -there is one uncontrolled small sample size outcome study that shows forefoot striking works for anterior compartment syndrome , but you can still forefoot strike in BBS, so its not really an outcome study for minimalism.
     
  8. Everyone following along can spot the paradox......except Blaise.
     
  9. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    PS My course are always full ;)[/QUOTE]

    that's not true.. you had to cancel a course here in Oz coz you only got 2 people to it...
     
  10. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    that's not true.. you had to cancel a course here in Oz coz you only got 2 people to it...[/QUOTE]

    :sinking:
    for the real 3 day course, we accept 10 more people for the Melbourne course... also we had a waiting list,
    We cancel a little extra one day for podiatrists... just 7 ? (don't remember) registrations... all was coming in the big course...

    I gave more than 50 "3 day course" ... always full

    When are you coming learning? strat with that : http://www.therunningclinic.ca/blog...rtold-analyse-simon-bartolds-speech-analysed/
     
  11. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    [Q

    When are you coming learning? strat with that : http://www.therunningclinic.ca/blog...rtold-analyse-simon-bartolds-speech-analysed/[/QUOTE]

    Surely your not still plogging on about that one are you Biase.. too much time on your hands old fella!
    You should be bringing yourself up to spewed with orthotic therapy and the science of athletic footwear.. about which you know very little. if you are gonna charge USD704 for your course.. you NEED to know what you are talking about Biase. Any time you would like me to give you some tips about the science.. I would be only to pleased.. sincere offer to someone I debated in Austin last year who was obviously way out of their depth..
     
  12. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    :sinking:
    for the real 3 day course, we accept 10 more people for the Melbourne course... also we had a waiting list,
    We cancel a little extra one day for podiatrists... just 7 ? (don't remember) registrations... all was coming in the big course...

    amazing who you can con.. you had,,and correct me if I am wrong.. 3 podiatrists to your course, 2 of whom were very disappointed with the content, one of whom complained on this forum. The other was in agreement with you because it helped her sell her "anti orthotic'. Podiatrist can see through you Biase.. that's why you had to cancel that course.The others are a bunch of people looking for a point of difference because they know no better Biase. As you have found out , on this forum, people are very educated, very well read, and real experts. They just do not buy into the snake oil like others..

    Anyway.. all this is very boring.. I am on this forum to learn from others, and you have taught me nothing unfortunately.. move on Biase..
     
  13. CraigT

    CraigT Well-Known Member

    I find this quite amusing...
    You have continually said you are here to learn, yet you don't listen. You critique everything that everyone else says, but you don't do the same for yourself.

    Yes Blaise, you are very good at quoting articles- but the more I hear from you, the more I am convinced you don't understand them... Impressive as long as the people you are speaking to don't know much either.

    I have said it before- I think you are doing yourself a disservice. I think you have some great ideas, yet because you think you know more than you do, you will be decreasing your effectiveness. It is a real pity.
     
  14. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Craig, you know I respect your opinion even if we don't agree. I respect the fact you support what you say with evidence and more than that, you have a deeper reflexion than many people on this blog... I feel they just protect their business.
    (I don't speak about Salmon... this weird homosapiens is the most bias, intellectually dishonest pseudo researcher I ever meet... but also the most funny one)

    OK : On that topic I don't understand you

    It’s seems that the debate here is between a PT and 10podiatrists. OK, we don’t have the same vision. But there is some rules in medicine (all kind confounded) and I don’t think podiatrist are different and excluded from those implicit rules.

    Choosing a treatment modality must be oriented :
    According to "simplicity" (the least amount of intervention for the maximum of result)
    According to "risk-reward" ratio (Most efficient AND safest modality)
    According to the "power" (Efficiency vs time and cost)
    According to the "durability" (treating the symptoms vs treating the cause)

    But NOT
    According to $ the therapist will do
    According to marketing influence
    According to professional bias (thinking that orthotics work for everything because we are podiatrist)
    According to profitability of investment (ex : using more a machine we just buy)

    So, do the math!
    Without evidence… what to prescribe to a kid with no pain (even if he had before)? The minimalist shoes are : more simple, more durable (by tissue adaptation it promotes), probably less risky (less deformation of barefoot biomechanics), less pricy…

    AGAIN, for kids : I can agree with some (very rare) cases treated with BBS and/or orthotics… treatment (not prevention), foot and post leg problems (not others), short term (not long term).

    But, THERE IS NO REASON to promote and prescribe BBS (less than 70% TRC rating – maybe 80%) to the majority of kids (no specific health problem AND pain).
     
  15. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    I know, I'm the only one that critics the others on this blog:D

    So if you are knowledgeable, impress me, teach me, show me the evidence:sinking:...

    So I understand you have no answer to my question and you speak about stuff you have no idea?

    YOU : There is a much greater wealth of literature supporting shoe interventions than barefoot/minimalist.
    ME : If it's more easy for you, just the name of the author the years of publication... try to surprise me with article I don't know
     
  16. David Wedemeyer

    David Wedemeyer Well-Known Member

    Blaise NEVER answers a question satisfactorily, instead he deflects and asks another question. Can't answer Blaise? Let me answer for you; it doesn;t exist therefore you have NO evidence, no studies and clinical experience doesn't count right...well...unless its you then its ok. ;)

    again you quote out of context and edit my words. How can anyone take you seriously? What I wrote was:

    On what planet do we dispense orthotics without shoes, custom shoes, shoes with modifications etc?

    I'm cracking up right now, Blaise the village called and well....:empathy:
     
  17. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Please show me where (evidence not anecdote) in your podiatry clinical practice guidelines big bulky shoe is a supported treatment/intervention supported by your profession? You cannot.

    Please show me where (evidence not anecdote) it is recommended that an orthotic or shoe or modification that was implemented to treat a diagnosed condition is recommended MUST NOT be removed "after the pain is gone". You cannot.

    David, you NEVER answers a question satisfactorily, instead you deflects and asks another question. Can't answer David? Let me answer for you; it doesn't exist therefore you have NO evidence, no studies and clinical experience doesn't count right...well...unless its you then its ok.

    And good luck when you will tell to you patient to keep the cast made for a fracture all his life. (don't tell me that is like glasses... to easy to demolish... nobody can tell that the static or dynamic observation is a problem, that the orthotics really correct it... but we know that is, for certain pathologies of the foot and on short term, an efficient treatment.

    It's absolutely NOT normal that so much plantar orthoses are sell. (25 000 000 Can$/ years with a population of 7 000 000 in the province of Quebec... pretty sure the proportion is the same in France, US, Australia, ...)
    So, except some specific condition, TAKE OFF it when you are pain free! STOP to created dependance to some thing that didn't show is efficiency on long term!!!


    hoouououou
    So you want exclude the "shoe" word in your statement?
    My question for you on your statement : There is a much greater wealth of literature supporting the use of orthotic and shoe interventions than barefoot/minimalist.
    Show me the evidence for the shoes
     
  18. phil

    phil Active Member

    Blaise,

    You obviously have a problem with the profession of Podiatry. It's a shame you let this unreasonable bias cloud your ability to learn from us. You are very arrogant.

    You seem to think podiatrist treat all unsymptomatic children with BBS and orthotics. We don't. You seem to think podiatrists believe the marketing hype of athletic shoe companies. We don't. Do you know what a straw man argument is? Because that's what you're doing.

    I've said it before, but I genuinely doubt you have the clinical experiance to make a valuable contribution to the discussion about the bulk of foot and lower limb injuries that podiatrists routinely treat. I haven't seen much evidence that you even have an adequate grasp of the biomechanics of the joints of the foot. Maybe you know how to categorise how minimalist a shoe is. But I really haven't learned anything much else from you.

    I've read your website, I've listened to you on podcasts. It's all just the same rhetoric against your BBS and the way you think the medical/ podiatric community promotes them. It's repetitive and exhausting. And you can't seem to ever actually answer questions that are asked to you.

    My greatest concern is that by being so frustrating and contrary, you misunderstand the frustration we are all expressing with some kind of perception that you are actually making any significant impact on the field of lower limb injury treatment.
     
  19. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    I have absolutely no problem with podiatry and podiatrist. I personally think they are (average) more competent and knowledgable for foot problem than all other health professionals. My problem is with the argumentations on this blog, what you call the "Church and rhetoric" of promotion of orthotics and BBS. I think Podiatry is a lot more than those two subjects...

    But, yes I think you are biais in your vision of health. The practice about "protection mode" and "biomechanical vision of problems" are not actual... In 2012 we need to think a little more and change our practice.
     
  20. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    Biase is like a cancer on this website.. he is just taking up way too much of everyone's time for all the wrong reasons. He has brought absolutely nothing to any of the forums he has contributed to except his own narrow little opinion. I think the administrators of Podiatry Arena should take a look at this because it is now the Biase forum with little of any educational merit and just a whole lot of posturing and arrogance from the french canadian physiotherapist who knows everything about everything. this is now a massive turn off and a total waste of precious time. Who the hell can be bothered?
    i am out.
     
  21. I have also given up on responding to Blaise after initially thinking that he had something useful to say. For a man who continually says that he is here on Podiatry Arena just to learn, he simply doesn't listen.

    However, the one thing that bothers me the most about Blaise is that he has the egotistical impudence to insult a whole group of medical professionals, many of whom have far more clinical experience and education than he does, by suggesting that the treatments they are using are simply being done to make money. This behavior from a medical professional demonstrates an arrogant lack of respect for our profession and will prevent me from ever wasting my time responding to him again.

    My only regret is that I actually did waste my time trying to reason with him over the past few months. His agenda obviously prevents him from learning here on Podiatry Arena, regardless of what he continually claims. I will be a very happy man once he stops polluting the pages of Podiatry Arena with his minimalist propaganda.
     
  22. markjohconley

    markjohconley Well-Known Member

    Goodaye Robin, same here. Fairly certain I started after reading a thread on PA.
     
  23. CraigT

    CraigT Well-Known Member

    I wish I could do this....
    Where I work there is a fair percentage of the population that never wear enclosed shoes... just sandals. Understandable when the from May to October it is rarely below 40C during the day and 32C at night...
    Actually I don't know why I should be concerned as they are already 'minimalist' they shouldn't have any problems...
    Wait... why have they come to see me then?? hmmmm :bash:
    I guess the posture fairies haven't made it to them yet...
     
  24. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Thanks for the compliment Salmon,
    I understand I'm maybe a cancer for companies that tell to everybody that they are evidence based oriented and are represented by pseudo scientific that expose false informations, do cherry picking, and lie to retailers in exchange of $$...

    Will do a deal. If more that 5 people "thanks" your comment, I will retired for 1 month...
     
  25. CraigT

    CraigT Well-Known Member

    Seriously??? methinks you need to look up the word 'irony'...
     
  26. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Craig, I'm intrigued about one thing. Do you think there is less podiatrist consultation (and foot problems) compare to Canada (more shoes, less barefoot, ...). I know we have probably no data on that but what your sincere idea?

    more infection?
    less hallux valgus and hammer toe?
    less metatarsalgia ans achilles tendinopathy?

    wait your opinion
     
  27. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    Aren't you doing the exact same thing with promoting minimalism? There is no evidence for that either.
     
  28. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    I don't agree. I have no financial interest to promote minimalism... I can teach my course everywhere around the world and defend maximalist shoes and the result will be the same. The success of my course have nothing to do with minimalism that represent a small part of the course. I was defending this at the beginning, long time before you were speaking about that... and probably that many people don't come on my course now because they categorize me like a bias minimalist defender... on the same idea debating on this blog certainly don't bring people on my course.

    The speech of Salmon is very demagogic. We can be not agree on some points, teaching what we thing is good and bad, trying to explain with available science mix to experience... but we cannot spend false informations like Salmon did to retailers. Nobody comment the video I comment of Salmon, but it's for me really dishonest to transmit this false informations like a truth. http://www.therunningclinic.ca/blog...rtold-analyse-simon-bartolds-speech-analysed/

    I debate with you in Melbourne and I don't have the same opinion (that I have with Slamon) because you were intellectually honest (even if you opinion was at the opposite than mine). Do you consider that I was intellectually dishonest? That I'm a pseudo scientific that expose false informations, do cherry picking, and lie to retailers in exchange of $$? You have the debate taped on video, maybe people here can judge by themselves?
     
  29. CraigT

    CraigT Well-Known Member

    Impossible to say.
    I see plenty of all of these.
    The only thing I would say I do not see so much of here are onychomycoses.
    If you are genuinely interested in my opinion then I would say that constant flat regular surfaces are much greater source of problems than footwear... something that our ancestors did not evolve to walk on.
     
  30. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    Blaise, lets try it a different way:

    If you go back through the last two years of Runners World magazine and look at the advertisements for running shoes, you see no claims made about injuries made by the manufacturers of BBS; ie they make no claims that can not be supported with the evidence.

    However, you you look at the advertisements by the manufacturers of minimalist shoes, you see many claims about injuries (ie things like "run in these shoes and you will get less injuries"), when there is no evidence to support that. Is it acceptable to you that the minimalist companies should be able to lie like this? These companies are doing exactly what you accuse the BBS companies of doing. Why are you not also criticizing them?

    Why is it that the only current class action lawsuits over the injury claims are against minimalist manufacturers and not the manufacturers of the BBS?
     
  31. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Sincerely, It's just playing with the words. Consumer don't see the difference... they are convince that BBS prevent running injuries. BBS companies are just smarter and prudent with words they use now. Ex: ASICS have a tone of publicity to tell people that their shoes are more stable, more cushion, more supportive (supposing that it's for deceasing injury)... their promote that their shoes are recognized by podiatrist USA... they have a "doctor" that teach to retailers that their shoes DECREASE injuries and minimalist shoes INCREASE injuries... this same guy tell to all rep, retailer and professional that they invest a lot of money in the R&D department and that their shoes are the best to correct biomechanics, absorb shock, AND prevent injuries ....
     
  32. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Craig,
    my minutes are counted ;)... there is 4 "thanks" for Salmon post. If you can answer my last questions :

    - I debate with you in Melbourne and I don't have the same opinion (that I have with Slamon) because you were intellectually honest (even if you opinion was at the opposite than mine). Do you consider that I was intellectually dishonest? That I'm a pseudo scientific that expose false informations, do cherry picking, and lie to retailers in exchange of $$? You have the debate taped on video, maybe people here can judge by themselves? -

    Also, what do you thing of the content that Salmon bring in Austin during the other debate


    After that I will retired, like that podiatrist on this blog will be able to convince themself that their practice are the best, that all other idea not in the church of othotics are bad. It's always more easy to stop thinking at the place where we are comfortable with our own practice... changed is sometime painful...
     
  33. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    Hummm ,
    not agree that surface are a bigger problem than shoes... and flat regular surfaces don't justify BBS.
     
  34. blinda

    blinda MVP

    tick tock

    Craig,

    Off thread, but since you mentioned it; environmental (occlusive footwear) conditions are one of many factors associated with infection of those pesky, opportunistic dermatophytes.

    Cheers,
    Bel
     
  35. Boots n all

    Boots n all Well-Known Member

    So what your saying here is Minimalist shoe companies are dumb and have very little to publicity to promote their product, aren't they the same companies producing a variety of different products, time to take a break Blaise.
     
  36. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    OK.. took almost nothing to get 5 thanks to my posting Biase.. your arrogance finally got you.. now.. how many do we need for you to p..s off forever? Say.. 10?
     
  37. Blaise Dubois

    Blaise Dubois Active Member

    see you next month:D
     
Loading...

Share This Page