it%26#039;s ok half hour a day, bare feet is ok when you are in the beach but not in road, it%26#039;s too hard for your feet, used sleeper or shoes that%26#039;s much better.
Is it ok to walk half an hr everyday bare feet indoors or wearing slippers on terrace?or sports shoes r must?
Either way is okay.
Reply:pls wear shoes if u r walking ona hard surfece else the surface might hurt ur muscles
Reply:shoes are a must to support your feel and arches
Reply:It is always advisable to wear sport shoes if you are walking on hard floor.
Reply:wear some supportive shoes.
Reply:bare feet are ok as long as you dont have sharp objects laying around
Reply:are you stupid?
Reply:I love being barefoot!
Reply:Sport shoes are not a must, but they do provide support.
Reply:A Case for Bare Feet
--------------------------------------...
3. Health
3.1. Barefoot is what Nature Intended
3.2. Going Barefoot Promotes Healthy Feet
3.3. Bare Feet are not Fragile
3.4. Some Shoes are Harmful
--------------------------------------...
3. Health
In addition to being pleasurable, going barefoot is healthy and many barefooters go barefoot for the beneficial effects also. In fact, some barefooters feel safer when barefoot than when wearing shoes.
3.1. Barefoot is what Nature Intended
Going barefoot is natural. Yet some non-barefooters actually think it%26#039;s unnatural and that humans, alone among all the other species on the planet, have feet that are somehow uniquely inadequate and fragile. This, however, makes no sense if one merely takes the time to think it through. Dr. Steele F. Stewart, in [23], noted:
Millions of Indians, both American and Asian, and Congoids wander their native savannas and rain forests without protection, inconvenience, or complaint. Footgear, therefore, would appear to be unnecessary.
...
We should learn from primitives the pleasure and painlessness of going barefoot.
Additionally, Robbins, et al, in [27], stated:
The opinion that the lower extremities are inherently fragile goes against the authors%26#039; understanding of the concept of natural selection.
And Samuel B. Shulman, in [25], stated:
People who have never worn shoes acquire very few foot defects, most of which are painless and non-debilitating. The range of their foot motions are remarkably great, allowing for full foot activity. Shoes are not necessary for healthy feet and are the cause of most foot troubles. ... Footgear is the greatest enemy of the human foot.
For those barefooters who are religious, they believe their Creator was not only competent in the design of the human foot, but it was intended to be an organ of touch and that joy should be graciously accepted from the world at our feet.
3.2. Going Barefoot Promotes Healthy Feet
Many non-barefooters think you can catch athlete%26#039;s foot or other diseases, or develop debilitating foot conditions, by going barefoot. Regarding athlete%26#039;s foot, the American Academy of Dermatology, in [25], stated:
Athlete%26#039;s foot does not occur among people who traditionally go barefoot. It%26#039;s moisture, sweating and lack of proper ventilation of the feet that present the perfect setting for the fungus of athlete%26#039;s foot to grow.
Regarding other conditions, Stewart, in [22], stated:
All writers who have reported their observations of barefooted people agree that the untrammeled feet of natural men are free from the disabilities commonly noted among shod people--hallux vagus, bunions, hammer toes, and painful feet.
And Robbins, et al, in [23], stated:
The reports that the authors have received indicate a low frequency of plantar fasciitis in barefoot populations.
Finally, bare feet do not naturally stink. There is no difference between the sweat glands of the feet and those of the hands. Feet stink only after they have been sweating in shoes for many hours. We believe that many non-barefooters assume that all feet stink because theirs do.
3.3. Bare Feet are not Fragile
Robbins, et al, in [8] explains:
Compared with the hairy skin of the thigh, plantar skin required approximately 600% greater abrading loads to reach pain threshold. ... We conclude that plantar skin is well protected through sensory feedback from abrasive injuries when barefoot. This information combined with previous reports suggests that risk of injury when normally shod individuals perform barefoot locomotion should be low.
...
The results of studies examining barefoot activity have consistently shown that the unshod human foot is characterized by excellent mobility, primarily in the region of the forefoot, thickening of the plantar skin up to 1 cm, better alignment of the phalanges with the metatarsals causing the digits to spread, an absence of foot deformities, and mobility of the arches on loading.
...
Observations from countries where barefoot activity is the norm indicates that plantar skin eventually becomes robust and permits extremely long duration of barefoot locomotion at high average velocities, without signs of damage to plantar skin, or for that matter other lower extremity injuries.
...
In conclusion, this experiment continues to enlarge the body of knowledge suggesting how well the human foot is adapted for safe locomotion, unencumbered by footwear...
Even though plantar skin thickens as a result of going barefoot, the soles of barefooters%26#039; feet do not become thick, hard, dead layers of skin; rather, the soles become a supple layer of %26quot;living leather%26quot; still very much alive and able to feel. As a side note, some barefooters take pride in having thick %26quot;leather pads.%26quot;
3.4. Some Shoes are Harmful
Not only is going barefoot natural and healthy, but many shoes are harmful, especially for children. Dr. Benjamin Joseph, in [26], stated:
In Europe and America flat foot is a common reason for attendance at a children%26#039;s orthopaedic clinic, but in India children are seldom brought for treatment for flat foot. The few children who do attend with this complaint are from affluent urban families and they all wear shoes. In our clinic we have never seen a child from the farming community or from the family of a manual labourer who complained of flat foot.
...
The high concentration of flat foot among six-year-old children who wore shoes as compared with those who did not, implies that the critical age for development of the arch is before six years.
...
Our cross-sectional study suggests that shoe-wearing in early childhood is detrimental to the development of a normal or a high medial longitudinal arch. The susceptibility for flat foot among children who wear shoes is most evident if there is associated ligament laxity. We suggest that children should be encouraged to play unshod and that slippers and sandals are less harmful than closed-toe shoes.
Robbins, et al, in [8], agree:
Furthermore, optimum foot development occurs in the barefoot environment, and, therefore, children should be encouraged to partake in barefoot activity.
As does Shulman in [24]:
Baby shoes cause great harm to growing, formative feet. The so-called %26quot;sentimental%26quot; value of baby%26#039;s shoes might well be dispensed with.
We find it incredible that, even today, many parents, through ignorance, are deforming their children%26#039;s feet and, in some cases, giving them life-long debilitating conditions. Children, above all others, should be barefoot.
For adults, especially runners, all modern running shoes are dangerous as a result of their construction. Robbins, et al, in [27], stated:
Modern athletic footwear provides remarkable plantar comfort when walking, running, or jumping. However, when injurious plantar loads elicit negligible perceived plantar discomfort, a perceptual illusion is created whereby perceived impact is lower than actual impact, which results in inadequate impact-moderating behavior and consequent injury.
And, in [23] stated:
The modern running shoe and footwear in general have successfully diminished sensory feedback without diminishing the injury inducing impact, a dangerous situation.
Hence, modern running shoes with all their cushioning deprive the wearer of the natural, sensory feedback from the soles of the feet so that running improperly no longer hurts and, as Robbins, et al, in [23], stated, injury is the result:
Despite the modern engineered running shoe, a sports medicine clinic reported a large series of running-related injury referrals with an average weekly mileage at the time of injury of 19 miles for women and 27 miles for men. Practitioners of sports medicine have observed injuries in runners using every shoe model available. The above reports can hardly be considered an endorsement of the modern running shoe as a protective device.
We want to emphasize our phrase %26quot;running improperly%26quot; since it is not inherently painful to run barefoot provided it is done properly. Anyone who sets off running barefoot will quickly learn how to run in comfort and safety as Robbins, et al, in [23] explain:
...the authors hypothesized that there exist adaptations associated with barefoot activity that provide impact absorption and protection against running-related injuries.
Hence, a barefoot runner naturally learns how to run so that it doesn%26#039;t hurt and, more importantly, this running style is safe unlike running shod. To support this claim it has been shown that barefoot runners have a very low incidence of running-related injuries as Robbins, et al, in [27], stated:
In addition, in barefoot populations running-related injuries are rare, which indicates that humans adapted to barefoot running run with lower impact than the unadapted group referred to above. This also suggests that the lower extremity is inherently durable and is made susceptible to injury by footwear use. Based on the above data, not withstanding unsupported claims by footwear manufacturers of improved protection with their products, it seems appropriate to consider expensive athletic footwear from major manufacturers (and perhaps less expensive shoes) as unsafe.
Why are running-shoe companies making dangerous footwear? Robbins, et al, in [23], explained:
Such designs occur when an engineer looks at the foot as an inflexible lever which is delicate and thus requires packaging. Various myths persist about foot behavior due to poor understanding of its biology.
And, in [28]:
...these concepts are still being promoted by biomechanists, physicians, and manufacturers of footwear as an effective solution to the injury problem in high impact environments.
Hence, the continued belief that modern running shoes are protective persists because the %26quot;experts%26quot; say so. Another human trait that enters into play here is ego: engineers who have spent many years going to school learning and who have become %26quot;experts%26quot; don%26#039;t like to be proven wrong. We%26#039;re not saying that the %26quot;experts%26quot; necessarily are intentionally misleading the public, but, rather than accepting conclusions counter to their knowledge and understanding, continue to look for other explanations that support what they know to be %26quot;true.%26quot; There are also other reasons as Robbins, et al, in [28], continue:
Investors may have become too preoccupied with sophisticated hardware rather than their principal task of performing experiments which test hypotheses. Further, as much of this research is %26quot;in-house%26quot; (performed by footwear company staff or as direct contracts from footwear manufacturers), intellectual freedom may be compromised, resulting in a reluctance on the part of investors to draw conclusions that may undermine current product lines promoted by their employers or patrons.
Some might even go so far as to draw parallels between running-shoe companies and tobacco companies. Will people be suing running-shoe companies in several years for selling products resulting in permanent and debilitating injuries? It%26#039;s interesting to speculate. The solution to injuries resulting from athletic footwear is obvious: go barefoot. Robbins, et al, in [29], agree:
Obviously, the ideal solution to the running related injury problem in shod populations lies in barefoot locomotion, since protective adaptations seems to be optimized for this state. Normally shod people would have to allow sufficient time for adaptation of the plantar skin and intrinsic foot musculature (perhaps 6 weeks), and run barefoot frequently, perhaps daily, to sustain this adaptation. However, once adapted, the foot is extremely durable.
...
The lower extremity is inherently durable, and, when unencumbered by footwear, it can endure running without signs of chronic overloading, because a vigilant system restrains shock. The use of modern athletic footwear, in addition to being inferior to older footwear in moderating shock during running, renders the lower extremity susceptible to injury because of design flaws introduced by the preoccupation with optimization of plantar comfort.
...
The obvious solution to the problem of chronic overloading in shod runners is to promote barefoot running.
good luck
Reply:i use my gazelle bear foot i love it but i don%26#039;t see how you could walk bare foot
Reply:It%26#039;s best if you are going to walk for any prolonged time such as a half hour to wear shoes with good support in the arch. It%26#039;s not good for your back in later years if you don%26#039;t take care of your feet.
Reply:why wouldn%26#039;t it be ok to walk around barefoot...its good for you.
Reply:As long as you%26#039;re not planning on walking on glass, then you don%26#039;t need shoes to walk at all. Sport shoes are recommended for running on surfaces that dont have much give, like sidewalks and paved roads to prevent injury to your knees.
Reply:bare feel shud b fine..
hair accessories
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment