Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums, for communication between foot health professionals about podiatry and related topics.
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 (PM), upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, earn CPD points and access many other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisments in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
When will you learn to defend your position and answer questions about your paradigm? That's another strategy that we use. How do you use foot typing to alter how the orthotic is fabricated for one foot type as opposed to another?
Lets keep this thread on topic what? We've more than enough threads on FFT.
Re: How Far Have We Come in Podiatric Biomechanics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robertisaacs
Lets keep this thread on topic what? We've more than enough threads on FFT.
Your posting proves the old adage that Love is Blind Robert.
The love and passion for your work and that of other self proclaimed leaders of Modern Biomechanics professing tissue stress and SALRE and Kevin is so exposed.
My two posts here made absolutely no reference to FFT, as that was my agreement about posting onThe Arena (which you yourself violated by yawning on my recent threads BTW).
A Dennis Shavelson post has become equatable with FFTing but you say there's nothing personal or biased in your bones?
Shame on you yet once again.
Dennis
Last edited by drsha : 15th May 2012 at 06:04 AM.
Reason: Resubmitted because I left out my Shakepeare quote
Re: How Far Have We Come in Podiatric Biomechanics?
Quote:
Robertisaacs]Lets keep this thread on topic what? We've more than enough threads on FFT.
Your posting proves the old adage that Love is Blind Robert.
The love and passion that you and other self proclaimed leaders of Modern Biomechanics professing tissue stress and SALRE and Kevin as leading the way instead of your Newtonian smoke screens is so exposed.
My two posts here made absolutely no reference to FFT, as that was my agreement about posting on The Arena unless violated (which BTW you yourself violated by yawning on my recent threads).
A Dennis Shavelson post has become equatable with FFTing but you say there's nothing personal or biased in your bones?
Shame on you yet once again.
"But love is blind, and lovers cannot see
The pretty follies that themselves commit."
William Shakespeare
Re: How Far Have We Come in Podiatric Biomechanics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissB
I know this is an old thread but I Just wanted to add...I'm not what you would call a 'mature' podiatrist, in fact, I wasn't even born in 1983! But unfortunately a lot of the concepts you outlined are the exact same ones that I was taught. I graduated 2011.
Thank God for this forum!!
I believe that you are correct not just for tha CCPM but for most of the other schools programs as well in America.
DPM's are being pounded by stale, old technology biomechanics that is no longer innovative.
My question is this, as his sign off on The Arena, Dr. Kirby credentials:
Kevin A. Kirby, DPM
Adjunct Associate Professor
Department of Applied Biomechanics
California School of Podiatric Medicine at Samuel Merritt College
as if to intimate that he is having influence on the biomechanics being taught at CSPMSMC.
How can that be explained when contrasted to what you claim to be being taught?
Re: How Far Have We Come in Podiatric Biomechanics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissB
I know this is an old thread but I Just wanted to add...I'm not what you would call a 'mature' podiatrist, in fact, I wasn't even born in 1983! But unfortunately a lot of the concepts you outlined are the exact same ones that I was taught. I graduated 2011.
Thank God for this forum!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by drsha
I believe that you are correct not just for tha CCPM but for most of the other schools programs as well in America.
DPM's are being pounded by stale, old technology biomechanics that is no longer innovative.
My question is this, as his sign off on The Arena, Dr. Kirby credentials:
Kevin A. Kirby, DPM
Adjunct Associate Professor
Department of Applied Biomechanics
California School of Podiatric Medicine at Samuel Merritt College
as if to intimate that he is having influence on the biomechanics being taught at CSPMSMC.
How can that be explained when contrasted to what you claim to be being taught?
Dennis
Well Dennis, my guess would be that the taught syllabus in California, USA has absolutely no bearing on the education one would receive if attending University in Manchester, UK...
Re: How Far Have We Come in Podiatric Biomechanics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by drsha
Your posting proves the old adage that Love is Blind Robert.
The love and passion for your work and that of other self proclaimed leaders of Modern Biomechanics professing tissue stress and SALRE and Kevin is so exposed.
My two posts here made absolutely no reference to FFT, A Dennis Shavelson post has become equatable with FFTing but you say there's nothing personal or biased in your bones?
Shame on you yet once again.
Dennis
Actually, if you look carefully you'll see the person I quoted in my post, and thus was addressing, was Eric not you. He was the one who mentioned FFT, I asked him not to. Ironic that you should accuse me of blindly loving "self proclaimed leaders of Tissue stress" when I was actually asking him to cease and desist.
I wasn't even talking to you, yet you take umbrage. That you presume personal attack from that is perhaps less a sign of personal vindictiveness on my part as paranoia on yours?
Quote:
that was my agreement about posting onThe Arena (which you yourself violated by yawning on my recent threads BTW).
You have me muddled up with a whole other body. If you look carefully, you'll see I took no part in the yawning nonsense. Seems a poor way to answer a criticism to me. Once again, you're assuming I'm victimising you. I'm really not.
Quote:
A Dennis Shavelson post has become equatable with FFTing
Actually, what you've done here is make that true. An FFT point was raised (by Eric) and I asked him not to. DS is not in this equation at this point. But by claiming victimisation you've presumed that an FFT post is equatable with a Dennis Shavelson attack (which of course its not). The irony is almost tangible.
Re: How Far Have We Come in Podiatric Biomechanics?
Ian G, Excuse me! I taught in Manchester from 1980-1987, at a time when "Root Biomechanics" was coming and going. I honestly believe that we did our best to untangle to good from the silly (it is not appropriate to call it "bad"). Together with my colleagues of the day, all those years ago, I believe that we looked at "Root theory", saw the good bits and taught it well. We also saw the bits that were, well, lacking in scienctific basis, and did our best to explain this to our students. No offencd meant, you have my word. Rob
__________________
Honorary Research Associate, Institute for Human Evolution, University of Witwatersrand
Adjunct Associate Professor (Human and Comparative Anatomy), University of Western Sydney
Fellow of The Centre For Human Biology, The University of Western Australia
"Please God, deliver me whole from Creationists......."
Re: How Far Have We Come in Podiatric Biomechanics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Kidd
Ian G, Excuse me! I taught in Manchester from 1980-1987, at a time when "Root Biomechanics" was coming and going. I honestly believe that we did our best to untangle to good from the silly (it is not appropriate to call it "bad"). Together with my colleagues of the day, all those years ago, I believe that we looked at "Root theory", saw the good bits and taught it well. We also saw the bits that were, well, lacking in scienctific basis, and did our best to explain this to our students. No offencd meant, you have my word. Rob
Hi Rob,
I think you may have misinterpreted my comment and the point I was trying to make. Here was the situation as I saw it:
- Miss B stated she what she was taught at University (Root Theory)
- Dennis made the incorrect assumption Miss B was a US trained DPM
- Dennis then used what Miss B had said as a pathetic swipe at Kevin (see his above post #64)
- I was merely pointing out the geographical distance between where Kevin lives and works, and where Miss B lives and works (and I assume trained) and how Dennis 'blaming' Kevin for what Miss B was taught was nothing short of ridiculous.
I was in no way making any comments on any institution or what they teach (and if it would be considered good/bad).
Re: How Far Have We Come in Podiatric Biomechanics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian G
Hi Rob,
I think you may have misinterpreted my comment and the point I was trying to make. Here was the situation as I saw it:
- Miss B stated she what she was taught at University (Root Theory)
- Dennis made the incorrect assumption Miss B was a US trained DPM
- Dennis then used what Miss B had said as a pathetic swipe at Kevin (see his above post #64)
- I was merely pointing out the geographical distance between where Kevin lives and works, and where Miss B lives and works (and I assume trained) and how Dennis 'blaming' Kevin for what Miss B was taught was nothing short of ridiculous.
I was in no way making any comments on any institution or what they teach (and if it would be considered good/bad).
David: you are right here. I misinterpreted Miss B stating:
"I know this is an old thread but I Just wanted to add...I'm not what you would call a 'mature' podiatrist, in fact, I wasn't even born in 1983! But unfortunately a lot of the concepts you outlined are the exact same ones that I was taught. I graduated 2011".
To be that she was American Podistry as I guess I assumed that the Schools involved in the UK, AU and NZ were teaching SALRE/Tissue Stress.
I did not have the right to "blame" Kevin for her education and I apologize to hi for that.
The fact that Miss B was receiving so much misinformation during her education raises a question for me and that is how many graduates of UK, AU and NZ schools have not found The Arena and are therefore "Dummies" as per David?
Dennis
The Following User Says Thank You to drsha For This Useful Post:
Re: How Far Have We Come in Podiatric Biomechanics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simon Spooner
Ask yourself this: if it is perceived that Kevin, Eric, Craig and I (I think you do a disservice to yourself and others here in their omission, btw) have moved out ahead, how have we done this?
I'll give you a clue, it didn't happen overnight, it certainly didn't happen without hours and hours of study and a dedication to the subject that would make Roy Castle proud.
I don't think I can speak for Eric, Craig, Simon and others. However, I can speak for myself on how I believe I gained greater knowledge in biomechanics over the 33 years that I have been a podiatry student and podiatrist.
1. I attended every biomechanics lecture given during my four years of podiatry school and took on extra work/projects with the likes of Dr. John Weed, Ron Valmassy and Rich Blake when I was a podiatry student.
2. I worked hard by showing interest in the biomechanics program at CCPM and trying to be as good or better than any of my classmates at biomechanics so I could get the one spot available for the Biomechanics Fellowship from 1984-85 at CCPM. [Sadly, the Biomechanics Fellowship that Rich Blake, Eric Fuller and I all trained in has not been in existence now for over a decade.]
3. I worked extra hours teaching students, doing demonstrations, making foot orthoses and reading every paper and book I could find on foot and lower extremity biomechanics during walking and running at the CCPM library during my Biomechanics Fellowship. I lived and breathed biomechanics nearly every waking hour that year.
4. I asked my most respected Biomechanics Professors questions at every opportunity while I was a student and Biomechanics Fellow at CCPM. I even had one of my professors trying to avoid me every time he saw me in order to keep from having to answer my questions. The squeeky wheel does get the grease in life.
5. Soon after I went into practice, I asked Paul Rasmussen, owner of Precision Intricast Labs, to let me write an informational newsletter on foot and lower extremity biomechanics and orthotic therapy on a monthly basis for his orthotic lab. Since October 1986, I have written a total of 298 monthly newsletters, published three books from those newsletters, will publish a fourth book in early 2014, and will soon be publishing three Spanish translations of those books for Spanish-speaking podiatrists. Doing these monthly newsletters over the past 25+ years has probably been the single most important factor that allowed me to increase my own knowledge. Writing on a subject forces the author to become more knowledgeable on that subject. Guaranteed!
6. Publishing papers and doing research with individuals that had greater knowledge than me in certain areas has also allowed me to learn more and develop greater depth of knowledge of other disciplines.
7. Trial and error experimentation and careful observation of new treatment techniques on my own patients in my private practice has helped me develop new tests and new techniques and theories which have, in turn, benefitted other podiatrists and their patients.
8. Being involved in online discussions on the Podiatry Mailbase and Podiatry Arena on a regular basis also greatly improved my knowledge and sharpened by debating skills. There is nothing quite like learning from the likes of Eric Fuller, Simon Spooner, Craig Payne, Bart Van Gheluwe and Howard Dananberg on a regular basis for the numerous years we have been having these discussions. The education I have received and the friendships that have developed as a result of these online discussions can not be measured in any way but to say these friendships and academic relationships are......priceless!!
__________________
Sincerely,
Kevin
**************************************************
Kevin A. Kirby, DPM
Adjunct Associate Professor
Department of Applied Biomechanics
California School of Podiatric Medicine at Samuel Merritt College
Re: How Far Have We Come in Podiatric Biomechanics?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Kirby
Even though I would sometimes like it to not be true, I am becoming somewhat of a "senior statesman" within my profession since I have been teaching podiatric biomechanics for over 23 years now. As such, I have seen and have been taught by many of the legends of podiatric biomechanics (e.g. Drs. Root, Weed, Sgarlato, Orien, Valmassy, Blake) who had many different ideas than what we teach now.
For those of you who haven't been around this profession as long as I have, I thought it might be helpful for you to become aware of some of the biomechanics concepts that I was taught as a podiatry student from 1979-1983 at the California College of Podiatric Medicine so that you can see how far we have come in the past quarter century in our knowledge of podiatric biomechanics. Some of you other more mature podiatrists, that have also been around the profession for a decade or more, and may have been trained in other podiatry schools in other countries, may also want to contribute to this thread for the benefit of our younger colleagues.
Old Concepts in Podiatric Biomechanics
(circa 1979-1983, California College of Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, California, USA)
1. Measuring foot deformities such as forefoot to rearfoot relationship, rearfoot varus/valgus allows the podiatrist to best determine how a foot will compensate for those deformities and how best to make an orthosis to prevent those compensations from occurring.
2. A foot is not normal unless it has a perpendicular forefoot to rearfoot relationship, stands with the subtalar joint (STJ) neutral, has a vertical distal third of the tibia, and stands with the calcaneus vertical.
3. The heel bisection and forefoot to rearfoot relationship is easily determined and does not vary considerably from one examiner to another, if performed correctly.
4. The midtarsal joint consists of two distinct simultaneously occurring joints, the oblique midtarsal joint, angulated 57 degrees from the sagittal plane and 52 degrees from the transverse plane and the longitudinal midtarsal joint, angulated 9 degrees from the sagittal plane and 15 degrees from the transverse plane.
5. A functional foot orthosis should always be balanced with the heel vertical since heel verticality is the position that a normal foot has. The only time that a foot orthosis should be balanced with the heel inverted are in cases where the calcaneus is inverted when it is maximally pronated.
6. A functional foot orthosis should never be balanced with the heel everted unless the foot is fixed in a heel everted position such as in peroneal spastic flatfoot or STJ degenerative joint disease.
7. A true functional foot orthosis ends at the metatarsal necks. Forefoot extensions are not necessary to make the foot function optimally with a foot orthosis since placing padding plantar to the metatarsal heads will restrict digital dorsiflexion during propulsion.
8. Pronation occurs frequently in feet since, during standing and walking, the center of mass of the body is positioned medial to each foot which forces feet to pronate.
9. Gravity causes pronation.
10. A foot with a vertical calcaneus in standing and with the STJ in neutral position is the most stable foot.
11. The goal of foot orthosis therapy is to make the foot function in the STJ neutral position.
12. Foot orthoses need to be made of a relatively rigid material in order to be considered true "functional foot orthoses". Soft materials can not be used to make functional foot orthoses, soft materials can only make "accommodative orthoses".
13. A calcaneus that is resting 2 or more degrees everted will continue to pronate to the maximally pronated STJ position during relaxed bipedal stance.
14. A foot with a rearfoot varus deformity will pronate until the heel becomes vertical unless it is supinated by some other influence since the heel vertical position is the most stable position of the foot.
Any other "mature podiatrists" wish to contribute?
Up until that time, I had considered Dr. Weed to be "deity-like", perfect in his knowledge, since he knew so much more than I did and his ideas always seemed to make sense to me. This one incident was profound for me in that the man that I most respected in his knowledge of podiatric biomechanics I now found to be imperfect. This event then led me to start questioning and examining all the other things that had been taught to me by him and my other biomechanics professors.
Now, 23 years later, I realize that this event, was an important part of my education and development as a researcher and educator in foot and lower extremity biomechanics. I began to realize that just because someone I respected greatly said it to be so, didn't mean it was so. I knew I had to analyze my own observations along with my understanding of Newtonian physics to see if what I had been taught still made sense.
These types of lessons are very important for our younger generation of podiatrists so that this profession may remain strong in their knowledge in this most important of fields: podiatric biomechanics. Teaching these lessons is exactly what I am trying to accomplish with this thread.
Mahalo Podiatry Arena,
It is good to know where we have come from but much more fun knowing where we are going.
11. An orthotic is only as stable and energy efficient as the foundation it is placed on.
Re: How Far Have We Come in Podiatric Biomechanics?
Re: How Far Have We Come in Podiatric Biomechanics?
Linear Mode
