Originally Posted by drsha
More than two weeks have gone by and not one reply although there have been more than 200 visits to this thread.
Kirby got your tongue?
I don't subscribe to the concept of putting one person down to make myself feel better. He might have my ear, but no one has my tongue. If you haven't been here in 2 weeks, odds are, the thread is exactly where you left it. For any idea to be expressed, and although it sometimes means taking a little heat, a person has to be here and be a part of it. I'll give you my uneducated opinion about it after I'm done repairing my machine.
If your interest isn't being captivated then please stop visiting and I will go away.
If not, can't one of you find the open-minded, self-expressive thought that lets alternative expression exist without being ridiculed or abused in a (theoretical)free and open forum.
I will add another theoretical question to the mix:
Theoretical question 5:
1) If an orthotic could be dispensed that reduced functional hallux limitus in those foot types that predictably have it so that it allowed peroneus longus to leverage and power to the point that it produced renewed stabilizing power upon the first ray, locking it more securely in closed chain with every step, would the IM, HAA and Met primus elevatus of that patient's pathological medial column improve?
I believe I've already designed something like that:
* Wed Aug 29 2001 Joe Jared <email@example.com>
Improvements for first met cutouts
I draw the forefoot posting proximal to the first metatarsal in a curve fit fashion on the bottom surface of the orthotic such that there is support proximal to the first met cutout, reinforcing the arch.
2) Could manual therapy, motor control, and additional vaulting of the dynamic arches of the foot then leverage and power the flexor hallucis longus and abductor hallucis, further reducing the development or advancement of biomechanical pathology?
"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum".
Dennis Shavelson, D.P.M.
Generally, the above referenced support behind the first metatarsal combined with a more aggressive arch has an immobilizing effect on the mid-tarsal joints while allowing fluid motion in the push off stage of gait. Freeing up the big toe while providing proper support of the arch was the objective at the time. I'll leave it to the experts whether or not they think this is good or bad.
Afterthoughts on this: