Sybarite: Everybody wants a shortcut.


I don't really see how those are a shortcut. You've still got to get out and walk or run.

In theory, they're like a curl bar or an ab bench. You've still got to do the exercise. These just claimed to adjust your stride such that your butt and thighs did more work than in traditional shoes... no different than adjusting your grip when lifting weights to direct stress to a different range or set of muscles.

In fact, one of the girls at my office was wearing these for a while and said it was sort of like walking in sand... so rather than a shortcut, it was even more strenuous than regular shoes.

penthesilea: Those things aren't cheap you know. Months went by and no weight lost. I actually gained weight and some major 'digestive' issues too.

Walk it off.

While you have to be something of an idiot to fall for such things, companies that make false claims like this should be given one chance to screw up, be fined a bunch, then if it happens a second time, shut down. If you are selling something dont make claims that are not backed by solid science. This is the same issue I have with the pro-weed forces. If you want to claim weed is usefull in treating a particular condition, fine. Treat it like any other pharmaceutical. Set up randomized clinical trials, etc. Then if the claim holds up it can be marketed, subject to standard FDA manufacturing controls (sterilization, packaging/labeling, quality controls, etc).

I love my MBTs. They're great for trade shows. After a day of working the floor at CES, my leg muscles are a little sore, but my joints don't hurt. No ankle or knee pain, like I would get with other shoes.

octopied: I took a look at them and a couple similar varieties including super expensive MBT shoes. I concluded very quickly that the supposed "benefits" would be outweighed by whatever injuries I'd sustain once I lost my balance in a pair. Using non rockered Timberland soft soled hikers for all my walking, thanks.

I bought a pair of MBT's from a shoe store attached to my mom's podiatrist office about 6 or 7 years ago -- before the Sketchers fad hit. I am a nurse and they are my work shoes. They were farkin' expensive, but I'm wearing them still and I love them. I have a history of knee and back issues, and I'm convinced keeping the weight on the arch of my foot (the strongest part of the foot) has reduced the number of trips I've had to make to the chiropractor to keep getting through my 12 hour shifts.

I don't think they've done anything to shape up my butt, but they definitely use different muscles in your legs than normal shoes do. I remember feeling it in my calves the first few times I wore these shoes. In short, I'm not any skinnier but my knees and back don't hurt either.

Derkins: Ambivalence: I just got them becuase they're comfortable. Unfortunatley they also have laces so I hardly ever wear them. (I hate laces)

I got them for comfort too. At a job where I'm on my feet all day, they were like walking on marshmallows.
As for toning my butt, not so much.

I got the Sketchers "work" shoes. Just as comfy, support my feet really well for 8+ hours of standing on tile-over-concrete floors, and don't cost NEARLY as much as the Shape-ups.

Jubeebee: what_now: serial_crusher: I'm still a believer in these things though:

those are great- if you have a perfect gate, have never sustained an injury to your hips, legs, knees, spine or feet, and you haven't been running with built up sneakers for long.

If you're in your late 20s and have been active all life? Those things are more likely to be harmful.

You have to adapt to them gradually. After two+ decades in traditional shoes, your feet can't adapt to barefoot style in a month or two. But if you're patient with them, a lot of those nagging things work themselves out.

My girlfriend had flat feet her whole life. After a year of gradually going from normal shoes to Nike Frees to Vibrams, she has arches and her feet don't hurt when she stands anymore.

Whaaat? I'm under the impression that arches are a static, genetic feature of one's body. Is this not the case?

belhade: I'm another disciple of Vibram.



I got them in December and wore them around the house all winter to get used to them. Of course, winter lasted about two weeks this year and I wore them out constantly whenever it was at least dry. I love these things so much I want to get a pair of black kangaroo-leather KSOs to wear for work.

You put your shoes up on furniture? Ew.

CommieTaoist: While I am normally all for consumer protection, anyone who was stupid enough to buy those expecting to lose weight or get a killer ass sort of deserves to lose their money.

If it's not okay to blame the victim for suffering rape, why is it okay to blame the victim for suffering fraud?

zato_ichi: Just really, REALLY farking gullible.

Most people are. People of a certain upbringing/background/mindset don't generally question authority, they take it for granted that the nice person on TV (in a store, behind the kiosk, etc.) is the fountain of all knowledge on something and has a duty to be impartial; after all they wouldn't be pushing the product (or news story) in that light if they didn't honestly believe in it's capabilities.

As you've discovered this gets such people in to a lot of trouble

relaxitsjustme: serial_crusher: I'm still a believer in these things though:
[www.vibramfivefingers.com image 237x197]

I hate those things. They're a favorite of snobby, Volvo driving, middle-aged, yoga Moms

I beg to differ. My wife and I are thinking of switching to minimalist running. Still reading up on it though. My wife's been having knee problems for awhile and minimalist running is supposed to alleviate that problem. She's only 26. While I don't have issues with my knees (just my back), I'm always up for trying something new.

We are just blindly buying Vibrams just to have them. I think they are pretty ugly myself, and expensive. I have a couple of coworkers that do minimalist running and say it's definitely better than normal running striking with your heal first.

We'll see though.

/who pays $100 for sketchers?
//I really want Crocs to go away forever

We are NOT just blindly buying Vibrams just to have them

/dammit, need an edit button.

theorellior: kab: /folks were running far before sneakers were invented. Hard to believe, but true.

On those rolling asphalt plains and concrete hills of yore, yes, I remember that part of anthropology well.

Because exposed rock and baked clay are that dissimilar? We've been running a damn long time on a huge array of surfaces. Including hard ones.

If you're running correctly, what you're running on doesn't matter. The muscle absorbs the force. Padding is only important when you heel strike, because that's what prevents you from feeling the searing pain that's supposed to warn you that THAT'S NOT HOW YOUR BODY IS DESIGNED TO RUN. When you heel strike, the energy of landing each stride goes straight into your skeletal structure- right up the leg into the knee.

jingks: belhade: I'm another disciple of Vibram.



I got them in December and wore them around the house all winter to get used to them. Of course, winter lasted about two weeks this year and I wore them out constantly whenever it was at least dry. I love these things so much I want to get a pair of black kangaroo-leather KSOs to wear for work.

You put your shoes up on furniture? Ew.

They were brand new; I'd just gotten them delivered.

Ed Finnerty: belhade: I'm another disciple of Vibram.

[lh3.googleusercontent.com image 307x512]

What's with the socks?

/Black socks go better with sandals

Like I said, I got them in December. Even with the ultrathin Injinji toe-socks I was wearing my Vibrams outside when it was 30-40 degrees. And a little padding when getting used to them doesn't hurt either.

Back when I exercised as part of a bizarre college mating ritual, I would always jog around the campus on my toes, never letting my heels strike the ground. Luckily I had already paired with my mate before I did that. Anyway, my calves and ass rocked because of it.

Most shoes promote heel-striking, with raised heels and rigid soles. At the very least they don't allow for mid-foot striking.

my wife wears these, she blew out her knee in the military and she says that these are the only shoes that do not make her knee hurt on long walks

I've never actually seen Vibrams marketed until I was already looking for them. And I don't pay $100...

What does a toned butt look like?

relaxitsjustme: belhade: I've never actually seen Vibrams marketed until I was already looking for them. And I don't pay $100...

Don't take it personally. I just think it's funny that people are touting Vibram FF in a thread about how shoe company marketing departments lie to their customers.

Is it lying to say that walking barefoot is better for you (in most cases) than walking in built-up shoes?

relaxitsjustme: belhade: relaxitsjustme: belhade: I've never actually seen Vibrams marketed until I was already looking for them. And I don't pay $100...

Don't take it personally. I just think it's funny that people are touting Vibram FF in a thread about how shoe company marketing departments lie to their customers.

Is it lying to say that walking barefoot is better for you (in most cases) than walking in built-up shoes?

No it's not lying but walking in Vibrams isn't walking barefoot either. Seriously, watch somebody walk (not running, that's a different story) wearing them, they still heel strike. If you really wanted to get close to to walking barefoot but still protect the sole of your foot wear flip-flops or moccasins. Both of those options will allow your toes to move more freely and splay out more than the VFF.

You've obviously never actually worn Vibrams yourself.