what do you think of this argumetn of going barefoot can you give me help with opinion?

narrowtoeboxisstupid

Barefooters
Sep 17, 2014
207
88
28
31
arent shoes deforms the toes and weakens the whole foot tendons muscles etc
yes

isnt going barefoot develop perfectly the foot as it is designed to develop?
yes

are there risks as stepping on cristals, nails and worms in infected soil(but very rare in most places)?
yes

doesnt dogs have practically the same risks in going shoeless with cristals, nails and probaly worms than us?
yes (my dog in 4 years cutted with cristal once and stepped in 1 nail)


arent cars risky? doenst everyday dies a lot of people in cars?
yes

why it is encouraged then to use them if they have so many risks?

arent the beneficts inmense in using a car for travelling 100km compared to travel 100km walking and avoiding the minimun risks of cars?

isnt that analogous to going barefoot?



also, why people let dogs walk shoeless if its so risky?
 
also, why people let dogs walk shoeless if its so risky?

isn't it obvious? why do people buy dog food for their dogs, even though animal food products are not regulated to the safety standards as human counterparts? Ever wonder why its cheaper and Preserves so long? Because pet lives are generally considered less valuable than human ones
 
It's not an argument, it's a choice.

Everyone is different, with different life experiences and values. The important thing is that we support each other as a community despite our differences as individuals.
Life is about risk for all of us, that's what makes life worth living, but an acceptable risk for me may be rejected by others, we all have our own tolerances and values.

I've always put my emotional wellbeing over the physical, that's where my motivations lie, that's where my struggle and scars are, If that means wearing shoes to get me to the places i need to be, i'm ok with that!
Don't get me wrong i love being barefoot, it's a passion, but not my driving force.

I think the real questions we should be asking are ones of tolerance, that way we can all learn from each other and embrace other communities who hold different values.
We have to accept the possibility that on many levels we could be wrong, the one size fits all approach hardly ever works. That we can learn from others no matter how polarised our ideas and experiences are..

Te effect change in the world you must first embrace it, the best you can do is live by example, not claim the higher ground. People will gravitate towards you if they can see you're happy, content and healthy in your choices.
It's not what you say that is important but how you say it. Meet people on level ground and they will be open to new ideas.
 
isn't it obvious? why do people buy dog food for their dogs, even though animal food products are not regulated to the safety standards as human counterparts? Ever wonder why its cheaper and Preserves so long? Because pet lives are generally considered less valuable than human ones

yes but doesnt people expend a lot of money in their dog's health? their health is important, its obvious, and if dogs would be hurted for going shoeless be sure that people would expend money in avoid that and buy shoes for them

Here is what we are up against. The anti-barefoot sites do bring up some good points. I became a little less fanatical after doing a little more research, running Ultras in shoes, and discovering that I wasn't ruining my feet with shoes. A happy medium is possible.

http://www.runningbarefootisbad.com/some-questions-for-the-barefoot-running-community/362/

those "good points" mr rickwhitelaw are mostly fallacies, disinformation, ive seen many podhiatrist make fallacies about it, such as "doesnt give any support" "catch fungus", or others saying "scientists have no prove that going barefoot is better than shoes"
fallacies and more fallacies

that page is big bs

yes shoes ruin your foot, mostly because of the narrow toe box, the excessive padding is bad also but not so bad as the narrow toe box, also the heel strike is bad in running

seems disinformation have hurted you and confused rickwhitelaw

Running any distance in shoes ruined my feet...forever.


yes, it amazes me why people dont sue shoe companies, they deform the foot and give so much health problems yet almost noone try to make them pay for it?

It's not an argument, it's a choice.

Everyone is different, with different life experiences and values. The important thing is that we support each other as a community despite our differences as individuals.
Life is about risk for all of us, that's what makes life worth living, but an acceptable risk for me may be rejected by others, we all have our own tolerances and values.

I've always put my emotional wellbeing over the physical, that's where my motivations lie, that's where my struggle and scars are, If that means wearing shoes to get me to the places i need to be, i'm ok with that!
Don't get me wrong i love being barefoot, it's a passion, but not my driving force.

I think the real questions we should be asking are ones of tolerance, that way we can all learn from each other and embrace other communities who hold different values.
We have to accept the possibility that on many levels we could be wrong, the one size fits all approach hardly ever works. That we can learn from others no matter how polarised our ideas and experiences are..

Te effect change in the world you must first embrace it, the best you can do is live by example, not claim the higher ground. People will gravitate towards you if they can see you're happy, content and healthy in your choices.
It's not what you say that is important but how you say it. Meet people on level ground and they will be open to new ideas.


in health, its an argument, you do it = good health, dont do it = have impact in health

does values and "tolerances" of most people are mostly based in tradition

for me its a driving force lol sometimes i wonder why am i so obsessed

depends, you dont have to be wrong, specially if you appreciate logic and science, floyd mayweather didnt had to lose not even 1 time

yep i agree example is strong
 
  • Like
Reactions: skedaddle
Here is what we are up against. The anti-barefoot sites do bring up some good points. I became a little less fanatical after doing a little more research, running Ultras in shoes, and discovering that I wasn't ruining my feet with shoes. A happy medium is possible.

http://www.runningbarefootisbad.com/some-questions-for-the-barefoot-running-community/362/

sorry the double posting

i was going to argument that web, but its too stupid not worthy, i mean its simply stupid in many points except in the abdele bigka,

even using that web as a reference its a shame

however if you want to use those arguments tell me we can discuss it rickwhitelaw

its powerful amongs a lot of people thou
 
Well, I don't agree with the website, it just raises some good questions. Don't be quick to dismiss it as bs. Take it question by question and answer them.

Then there are the podiatrists. Jason R. tried to do battle with them but gave up, they would always come back to the same lack of research, etc.

For some humor watch: http://xeroshoes.com/barefoot-running-humor/sht-barefoot-runners-say/ We have all said many of these things.

I'm not confused. I am exactly where I want to be with being barefoot and barefoot running.

I admire your passion for being barefoot, I just can't take such an extreme stance on some issues.
 
in health, its an argument, you do it = good health, dont do it = have impact in health

does values and "tolerances" of most people are mostly based in tradition

for me its a driving force lol sometimes i wonder why am i so obsessed

depends, you dont have to be wrong, specially if you appreciate logic and science, floyd mayweather didnt had to lose not even 1 time

yep i agree example is strong


The problem i have when people talk in absolutes like 'yes', 'no' is that there is no room for middle ground where the majority of us live.

Science is often flawed and bias, often for commercial gain, but it is also cultural.

It's obvious that cramming you're feet into narrow shoes will deform them over time, no one would dispute that, but that's different to wearing wide fitting minimal shoes designed for a purpose.
There are places i run that are remote with terrain that requires some sort of foot protection, should i deny myself visiting such places for purist views, fear or risk?

In health you choose to do something or do don't, the definition of 'good health' vs 'bad health' is not scientifically established, life is just too complex and subjective to make such an argument.
A man with one leg could say he's in good health or bad health depending on how he views himself.

It's fun locking horns with you narrow. I don't think we will ever see eye to eye, but at least we're 'chewing the fat' and trying to make sense of the world, which is a good thing.:)
 
I think that article brings up some valid questions that we (as a community) should at least be aware of.

That being said, that article (and the majority of the articles on that site) are about 5 years old and portions may very well be out or date or need to be updated with current information.
 
Sked, you are so wise. Narrow does seem to have a way of provoking discourse. Narrow, have you always been a trouble-maker? LOL

haha i'm can be a pain sometimes i can't avoid being like that

I think that article brings up some valid questions that we (as a community) should at least be aware of.

That being said, that article (and the majority of the articles on that site) are about 5 years old and portions may very well be out or date or need to be updated with current information.

seriously? such as? the only good questions for me were the Abdele Bigca and possibly the Zola Budd too

i agree

Well, I don't agree with the website, it just raises some good questions. Don't be quick to dismiss it as bs. Take it question by question and answer them.

Then there are the podiatrists. Jason R. tried to do battle with them but gave up, they would always come back to the same lack of research, etc.

For some humor watch: http://xeroshoes.com/barefoot-running-humor/sht-barefoot-runners-say/ We have all said many of these things.

I'm not confused. I am exactly where I want to be with being barefoot and barefoot running.

I admire your passion for being barefoot, I just can't take such an extreme stance on some issues.


ok i'll do it homie

yes, i like a quote from assassins creed 1, "you can't reason with some people" i don't know if mention the quote was necessary it's well known, Dale Carnegie talks about it a lot in his book "how to make friends and influence people"

i said you got confused because you said "I became a little less fanatical after doing a little more research, running Ultras in shoes, and discovering that I wasn't ruining my feet with shoes."
yes you do ruin your feet with modern shoes, human foot doesn't have a rounded shape in the toes, modern shoes have rounded-narrow toe box shape
it's like this game
152522418.jpg
modern shoes try to put the square into the triangle zone, and what happens is seen in my photo, the toes are deformed, specially the big toe and the pnky toe, also the excess of padding is bad and weakens the foot, but that is less worse thank you
The problem i have when people talk in absolutes like 'yes', 'no' is that there is no room for middle ground where the majority of us live.

Science is often flawed and bias, often for commercial gain, but it is also cultural.

It's obvious that cramming you're feet into narrow shoes will deform them over time, no one would dispute that, but that's different to wearing wide fitting minimal shoes designed for a purpose.
There are places i run that are remote with terrain that requires some sort of foot protection, should i deny myself visiting such places for purist views, fear or risk?

In health you choose to do something or do don't, the definition of 'good health' vs 'bad health' is not scientifically established, life is just too complex and subjective to make such an argument.
A man with one leg could say he's in good health or bad health depending on how he views himself.

It's fun locking horns with you narrow. I don't think we will ever see eye to eye, but at least we're 'chewing the fat' and trying to make sense of the world, which is a good thing.:)

there is no room for middle ground in discussing the discoverings of a scientist for example,

i agree, but not science, scientists, and only in the area of hypothesis and some theories, in facts discovered is not, like e = mc2 etc

so true, but are very difficult or even extremely difficult to find, even altra dissapointed me, not wide enough, way wider but dont respect the for 100%, only open toe like flip flops respect foots anatomy,
yes so true i use shoes if i have to walk on gravel for long distance, so painfull, even horses need shoes for terrains like that,

? so deformed foot isnot clear if it's healthier than no deformed foot?

i agree with you in many things skedaddle, i think u wise
 
Well, I don't agree with the website, it just raises some good questions. Don't be quick to dismiss it as bs. Take it question by question and answer them.
i'll only take time to answer the link you gave me, i mean it seems he has plenty of post


Why do you dismiss what podiatrists say about barefoot running as they have a vested interest in treating injuries? Are you also going to dismiss the research by Liebermann et al in Nature because he has a vested interest considering he is a barefoot runner and a barefoot running shoe product sponsored his research? Are you going to dismiss everything Chris McDougal says as he has a vested interest in selling a book and getting speaking fees? You can’t have it both ways.
podhiatrist makes a lot of fallacies and disinformation, they earn money thanks to unhealthy feet, many cannot be trusted, going barefoot means healthy feet, healthy feet means no profit, that remembers of my dentist... she hoaxed me in an extreme way for many years
Why do you try and dismiss the apparent epidemic of stress fractures in those using the Vibram Five Fingers as being due to training errors? Why can’t the injuries that runners get in running shoes be due to training errors as well? You can’t have it both ways.
there are a big % of runners who got injured everyyear, correct me if i'm wrong but i heard 30% aprox, also the commonly known "runner knee" only tend to appear in runners with shoes, i heard some disinformation that the cause of it is "unknown", heel strike must be the cause of it or influence it, that's logic
Why did you claim that running shoes cause osteoarthritis based on a study that was not even about osteoarthritis? Why did these two barefoot running sites lie about the Kerrigan et al research?
i'm ignorant about that
Can you tell me which injuries are actually caused by the high impactsthat you claim running shoes are responsible for? Which injury actually has high impact as a risk factor?
heel striking is unnatural, and affects the articulations, it's logic
Can you show me the research that shows there is an increased epidemic of injuries in runners as you keep claiming there is?
as said 30% of runners i've heard (unless i'm wrong, but the percentage was something like that) get injured every year, an army article if i remember well talks about it, i think that article is posted in this forum
Do you really believe that driving a car barefoot can save gas?
what? where'd that come from? haha
Where is the evidence that running shoes cause any injuries? Why do you ignore the evidence that they might be helpful? You can’t have it both ways. There is less research for the benefits of barefoot running than there are for the benefits of running shoes!
speaking of running injuries only and not in general: heel striking, and running barefoot avoids heel striking, also propioception or whatever is called this is a great video about it
, shoes are unnecessary for running, except in special surfaces as roads and gravel, then they protect the feet
Where is the evidence that running shoes weaken muscles? Foot orthotics have been shown to strengthen muscles, not weaken them, so why would running shoes weaken muscles? You can’t have that one both ways either.
foot orthotics are a special type of shoe created with the purpose of maybe strenghen muscles i don't know never heard of, you can't compare them with normal shoes, what kind of stupid fallacy is that,
the excess of padding weakens the human foot, and the worst part, the narrow toe box deforms the toes, as Dean Carnazes told once to some shoemakers "let the foot be the foot"
Why do you claim the lack of evidence for the benefits of running shoes as proof that running barefoot is better? It is an illogical 2+2=5 type conclusion.
that's bullshit, also it tends to be the contrary, many podhiatrists etc use the fallacy and not true that there are lack of evidence of the benefits of running barefoot, "there are no proof that running barefoot is better than running with shoes" as exposed in this forum in one post, but the post is wrong, running barefoot is much healthier, modern shoes are retarded
Why do no elite runners run barefoot? (Try and answer this one without insulting their intelligence)
tradition, shame, some because run on roads and similar terrains, gravel etc as Karnazes said that he don't think the foot can stand running in roads for long periods
Why do you claim the achievements of Abebe Bikala in winning an Olympic marathon running barefoot, but not mention that he could run faster and break a world record wearing running shoes?
good point
Why do you claim the achievements of Zola Budd for competing in the Olympic 1500m barefoot, but not mention that she had to resort to wearing running shoes to prevent the injuries that she was getting?
didn't heard of those injuries of Zola for running barefoot, i will make some research, i cannot trust this guy, with all the fallacies he speak
How about explaining why I can’t make up headlines like Barefoot Runners Get More Stress Fractures?
i didn't understood that
Why did you claim that the Liebermann et al study in Nature supported barefoot running and showed barefoot running was better and showed there are less injuries in barefoot runners? The study showed none of that. Liebermann himself had to publish a disclaimer on his website to distance himself from what was being claimed from the research. You can’t have it both ways.
there is no need of that Liebermann guy, modern shoes are bad for the feet and running barefoot is better, is scientifically proved, there is no room to argue that, except in some terrains in which shoes fullfil their true purpose and protect the foot from gravel etc
These are the issues. Why do you always attack the messenger and not the message? Why do you always take pot shots at those critiquing barefoot running and never address the actual issues that they raise? Why are you so irrational? Is it because you can not actually address the issues being raised, so have to resort to these attacks? Stick to the issues.
he talk bullshits and fallacies what he can expect to get in return, but many adresses the actual issues, irrational? lol haha

also his post of vivobarefoot
one point is: "It was not even on barefoot running! They were all wearing shoes!"
haha whats the point of even listen to people like this, i mean the bullshit is too obvious, i don't know if he is a disinformator or just a fool, but if he is a disinformator his disinfomartion only works with some people
 
there is no room for middle ground in discussing the discoverings of a scientist for example,

i agree, but not science, scientists, and only in the area of hypothesis and some theories, in facts discovered is not, like e = mc2 etc

? so deformed foot isnot clear if it's healthier than no deformed foot?

As soon as you start thinking in terms of absolutes, scientific endeavour ceases to be objective and science breaks down, it's an oxymoron.
For science to exist you must first consider the possibility that it might not, if you didn't it wouldn't be scientific. This is middle ground reasoning.

I don’t really see people terms of health, it’s the individual that matters and not for me to judge people in that way.

I saw the London marathon today and watched loads of disabled runners compete, most of them fitter and healthier than i’ll ever be, contributing massively to their communities and charities with the sponsorship they raise.
 
As soon as you start thinking in terms of absolutes, scientific endeavour ceases to be objective and science breaks down, it's an oxymoron.
For science to exist you must first consider the possibility that it might not, if you didn't it wouldn't be scientific. This is middle ground reasoning.

I don’t really see people terms of health, it’s the individual that matters and not for me to judge people in that way.

I saw the London marathon today and watched loads of disabled runners compete, most of them fitter and healthier than i’ll ever be, contributing massively to their communities and charities with the sponsorship they raise.


they know that the possibility of "might not" can exists in some cases, but in reality with empiric evidence no one question it, no one questions the vailidity of gravity, it exists without even the 0.000000000000000000001% of soubt, its 100%, newton laws exists with the same rigor, e=mc2 the same etc

no one would question the possibility that cancer might not exist isnt it?

and im not speaking about that type of health, health of body like taking a flu, or mind health, different types of health

listen to this logic
feet are designed in a certain way and works perfectly in that way, be that way its a type of "health", deforming feet, the bones the form etc making it unhealthy without a doubt i dont think anyone would doubt that

those disabled competing have some of their body parts "unhealthy" thats why they are disabled, the same a broken engine is analogous to unhealthy and its "unhealthy" even if the rest of the car is healthy

i love logic
 
why am i ignored so much, if you dont like me or whatever its good to ignore me, that ensures i will not post again, but if u like it ignore like that is conterproductive,

i tend to receive 0 likes and people who answer me receive many likes i mean that nnoys me, but being ignored its worst, i think i will rarely come to this forum or post anything, but i like some of the people here

bye
 
why am i ignored so much, if you dont like me or whatever its good to ignore me, that ensures i will not post again, but if u like it ignore like that is conterproductive,

i tend to receive 0 likes and people who answer me receive many likes i mean that nnoys me, but being ignored its worst, i think i will rarely come to this forum or post anything, but i like some of the people here

bye


Just be yourself Narrow, i know it's hard sometimes to feel connected if you have strong views about things. Remember most of us here are runners and tend to have very short sighted one track minds.;)

The truth is communities need diversity to flourish, i enjoy your passion and eagerness to engage with people, even with the language barrier you take the time to answer and express your view and values! By taking time to answer someone you acknowledge them, this is community.

Because of you i run barefoot more than i ever did, not because your a runner, or that i share your ideals, but because of your willingness to share. I began to question some of my own values about being barefoot outside of running, maybe this is an evolutionary step for me, i don't know, i haven't had that revelation yet, but you got me thinking.

The 'like' button is no more than padded, badly fitting shoes for human interaction. We evolved to communicate with each other! To argue, agree, negotiate and inspire, not to ignore or prop each other up with a click.
 
Just be yourself Narrow, i know it's hard sometimes to feel connected if you have strong views about things. Remember most of us here are runners and tend to have very short sighted one track minds.;)

The truth is communities need diversity to flourish, i enjoy your passion and eagerness to engage with people, even with the language barrier you take the time to answer and express your view and values! By taking time to answer someone you acknowledge them, this is community.

Because of you i run barefoot more than i ever did, not because your a runner, or that i share your ideals, but because of your willingness to share. I began to question some of my own values about being barefoot outside of running, maybe this is an evolutionary step for me, i don't know, i haven't had that revelation yet, but you got me thinking.

The 'like' button is no more than padded, badly fitting shoes for human interaction. We evolved to communicate with each other! To argue, agree, negotiate and inspire, not to ignore or prop each other up with a click.

thank you very much skedaddle, i mean it was in general but that long message above about the web antibarefoot i was suggested to make, being ignored hurted haha

seriously?? im shocked lol, ye i mean i dont share as much as i would like, i dont have internet at home i connect rarely,

thank u skedaddle again

Don't give up, narrow. I agree with Sked that it's great to see you at work. LIKE is not the reason to participate. Having something to say. That's important.

thank u bro, no but i mean being directly ignored, like is not very important to me, but being directly ignored hurts haha as i said i took precious time above to make that huge responding message and no one cared -.- so i was like dammit, and happens some times too, this forum is a little bit inactive i think compared with others, more users would be better
 
why am i ignored so much, if you dont like me or whatever its good to ignore me, that ensures i will not post again, but if u like it ignore like that is conterproductive,

i tend to receive 0 likes and people who answer me receive many likes i mean that nnoys me, but being ignored its worst, i think i will rarely come to this forum or post anything, but i like some of the people here

bye


Probably directed at me. Sorry for not replying, I do have quite a life besides this forum, I check in, but don't post as often as I used to. I don't have anything personal against you, I just didn't find your answers worth discussing. In many ways, we have the same views. I am barefoot the majority of the time, check some of the barefootedness threads. I don't like narrow shoes and cringe at high heals, but I don't think there is any evidence that shoes ruin your feet or cause other problems. A few pictures and TJ's case (sorry TJ, I have been on here long enough to know of your ordeal) aren't enough for me to be anti-shoe.

As for the "not getting enough likes", I don't know what the big deal is. At times you sound like a grade schooler. Good luck in your search for a barefoot friendly place, but a lot of it has to do with a positive attitude. bye