Connect with us

Health

Can the design of a running shoe help prevent injury? A B.C. researcher says he has the answer

Editor

Published

on

[ad_1]

This is an excerpt from Second Opinion, a weekly roundup of eclectic and under-the-radar health and medical science news emailed to subscribers every Saturday morning. If you haven’t subscribed yet, you can do that by clicking here.

Challenging the scientific evidence behind running shoes is not for the faint of heart.

“People have very religious beliefs about this. It’s crazy,” said Chris Napier, a physiotherapist at the University of British Columbia.

Still, Napier dared to kick that hornet’s nest by writing a recent commentary in the British Journal of Sports Medicine suggesting that running shoe design makes no difference when it comes to preventing injuries.

His conclusion was blunt.

“Runners should be instructed to choose a certain type of running shoe over another shoe no more so than a blue shoe over a red shoe,” he wrote.

Some experts say comfort is the most important consideration when shopping for a new pair of running shoes. (Shutterstock/PEPPERSMINT)

Sports science writer Alex Hutchinson added fuel to the running shoe debate this week with a column in the Globe and Mail with the headline: “The myth of the running shoe.”

Hutchinson ranks the running shoe controversy high on the list of fitness flashpoints, right up there with the debates about the benefits of stretching and the low-carb, high-fat diet.

“It’s something people feel strongly about,” he said.

Controversy began with barefoot running theory

Hutchinson traces the shoe controversy back to what he calls “the great minimalism debates of 2009.”

That’s when a book called Born to Run shook the running world with the theory that running barefoot is better. Suddenly, the running world was divided into polarized camps.

“Barefoot running is the idea that we’re born to run without shoes and that’s the way our feet move best,” Hutchinson said.

Until then, the running shoe market had been dominated by the highly structured shoes that were developed in the 1970s after an Oregon trainer named Bill Bowerman famously pressed rubber with a waffle iron to create the original waffle-soled running shoe.

What we see is that there’s really no high-level evidence that any running shoe design can prevent injuries.– Chris Napier, UBC physiotherapist

The idea behind those early high-tech shoes was to control the way the foot rolls inward as it takes a step, called “pronation.” The shoes were also intended to reduce the force of impact and therefore reduce injury.

But then the barefoot craze took off, with a series of shoes — some of them looking like a glove for the foot  — designed to mimic barefoot running but still protect the foot from a harsh urban terrain and northern climate.

“A lot of people got caught up in that,” Napier said. 

As the minimalist shoe craze settled down, a new trend quickly emerged — the maximalist shoe designed with extreme cushioning. 

Lack of evidence

And through it all, runners are getting conflicting advice.

“We were growing concerned [about] some of the claims that were being made on social media and in research circles, being made by health professionals especially, and researchers, that certain running shoes could prevent injuries,” Napier said.

So Napier and co-author Richard Willy from the University of Montana reviewed the highest-quality research featuring randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews.

“What we see is that there’s really no high-level evidence that any running shoe design can prevent injuries,” Napier said.

Sports science writer Alex Hutchinson traces the running shoe controversy to the barefoot running craze that began in 2009. (Stefan Wermuth/Reuters)

None of this comes as a surprise to University of Calgary kinesiology professor Benno Nigg, a prominent biomechanics researcher.

“What you have at the moment is a lot of religion and dogma and beliefs and very little facts,” he said.

“The development of running shoe technologies aimed at reducing impact forces and pronation has not led to a decline of running-related injuries,” he wrote in a paper published last year.

He says there are a variety of biomechanical factors associated with those injuries that are not well understood. And the type of shoe is not a significant variable.

He suspects the high number of running injuries has more to do with the exercise habits of runners than the quality or design of their shoes. 

“The reasons are … too much mileage, or not enough recovery or those types of things,” he said.

One study reported that in a single year about 50 per cent of all runners will suffer knee injuries, or other running-related problems including plantar fasciitis, Achilles tendinopathy and stress fractures of the foot and the tibia.

Experts choose comfort over design

So what do the experts recommend for runners facing a dizzying variety of highly engineered footwear? Choose comfort. 

Nigg’s research suggests comfort might even play a role in preventing injury.

One of his studies compared a group of soldiers who used an insole versus soldiers who wore regular military-issue boots with no added insole. The results showed fewer injuries in the group that wore the comfort-enhancing insole.

“It’s not running, it’s military activity, but it’s a good indicator,” he said.

Napier agrees that comfort is a good guide.

“My advice is fairly simple. I tell people that comfort is probably the most important thing. A comfortable shoe is something you will get out and run in.”

Hutchinson, who in addition to being a sports science writer is a former member of Canada’s national running team, says he has two simple questions when shopping for running shoes: 

“Is it comfortable and is it on sale? That’s how I choose my shoes.”

[ad_2]

Source link

قالب وردپرس

Health

Bill Gates: Third Shot May Be Needed to Combat Coronavirus Variants

Editor

Published

on

By

With more than 40 million Americans having received at least the first dose of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, a third dose may be needed to prevent the spread of new variants of the disease, Bill Gates told CBS News Tuesday.

Gates’ comments come amid growing concern that the current vaccines are not effective against the more contagious Brazilian and South African variants.

Pfizer and Moderna have stated that their vaccines are 95% and 99% effective, respectively, against the initial strain of COVID. However, some scientists have questioned those statements. Additionally, the World Health Organization and vaccine companies have conceded that the vaccines do not prevent people from being infected with COVID or from transmitting it, but are only effective at reducing symptoms.

Gates told CBS Evening News:

“The discussion now is do we just need to get a super high coverage of the current vaccine, or do we need a third dose that’s just the same, or do we need a modified vaccine?”

U.S. vaccine companies are looking at making modifications, which Gates refers to as “tuning.”

People who have had two shots may need to get a third shot and people who have not yet been vaccinated would need the modified vaccine, explained Gates. When asked whether the coronavirus vaccine would be similar to the flu vaccine, which requires yearly boosters, Gates couldn’t rule that out. Until the virus is eradicated from all humans, Gates said, additional shots may be needed in the future.

AstraZeneca in particular has a challenge with the variant,” Gates explained. “And the other two, Johnson & Johnson and Novavax, are slightly less effective, but still effective enough that we absolutely should get them out as fast as we can while we study this idea of tuning the vaccine.”

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is funding the studies being conducted in Brazil and South Africa, CBS News said. The foundation has also invested in the AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson and the Novavax vaccines, which are being tested against new variants. Once the AstraZeneca vaccine is approved, the Global Alliance for Vaccine Initiative or GAVI, founded by Gates, will distribute it globally.

“Gates continues to move the goalposts,” said Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman and chief legal counsel of Children’s Health Defense. “Meanwhile the strategies he and others have promoted are obliterating the global economy, demolishing the middle class, making the rich richer and censoring vaccine safety advocates, like me.”

Kennedy said that the exclusive focus on vaccines has prevented the kind of progress required to actually address and recover from the pandemic:

“From the pandemic’s outset, clear-headed people familiar with the challenges inherent in the vaccine model have understood that the path out of crisis would require multiple steps. Those steps would need to include the development and/or identification of therapeutic drugs, the sharing of information among doctors to hone improved treatment models that reduce infection mortality rates below those for flu, and the kind of broad-spectrum long-term herd immunity that protects against mutant strains and that only derives from natural infection.”

Instead, Gates and vaccine makers are proposing a lifetime of boosters, supporting insufficient testing to determine safety and failing to address the inadequate monitoring of vaccine injuries, Kennedy said.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.

Continue Reading

Health

Young nurse suffers from hemorrhage and brain swelling after second dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine

Editor

Published

on

By

(Natural News) A 28-year-old healthcare worker from the Swedish American Hospital, in Beloit, Wisconsin was recently admitted to the ICU just five days after receiving a second dose of Pfizer’s experimental mRNA vaccine. The previously healthy young woman was pronounced brain dead after cerebral angiography confirmed a severe hemorrhage stroke in her brain stem.

Her family members confirmed that she was “breaking out in rashes” after the vaccine. She also suffered from sudden migraine headaches, and got “sick” after taking the second dose of the vaccine. At the very end, she lost the ability to speak and went unconscious. The migraines, nausea, and loss of speech were all symptoms of a brain bleed and brain swelling, something her family did not understand at the time, and something nobody would expect after vaccination.

While on life support, neurologists used angiography to image the damage inside the brain. They found a subarachnoid hemorrhage, whereas a bulging blood vessel burst in the brain, bleeding out in the space between the brain and the tissue covering the brain. The ensuing swelling cut off oxygen to the brain and caused brain death. On February 10, 2021, Sarah reportedly had “no brain activity.” Some of the woman’s organs are now being procured, so they can be donated to other people around the world.

Doctors warn FDA about COVID vaccines causing autoimmune attacks in the heart and brain

Experimental COVID-19 vaccines may cause inflammation along the cardiovascular system, leading to heart attack and/or stroke. This serious issue was brought forth to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) by Dr. J. Patrick Whelan, M.D., Ph.D. and further confirmed by cardiothoracic surgeon, Dr. Hooman Noorchashm, M.D., Ph.D. The two doctors warned that a recently-infected patient who is subject to COVID-19 vaccination is likely to suffer from autoimmune attacks along the ACE-2 receptors present in the heart, and in the microvasculature of the brain, liver and kidney. If viral antigens are present in the tissues of recipients at the time of vaccination, the vaccine-augmented immune response will turn the immune system against those tissues, causing inflammation that can lead to blood clot formation.

This severe adverse event is likely cause of death for the elderly who are vaccinated despite recently being infected. There is no adequate screening process to ensure that this autoimmune attack doesn’t occur. The elderly are not the only people vulnerable to vaccine injury and death. Pfizer’s experimental COVID-19 vaccine could be the main cause behind the sudden death of Sarah Sickles, a 28-year-old nurse from Wisconsin. The Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System has captured five permanent disabilities in Wisconsin, 58 ER visits, and eleven deaths in just one month. This is the first case in Wisconsin of someone under 44 years of age suffering from severe COVID-19 vaccine side effects and death. There are now more than 1,170 deaths recorded in the U.S. related to the experimental mRNA vaccines, a reality that the FDA and CDC continue to ignore.

Continue Reading

Health

Powering hypersonic weapons: US armed forces eyeing dangerous 5G tech

Editor

Published

on

By

(Natural News) Much of the conversation surrounding the benefits of 5G is geared toward the consumer side of the technology. People will be able to download videos at lightning speed and will be more connected than ever, proponents claim, although there are serious questions regarding its safety. However, some of the most important 5G applications are not civil at all – the technology will be used extensively in the military domain.

Some of its military uses are outlined in the Defense Applications of 5G Network Technology report, which was published by the Defense Science Board. This federal committee gives scientific advice to the Pentagon. Their report states: “The emergence of 5G technology, now commercially available, offers the Department of Defense the opportunity to take advantage, at minimal cost, of the benefits of this system for its own operational requirements.”

The 5G commercial network that is being built by private companies right now can be used by the American military for a much lower cost than if the network had been set up exclusively for military purposes.

Military experts expect the 5G system to play a pivotal role in using hypersonic weapons. For example, it can be used for new missiles that bear nuclear warheads and travel at speeds superior to Mach 5. These hypersonic weapons, which travel at five times the speed of sound and move a mile per second, will be flying at high altitudes on unpredictable flight paths, making them as hard to guide as they will be to intercept.

Huge quantities of data need to be gathered and transmitted in a very short period in order to maneuver these warheads on variable trajectories and allow them to change direction in milliseconds to avoid interceptor missiles.

5G for defense

This type of technology is also needed to activate defenses should we be attacked by a weapon of this type; 5G automatic systems could theoretically handle decisions that humans won’t have enough time to make on their own. Military bases and even cities will have less than a minute to react to incoming hypersonic missiles, and 5G will make it easier to process real time data on trajectories for decision-making.

There are also important uses of this technology in combat. 5G’s ability to simultaneously link millions of transceivers will undoubtedly facilitate communication among military personnel and allow them to transmit photos, maps and other vital information about operations in progress at dizzying speeds to improve situational awareness.

The military can also take advantage of the high-frequency and short-wavelength millimeter wave spectrum used by 5G. Its short range means that it is well suited for smart military bases and command posts because the signal will not propagate too far, making it less likely that enemies will be able to detect it.

When it comes to special forces and secret services, the benefits of 5G are numerous. Its speed and connectivity will allow espionage systems to reach unprecedented levels of efficiency. It will also make drones more dangerous by allowing them to identify and target people using facial recognition and other methods.

Like all technology, 5G will also make us highly vulnerable. The network itself could become an attractive target for cyber-attacks and other acts of war being carried out with cutting-edge weaponry. In fact, the 5G network is already viewed as critical infrastructure and is being carefully protected before it is even fully built.

While the focus on 5G’s dangers to human health and the environment is absolutely warranted, it is also important not to lose sight of the military implications of 5G. After all, it is not just the United States that is developing this technology for military purposes; our enemies, like China and other countries, are also making great strides in this realm.

Continue Reading

Chat

Trending