Yikes! Vibram in Hot Water April 11 2012
A few weeks ago reports surfaced that Vibram, the company that sells the FiverFinger footwear and champions minimalist footwear, is facing a federal class action lawsuit in Massachusetts. The plaintiff is arguing that the company has greatly exaggerated the benefits of its products and says there is no proof that running in a pair of FiveFingers will improve posture, promote spine alignment, strengthen muscles, or reduce injury.
So, what do you guys think? Any barefoot/minimalist footwear runners out there who would care to come to Vibram's defense? Anyone side with the plaintiff? Though I definitely bust out my running shoes for longer runs and haven't quite made the transition to 100% barefoot or minimal footwear running, I've been integrating short barefoot runs on grass, tracks, and beaches for years and have found it to be pleasant...perhaps even beneficial. Or, at least, I think it's beneficial. I don't really know. All I know is that I've been running since the age of 13 and (knock on wood) have never had any serious running related injuries. And that's the crux of the argument isn't it? We don't really know.
There are plenty of people who will testify that barefoot running has been an integral part of warding off or eliminating nagging and painful running-related injuries like Plantar fasciitis, but on the other hand, there isn't any real scientific evidence to back up the claims that barefoot running is better for the body or that it prevents injuries. Vibram saw a niche and went for it (clearly there are a lot of people out there who find that running in minimalist footwear works for them and appreciate having the FiveFinger option), but perhaps they got a little overzealous in trying to promote the benefits of their product without any heavyweight scientific data to back them up?
The plaintiff in this case, a woman from Florida, is arguing that running in Vibram's footwear may increase injury as compared with running in conventional shoes or barefoot. The lawsuit accuses Vibram of propagating a "false and misleading advertising campaign" that has allowed them to "reap millions of dollars of profit at the expense of the consumers they have misled."
It will be interesting to see how this plays out although, I have to ask, was it really necessary to take the barefoot running debate to court? What do you think? Legitimate lawsuit or another case of the McDonald's coffee was too hot?
With all the technology available in the modern world, it can be hard to believe that there are still places without consistent access to electricity. But fewer than 25 percent of residents of rural African villages have power. For students, that means that sitting in a dark classroom without air conditioning, or under a tree, is the norm. Fortunately, that could change thanks to the debut of a solar-powered mobile school last week in Johannesburg.
The "school" is actually a 40-foot-long shipping container, which means it can be transported anywhere on the continent on a flatbed truck. Designed by Samsung as part of the company's social innovation efforts, the school comes fitted with foldaway solar panels that provide enough power to run the school's ventilation system, laptops, 3G wireless routers, electronic blackboard and mini-fridge for nearly two rain-soaked days.
After the traditional school day ends, the schools will be used as adult education classrooms and community centers so that entire villages can have access to education and the internet. The pilot solar school is currently being tested to ensure that it's a functional learning and teaching environment. If all goes well, the units will be mass-produced, transforming the educational opportunities of countless kids and their families.
The Once and Future Way to Run November 03 2011
Check out this great article from barefoot champion Christopher McDougall (Born to Run). Visit NYT to see a video of Chris teaching the staff at NYT how to run.
When you’re stalking barefoot runners, camouflage helps. “Some of them get kind of prancy when they notice you filming,” Peter Larson says. “They put on this notion of what they think barefoot running should be. It looks weird.” Larson, an evolutionary biologist at Saint Anselm College in New Hampshire who has been on the barefoot beat for two years now, is also a stickler about his timing. “You don’t want to catch them too early in a run, when they’re cold, or too late, when they’re tired.”
If everything comes together just right, you’ll be exactly where Larson was one Sunday morning in September: peeking out from behind a tree on Governors Island in New York Harbor, his digital video camera nearly invisible on an ankle-high tripod, as the Second Annual New York City Barefoot Run got under way about a quarter-mile up the road. Hundreds of runners — men and women, young and old, athletic and not so much so, natives from 11 different countries — came pattering down the asphalt straight toward his viewfinder.
About half of them were actually barefoot. The rest wore Vibram FiveFingers — a rubber foot glove with no heel cushion or arch support — or Spartacus-style sandals, or other superlight “minimalist” running shoes. Larson surreptitiously recorded them all, wondering how many (if any) had what he was looking for: the lost secret of perfect running.
It’s what Alberto Salazar, for a while the world’s dominant marathoner and now the coach of some of America’s top distance runners, describes in mythical-questing terms as the “one best way” — not the fastest, necessarily, but thebest: an injury-proof, evolution-tested way to place one foot on the ground and pick it up before the other comes down. Left, right, repeat; that’s all running really is, a movement so natural that babies learn it the first time they rise to their feet. Yet sometime between childhood and adulthood — and between the dawn of our species and today — most of us lose the knack.
We were once the greatest endurance runners on earth. We didn’t have fangs, claws, strength or speed, but the springiness of our legs and our unrivaled ability to cool our bodies by sweating rather than panting enabled humans to chase prey until it dropped from heat exhaustion. Some speculate that collaboration on such hunts led to language, then shared technology. Running arguably made us the masters of the world.
So how did one of our greatest strengths become such a liability? “The data suggests up to 79 percent of all runners are injured every year,” says Stephen Messier, the director of the J. B. Snow Biomechanics Laboratory at Wake Forest University. “What’s more, those figures have been consistent since the 1970s.” Messier is currently 11 months into a study for the U.S. Army and estimates that 40 percent of his 200 subjects will be hurt within a year. “It’s become a serious public health crisis.”
Nothing seems able to check it: not cross-training, not stretching, not $400 custom-molded orthotics, not even softer surfaces. And those special running shoes everyone thinks he needs? In 40 years, no study has ever shown that they do anything to reduce injuries. On the contrary, the U.S. Army’s Public Health Command concluded in a report in 2010, drawing on three large-scale studies of thousands of military personnel, that using shoes tailored to individual foot shapes had “little influence on injuries.”
Two years ago, in my book, “Born to Run,” I suggested we don’t need smarter shoes; we need smarter feet. I’d gone into Mexico’s Copper Canyon to learn from the Tarahumara Indians, who tackle 100-mile races well into their geriatric years. I was a broken-down, middle-aged, ex-runner when I arrived. Nine months later, I was transformed. After getting rid of my cushioned shoes and adopting the Tarahumaras’ whisper-soft stride, I was able to join them for a 50-mile race through the canyons. I haven’t lost a day of running to injury since.
“Barefoot-style” shoes are now a $1.7 billion industry. But simply putting something different on your feet doesn’t make you a gliding Tarahumara. The “one best way” isn’t about footwear. It’s about form. Learn to run gently, and you can wear anything. Fail to do so, and no shoe — or lack of shoe — will make a difference.
Full Article and Video LINK
Nestle sees no point in fighting child labor May 11 2011
For those of us little guys out there fighting gallantly to save the world, it’s just gut-wrenching to see a major player step forward and say, “Meh…it’s not our problem.”
So what do we do about Nestle? The packaged foods conglomerate whose last great idea was peddling litter-in-waiting and its accompanying junk food up the Amazon in a barge, is now suggesting that it has no reason to be concerned about child labor.
In a report yesterday, Nestle chairman Peter Brabeck-Letmathe stated that it is “nearly impossible” to eradicate child labor, arguing that in his (and Nestle’s) native Switzerland, “schools have one week holiday so students can help in the wine harvesting.”
Wait. He didn’t just say that.
Yes. Indeed. Nestle’s chairman likened the worldwide child labor crisis to the children of posh European wine estate owners who help their families with the annual grape haul.
Now, we ourselves have noted what a daunting task this fight is, and it may very well be “nearly impossible.” But to cite the thousands of children worldwide who help family-run businesses and agribusinesses in a healthy way, and use it as an argument that fighting slavery and indentured servitude is futile, that’s just obscene. Especially from one of the largest players in the chocolate industry. I wonder if there’s any child labor in cocoa beans?
Brabeck-Letmathe goes further to say, “anybody who does philanthropy, should do it with his own money and not the money of the shareholders.” This man runs a major company.
OMG. Oh. Emm. Gee.