Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Patrick Moore]

And a very good one; great fun. "Penticleat." That sounds a whole lot more
real-life than so many "real life" corporate names I come across, which
sound like very bad satire. "Cydifex" the new antibiotic.

Personally, I think the world needs an April Fools for each month of the
year.

On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 10:35 AM, Garth  wrote:

> It was an April fools joke !
>
>
> On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 12:15:09 PM UTC-5, Lee Legrand wrote:
>>
>> I am opening this discussion back up.  Well, I get cycling stuff sent to
>> me thru pinterest and there is a minimalist cycling shoe that appeared in
>> 2014 offered by Shimano.  I do not know if they still have it but I figure
>> I will at least link it hear for all to read.  I still do not know if it
>> adds anything to cycling performance or foot health.  I have not read the
>> article but if the discussion pops up, I will make sure to read before
>> responding.
>>
>> https://gearjunkie.com/shimano-vibram-bike-shoe
>>
>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>



-- 
Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews.
By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.
Other professional writing services.
http://www.resumespecialties.com/
www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmooreresumespec/
Patrick Moore
Alburquerque, New Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique
**
**
*Auditis an me ludit amabilis insania?*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Garth]

All we can do is smile with it all Lee  , as it rolls on by like a cloud in 
sky . and poof  there it isn't ! 


On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 12:43:05 PM UTC-5, Lee Legrand wrote:
>
> Ha, it was a April Fool Joke.  Boy do I feel like a knuckle head now. LOL
>
> On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Lee Legrand  > wrote:
>
>> Really?
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:35 PM, Garth  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> It was an April fools joke ! 
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 12:15:09 PM UTC-5, Lee Legrand wrote:

 I am opening this discussion back up.  Well, I get cycling stuff sent 
 to me thru pinterest and there is a minimalist cycling shoe that appeared 
 in 2014 offered by Shimano.  I do not know if they still have it but I 
 figure I will at least link it hear for all to read.  I still do not know 
 if it adds anything to cycling performance or foot health.  I have not 
 read 
 the article but if the discussion pops up, I will make sure to read before 
 responding.

 https://gearjunkie.com/shimano-vibram-bike-shoe

 -- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>> Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
>>> an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com .
>>> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com 
>>> .
>>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>
>>
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[lum gim fong]

I like my Lems 925 shoes but haven't ridden with them yet. Crazy cold in MD 
right now keeps me off-bike. Too cold for me. I don't know how Patrick does in 
in Colorado. Maybe Colorado 15 and Maryland 15 ain't the same.

But I have always been a spring/summer weather lover. 

Anyway, I hope the Lems will be good for riding. Hopefully back up in the 40's 
soon so I can ride again.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Lee Legrand]

Ha, it was a April Fool Joke.  Boy do I feel like a knuckle head now. LOL

On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Lee Legrand  wrote:

> Really?
>
> On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:35 PM, Garth  wrote:
>
>> It was an April fools joke !
>>
>>
>> On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 12:15:09 PM UTC-5, Lee Legrand wrote:
>>>
>>> I am opening this discussion back up.  Well, I get cycling stuff sent to
>>> me thru pinterest and there is a minimalist cycling shoe that appeared in
>>> 2014 offered by Shimano.  I do not know if they still have it but I figure
>>> I will at least link it hear for all to read.  I still do not know if it
>>> adds anything to cycling performance or foot health.  I have not read the
>>> article but if the discussion pops up, I will make sure to read before
>>> responding.
>>>
>>> https://gearjunkie.com/shimano-vibram-bike-shoe
>>>
>>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Lee Legrand]

Really?

On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 12:35 PM, Garth  wrote:

> It was an April fools joke !
>
>
> On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 12:15:09 PM UTC-5, Lee Legrand wrote:
>>
>> I am opening this discussion back up.  Well, I get cycling stuff sent to
>> me thru pinterest and there is a minimalist cycling shoe that appeared in
>> 2014 offered by Shimano.  I do not know if they still have it but I figure
>> I will at least link it hear for all to read.  I still do not know if it
>> adds anything to cycling performance or foot health.  I have not read the
>> article but if the discussion pops up, I will make sure to read before
>> responding.
>>
>> https://gearjunkie.com/shimano-vibram-bike-shoe
>>
>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Garth]

It was an April fools joke ! 


On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 12:15:09 PM UTC-5, Lee Legrand wrote:
>
> I am opening this discussion back up.  Well, I get cycling stuff sent to 
> me thru pinterest and there is a minimalist cycling shoe that appeared in 
> 2014 offered by Shimano.  I do not know if they still have it but I figure 
> I will at least link it hear for all to read.  I still do not know if it 
> adds anything to cycling performance or foot health.  I have not read the 
> article but if the discussion pops up, I will make sure to read before 
> responding.
>
> https://gearjunkie.com/shimano-vibram-bike-shoe
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Lee Legrand]

I am opening this discussion back up.  Well, I get cycling stuff sent to me
thru pinterest and there is a minimalist cycling shoe that appeared in 2014
offered by Shimano.  I do not know if they still have it but I figure I
will at least link it hear for all to read.  I still do not know if it adds
anything to cycling performance or foot health.  I have not read the
article but if the discussion pops up, I will make sure to read before
responding.

https://gearjunkie.com/shimano-vibram-bike-shoe



On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Deacon Patrick  wrote:

> Peter,
>
> A raised heel changes the gait, be it running or walking, causing greater
> wear and impact on the heel (as well as altering biomechanics). The
> “solution” you say the heel is actually created the problem. WIth the
> excepetion of leather soled moccasins, the uppers on my footwear fall apart
> now, long before the soles are done, and my moccasins wear out under the
> big toe metatarcal and almost equally across the forefoot, not the heel at
> all. Bottom line, walking barefoot or in minimalist shoes with
> biomechanically correct gait is much easier on footwear and feet.
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Deacon Patrick]

Peter,

A raised heel changes the gait, be it running or walking, causing greater wear 
and impact on the heel (as well as altering biomechanics). The “solution” you 
say the heel is actually created the problem. WIth the excepetion of leather 
soled moccasins, the uppers on my footwear fall apart now, long before the 
soles are done, and my moccasins wear out under the big toe metatarcal and 
almost equally across the forefoot, not the heel at all. Bottom line, walking 
barefoot or in minimalist shoes with biomechanically correct gait is much 
easier on footwear and feet.

With abandon,
Patrick

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Lee Legrand]

Hi Patrick,

I do not have an answer to why high heel may be worse or better and would
be open just like you to the evidence.  Also, I think the evidence is there
but you may not be aware of it. Rarely do I see anyone mentioning anything
other than the typical raised heel or giving a shoe in the market that as a
alternative.  They do not have to say it but merely offer you what the
market will  allow or take by offering you the only the choice to make. As
I mentioned in the previous post, if public transportation is a better
solution than people driving car or bicycling is better for your health and
the health of the city you live in, why do people in mast not go in that
direction?  Do you hear anything about that in your area about how public
transportation is better than having a car in already crowded cities?  I am
on the east coast and almost never hear anything about it and cities are
getting over crowded,especially in my state.  So they do not have to say
anything explicitly towards you but frame discussion or omit alternative
completely from the discussion.  In that, you are locked in to a frame of
looking at the world.


On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 11:29 AM, Patrick Moore  wrote:

> Lee: For my mind, at any rate, the question about the benefits or
> detriments of heels remains open; I just haven't heard sufficiently good
> evidence either way and, again, the argument "all the others are doing it
> wrong" seems to me to be a dangerously 2-edged sword.
>
> Respectfully, I don't yet see sufficient evidence that people wear
> conventional shoes merely because marketing has them bamboozled, or because
> society has refused them alternatives. I am very open to hearing more about
> the health benefits of no shoes, or no heels, but you all need to give more
> information than "*this *worked for me" and "*that* happens only because
> marketers or powers-that-be make it happen" -- ie, personal experience on
> the one hand, and conjecture on the other. Again, I am very open to hearing
> more and clearer evidence about pros and cons of heels and no heels, and
> for that matter, shoes and no shoes, but I haven't yet seen it. Indeed, I
> am if anything biased toward no heels since Romans and Indians and Chinese
> and Maya and Zulu all thrived without European type shoes; but then they
> don't live in Germany or Zurich or damp England, either. (Cetschwayo's
> impis could cover 50 miles in a day over rough bush terrain while barefoot.)
>
> One more anecdote: I recall as a boy recently moved to India, remarking at
> the high arches of laborers who of course went barefoot on asphalt as they
> did their daily work pushing and carrying and hewing and drawing. No shoes
> didn't seem to hurt them. But then, I've known very old people whose feet
> didn't hurt after 8 decades of modern shoes.
>
> BTW, Lee, it's apparent to me that societies don't "progress" in a
> unilateral way; they progress in certain ways and regress on others; it's
> aways a combination.
>
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:53 AM, Lee Legrand  wrote:
>
>> Hi Patrick,
>>
>> I would not use the word stupid since a society is not always progressing
>> but can remain stagnant because of cultural conditioning and society tend
>> to change slowly or resist change.  Anyway, it may be due to wear but I am
>> not aware of the reason why shoes have heels and it may be true what Peter
>> has said.  I always thought it was a fashion thing. Sometimes things do not
>> change due to market forces which see that expensive of retooling or
>> research to get into profits.  Availability of having a shoe or choices of
>> shoes are very limited as well since living in a society does not mean we
>> really have choices.  For example, it may be to have better public
>> transportation in society to reduce air pollution but the only choice we
>> have in some circumstances is to just get a car and these choices are
>> driven by markets since it is more advantages (if you are a business man
>> that relies on people having them and you are selling them) than to go
>> toward other ways of traveling like using bikes or public transportation
>> such as buses and trains.  We see this played out in society in all kinds
>> of ways to drive out ideas because they are bad but bad means bad for
>> business.  Also, would not a thicker sole help with the wear?  It may be my
>> foot but I rarely buy new shoes because the sole has worn down but because
>> they are completely worn.  Just saying.
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Patrick Moore 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Heels may well add nothing to foot health, but apparently they don't
>>> hurt, to judge by the 80 and 90 year olds I've known who wore heeled shoes
>>> and remained ambulatory until very near death without any foot complaints!
>>>
>>> I'm still open to the answer; it's obvious that millennia of people got
>>> by without heels. I just don't believe that centuries of societies are 

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Garth]

Peter, having a durable heel assumes you are walking in a heel first manner, 
but it is not the only way. It also implies the heel is separate from the rest 
of the shoe, and the heel is the landing surface.

 In bare feet, I for one find landing on the heels first feels not only 
awkward, but often painful when outdoors if landing on stones . Landing 
fore-mid foot is a completely different posture, there is natural spring in the 
step and feel that is totally different from landing heel first. When you land 
on a stone you naturally bend at the knees and "move with it" and continue on 
with a soft step. Heel walking is a hard step, jarring. Place your hands over 
your ears, now walk forward heel first, and you will hear the thumping. Do the 
same landing on the forefoot, and you hear no thump. No jarring forces, which 
heel walking accentuates by concentrating the force of landing there and up the 
body. 

The footwear we are speaking of all have one whole layer of rubber on the 
bottom, and yes, few if anyone offers replacement soles for them for numerous 
reasons, among them the models are always changing and labor cost. 




Lum , in regard to minimalist shoes, again, the toe box shape and width is not 
what "minimal" is referring to. Not all zero drop wide toe box and width shoes 
are considered "minimalist", look at Altra shoes, most models are quite thick, 
25mm and more stack height. They have the shape you are looking for but are 
quite thick compared to a 10mm or less shoes. The more padding you have the 
more clunky they feel, regardless of where you land.  

Same with Birkenstocks, great anatomic shape, but thick and stiff as a board 
with obtrusive arches. 

This discussion is confusing the whole minimal idea. Crocs for example, never 
were and and are not minimal in any way. The shape of the footbed has nothing 
to do with "minimal". Birkenstocks, not minimal.

You can still have a minimal shoe with a not so anatomic shape. The bottom line 
is you have to take each shoe for what is is on it's own merits. 

--


And again, health refers to the whole body and being  it's not limited to or by 
any body part regardless of all the medical jargon used !  Heels or nor heel, 
both work fine for people. To claim one is right and another wrong is a stance 
taken only to rationalize what you wear. Okay, so what. As Patrick Moore 
stated, and the article I linked to, people have worn heels for a long time 
... and they have not for a lng time. Both exist and both work , variety 
works. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Patrick Moore]

Lee: For my mind, at any rate, the question about the benefits or
detriments of heels remains open; I just haven't heard sufficiently good
evidence either way and, again, the argument "all the others are doing it
wrong" seems to me to be a dangerously 2-edged sword.

Respectfully, I don't yet see sufficient evidence that people wear
conventional shoes merely because marketing has them bamboozled, or because
society has refused them alternatives. I am very open to hearing more about
the health benefits of no shoes, or no heels, but you all need to give more
information than "*this *worked for me" and "*that* happens only because
marketers or powers-that-be make it happen" -- ie, personal experience on
the one hand, and conjecture on the other. Again, I am very open to hearing
more and clearer evidence about pros and cons of heels and no heels, and
for that matter, shoes and no shoes, but I haven't yet seen it. Indeed, I
am if anything biased toward no heels since Romans and Indians and Chinese
and Maya and Zulu all thrived without European type shoes; but then they
don't live in Germany or Zurich or damp England, either. (Cetschwayo's
impis could cover 50 miles in a day over rough bush terrain while barefoot.)

One more anecdote: I recall as a boy recently moved to India, remarking at
the high arches of laborers who of course went barefoot on asphalt as they
did their daily work pushing and carrying and hewing and drawing. No shoes
didn't seem to hurt them. But then, I've known very old people whose feet
didn't hurt after 8 decades of modern shoes.

BTW, Lee, it's apparent to me that societies don't "progress" in a
unilateral way; they progress in certain ways and regress on others; it's
aways a combination.

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:53 AM, Lee Legrand  wrote:

> Hi Patrick,
>
> I would not use the word stupid since a society is not always progressing
> but can remain stagnant because of cultural conditioning and society tend
> to change slowly or resist change.  Anyway, it may be due to wear but I am
> not aware of the reason why shoes have heels and it may be true what Peter
> has said.  I always thought it was a fashion thing. Sometimes things do not
> change due to market forces which see that expensive of retooling or
> research to get into profits.  Availability of having a shoe or choices of
> shoes are very limited as well since living in a society does not mean we
> really have choices.  For example, it may be to have better public
> transportation in society to reduce air pollution but the only choice we
> have in some circumstances is to just get a car and these choices are
> driven by markets since it is more advantages (if you are a business man
> that relies on people having them and you are selling them) than to go
> toward other ways of traveling like using bikes or public transportation
> such as buses and trains.  We see this played out in society in all kinds
> of ways to drive out ideas because they are bad but bad means bad for
> business.  Also, would not a thicker sole help with the wear?  It may be my
> foot but I rarely buy new shoes because the sole has worn down but because
> they are completely worn.  Just saying.
>
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Patrick Moore 
> wrote:
>
>> Heels may well add nothing to foot health, but apparently they don't
>> hurt, to judge by the 80 and 90 year olds I've known who wore heeled shoes
>> and remained ambulatory until very near death without any foot complaints!
>>
>> I'm still open to the answer; it's obvious that millennia of people got
>> by without heels. I just don't believe that centuries of societies are as
>> stupid as they've been made out to be, if heels were merely fashion or
>> cluelessness. One could turn the question around and ask why minimalist
>> shoes, as those "earth shoes" and other designs, seem to come up every
>> decade or 2 and then disappear?
>>
>> What happened to Crocks, by the way?
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:11 AM, Lee Legrand  wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Peter,
>>>
>>> It may last longer but what does this say about foot health?  I think
>>> that is central to the minimalist shoe idea and to this post.  Not how
>>> shoes last longer but is a raise heel better for your feet?
>>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to 

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Lee Legrand]

Hi Patrick,

I would not use the word stupid since a society is not always progressing
but can remain stagnant because of cultural conditioning and society tend
to change slowly or resist change.  Anyway, it may be due to wear but I am
not aware of the reason why shoes have heels and it may be true what Peter
has said.  I always thought it was a fashion thing. Sometimes things do not
change due to market forces which see that expensive of retooling or
research to get into profits.  Availability of having a shoe or choices of
shoes are very limited as well since living in a society does not mean we
really have choices.  For example, it may be to have better public
transportation in society to reduce air pollution but the only choice we
have in some circumstances is to just get a car and these choices are
driven by markets since it is more advantages (if you are a business man
that relies on people having them and you are selling them) than to go
toward other ways of traveling like using bikes or public transportation
such as buses and trains.  We see this played out in society in all kinds
of ways to drive out ideas because they are bad but bad means bad for
business.  Also, would not a thicker sole help with the wear?  It may be my
foot but I rarely buy new shoes because the sole has worn down but because
they are completely worn.  Just saying.

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Patrick Moore  wrote:

> Heels may well add nothing to foot health, but apparently they don't hurt,
> to judge by the 80 and 90 year olds I've known who wore heeled shoes and
> remained ambulatory until very near death without any foot complaints!
>
> I'm still open to the answer; it's obvious that millennia of people got by
> without heels. I just don't believe that centuries of societies are as
> stupid as they've been made out to be, if heels were merely fashion or
> cluelessness. One could turn the question around and ask why minimalist
> shoes, as those "earth shoes" and other designs, seem to come up every
> decade or 2 and then disappear?
>
> What happened to Crocks, by the way?
>
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:11 AM, Lee Legrand  wrote:
>
>> Hey Peter,
>>
>> It may last longer but what does this say about foot health?  I think
>> that is central to the minimalist shoe idea and to this post.  Not how
>> shoes last longer but is a raise heel better for your feet?
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Patrick Moore]

Heels may well add nothing to foot health, but apparently they don't hurt,
to judge by the 80 and 90 year olds I've known who wore heeled shoes and
remained ambulatory until very near death without any foot complaints!

I'm still open to the answer; it's obvious that millennia of people got by
without heels. I just don't believe that centuries of societies are as
stupid as they've been made out to be, if heels were merely fashion or
cluelessness. One could turn the question around and ask why minimalist
shoes, as those "earth shoes" and other designs, seem to come up every
decade or 2 and then disappear?

What happened to Crocks, by the way?

On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 8:11 AM, Lee Legrand  wrote:

> Hey Peter,
>
> It may last longer but what does this say about foot health?  I think that
> is central to the minimalist shoe idea and to this post.  Not how shoes
> last longer but is a raise heel better for your feet?
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Patrick Moore]

Peter: That is one difference between European, at least Swiss, attitudes,
and American ones: Here, it's alost cheaper to buy a new shoe, and
certainly easier, than to find a competent cobbler who replace soles and
heels. In fact, most shoes up to the middle price ranges nowadays aren't
even constructed so as to allow easy replacement, with hard rubber molded
one piece heels and soles. (But cowboy boots, very common street wear in
the US Southwest, always have separate leather soles and heels.)

Here in ABQ, NM -- which, granted is (1) far more spread out and (2) less
wealthy than east coast cities, where cobblers may be more common, I've
seen the few easily accessible cobblers slowly close shop, so that now, on
our burgeoning Westside, you have to do extensive Google searches to find
one still working, and then he is a part timer who requires appointments --
"my guy" lives in a North Valley "barrio" with his ancient father and has
his shop in cute little Home Depot shed, with electricity and air, parked
in the driveway. But he'll do leather and Vibram soles as well as good
extracurricular leatherwork (patched leather footstool cushion chewed by
dog and added elegant SW riveting, and converted worn pair of boat shoes to
house slippers with double leather bottoms).

Back to heels: I wasn't aware that heels were added for wear, though it
certainly makes sense; (they were also added for stirrups and height --
that royal old pimple Louis XIV had 5" heels, apparently to go with his
full bottom wig). I wonder why heels instead of hobnails -- probably
because the latter are noisy and slippery?

Funny description of vain bankers and their thin heels.

I agree that nothing so common and so long used as shoe heels can be
*merely* fashion or social stupidity.

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 2:19 AM, Peter Turskovitch 
wrote:

> Thick heels last longer. That's what they're for. They exist to allow you
> to walk farther before replacing your shoes. The vast majority of shoes,
> for centuries, have had a little extra material in the places that wear the
> most. That means raised heels. Raised heels mean that your shoes can last
> far longer before replacement. I'm surprised that this isn't common
> knowledge.
>
> Where I live, decent boots have separate heels and fore-foot soles, both
> of which are replaceable. Cobblers often have a display of Vibram-brand
> replacement heels in their windows. Anecdotally, cobblers are about as
> common in Zürich as dry cleaners. Getting your shoes re-heeled is a super
> common thing to do. Bankers here are semi-famous for having low or even
> absent heels on their shoes, ostentatiously displaying their ability to
> replace entire shoes when the sole wears a little.
>
> I understand that this list is mostly American - do you really not replace
> the soles of your shoes in America? How can you people think that heels
> "serve no purpose" despite being a feature of shoes for literal millenia?
> As if any mere fashion could be so stable???
>
> Peter, confused, Zürich
>
>
>
> On Monday, November 20, 2017 at 1:04:43 AM UTC+1, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>>
>> Humans are highly adaptable, and we often adapt to things less than ideal
>> and yet continue to do amazing things along the way. Democracy of the herd
>> buying mostly raised heels doesn’t answer the question: what does a raised
>> heel accomplish?
>>
>> With abandon,
>> Patrick
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>



-- 
Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews.
By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.
Other professional writing services.
http://www.resumespecialties.com/
www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmooreresumespec/
Patrick Moore
Alburquerque, New Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique
**
**
*Auditis an me ludit amabilis insania?*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Lee Legrand]

Hey Peter,

It may last longer but what does this say about foot health?  I think that
is central to the minimalist shoe idea and to this post.  Not how shoes
last longer but is a raise heel better for your feet?

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 4:19 AM, Peter Turskovitch 
wrote:

> Thick heels last longer. That's what they're for. They exist to allow you
> to walk farther before replacing your shoes. The vast majority of shoes,
> for centuries, have had a little extra material in the places that wear the
> most. That means raised heels. Raised heels mean that your shoes can last
> far longer before replacement. I'm surprised that this isn't common
> knowledge.
>
> Where I live, decent boots have separate heels and fore-foot soles, both
> of which are replaceable. Cobblers often have a display of Vibram-brand
> replacement heels in their windows. Anecdotally, cobblers are about as
> common in Zürich as dry cleaners. Getting your shoes re-heeled is a super
> common thing to do. Bankers here are semi-famous for having low or even
> absent heels on their shoes, ostentatiously displaying their ability to
> replace entire shoes when the sole wears a little.
>
> I understand that this list is mostly American - do you really not replace
> the soles of your shoes in America? How can you people think that heels
> "serve no purpose" despite being a feature of shoes for literal millenia?
> As if any mere fashion could be so stable???
>
> Peter, confused, Zürich
>
>
>
>
> On Monday, November 20, 2017 at 1:04:43 AM UTC+1, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>>
>> Humans are highly adaptable, and we often adapt to things less than ideal
>> and yet continue to do amazing things along the way. Democracy of the herd
>> buying mostly raised heels doesn’t answer the question: what does a raised
>> heel accomplish?
>>
>> With abandon,
>> Patrick
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Peter Turskovitch]

Thick heels last longer. That's what they're for. They exist to allow you 
to walk farther before replacing your shoes. The vast majority of shoes, 
for centuries, have had a little extra material in the places that wear the 
most. That means raised heels. Raised heels mean that your shoes can last 
far longer before replacement. I'm surprised that this isn't common 
knowledge. 

Where I live, decent boots have separate heels and fore-foot soles, both of 
which are replaceable. Cobblers often have a display of Vibram-brand 
replacement heels in their windows. Anecdotally, cobblers are about as 
common in Zürich as dry cleaners. Getting your shoes re-heeled is a super 
common thing to do. Bankers here are semi-famous for having low or even 
absent heels on their shoes, ostentatiously displaying their ability to 
replace entire shoes when the sole wears a little. 

I understand that this list is mostly American - do you really not replace 
the soles of your shoes in America? How can you people think that heels 
"serve no purpose" despite being a feature of shoes for literal millenia? 
As if any mere fashion could be so stable???

Peter, confused, Zürich



On Monday, November 20, 2017 at 1:04:43 AM UTC+1, Deacon Patrick wrote:
>
> Humans are highly adaptable, and we often adapt to things less than ideal 
> and yet continue to do amazing things along the way. Democracy of the herd 
> buying mostly raised heels doesn’t answer the question: what does a raised 
> heel accomplish? 
>
> With abandon, 
> Patrick

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Lee Legrand]

Hi Lum,

I see how they are using it from the ad.

It reminds me when I have discussions of people who buy organic chicken.
What is organic chicken?  Its chicken that eats organic food that is mostly
some kind grain but chicken natural diets are not grain and include greens,
seeds, insects and worms. It is a marketing tool that associates organic
with healthy and if you eat organic chicken you are choosing a healthy
chicken and eating healthy which may not be the case since we are feeding
them something closer to cheerios than their natural food.   When I see how
they are using minimal, it is like that in which they are changing the
meaning of the word to sell something which appears to be healthy.  I am
not a podiatrist but I do think there is something to having wider box
shoes and less heel but I also think our ancestors if they walked bare
foots lived in areas where there were minimal hard surfaces for our feet
and they walked and ran on cushy soil which I think would play a part in a
healthy foot.  Minimal has a specific meaning but companies use advertisers
and propagandist to change meaning in order to sell an idea.  The original
meaning of minimal is having less or what is necessary for function but
they are using it to how associate it with low heel shoes with box toe.  It
is not a minimal shoe but a type of shoe and has nothing to do, in my
opinion, with minimal.  We have podiatric shoes available but why are they
not minimal as well? Why isnt a cycling shoe minimal? We can make the case
if I own 3 cycling shoes but if I have 1, I am still living minimal since
no shoe is good at every function (walking in snow, hiking in  woods,
walking, running etc).  It is marketing used to sell an idea and it
probably requires alot more knowledge on our part to validate whether this
choice of shoes is actual great for our feet.  Like, not only would I have
to know podiatrics, but anthropology for the origins of people, their
footwear (if they wore something like shoes) and environment in which they
flourished.  I should be able to trust that my society that produces
products that it is scientifically sound or to the best of its knowledge
that these products will not hurt people since it is impossible to know
everything.

On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 6:56 PM, lum gim fong  wrote:

> @Lee:
>
> Looking into it online, it seems that a minimalist shoe is defined as a
> shoe that is a:
>
> protective and ornamental foot covering that has zero drop (no elevation
> of heel), completely flat (level) support base from heel to toe, wide toe
> box (allowing toes to splay freely and inline with metatarsals), flexible
> sole, and is widest at the ends of the toes, allowing your feet to function
> like a bare foot inside the shoe.
>
> Here is an example of a minimalist shoe vendor:  https://
> naturalfootgear.com/?gclid=Cj0KCQiAl8rQBRDrARIsAEW_To-guXA0skc-
> o85dg8s0BkZK4VXAmed4q7XmedrNUU1XifrSM94_efcaAkcaEALw_wcB
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[nash5510]

Werent heels made for riding in stirrups?  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Deacon Patrick]

Humans are highly adaptable, and we often adapt to things less than ideal and 
yet continue to do amazing things along the way. Democracy of the herd buying 
mostly raised heels doesn’t answer the question: what does a raised heel 
accomplish?

With abandon,
Patrick

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Garth]

People will wear whatever they wish, the more the merrier !  People use the 
idea of "this is how man was" and "this is how man evolved" therefore "this is 
man is supposed to be" only to promote whatever they are trying to sell you, be 
it goods or a way of life. 

These dayze we have the same ol' isms in "new clothing". Like a game of ping 
pong, back and forth . the game of polarities the same ol'good vs. evil 
theme. This is good, that is bad, I'm right and you'e wrong  blah blah 
blah. You can argue 'till the cows come home about "who what where when and 
why" is true, but no one can deny or claim for themselves the absolute fact 
that Truth Itself exists, and any subsequent side-taking is impossibly futile 
because Truth is all there is. 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Patrick Moore]

What if I want to look like a noble orangutang on horseback? Or a hot noble?

Seriously, Patrick, people have walked the length of continents on heels. I
agree that there are extremes of style and that these are probably
injurious, but heels have been around too long to allow me to dismiss them
because a few people say they're bad. After all, the argument from
democracy isn't wholly invalid!

On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 4:30 PM, Deacon Patrick  wrote:

> Ha! Well, if you want to look like nobility on horseback or an orangutang
> in heat, raised heels are the way to go. To my knowledge those are the only
> functional reasons for a raised heel, other than messing up body mechanics.
> Sardonic grin.
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>



-- 
Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews.
By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.
Other professional writing services.
http://www.resumespecialties.com/
www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmooreresumespec/
Patrick Moore
Alburquerque, New Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique
**
**
*Auditis an me ludit amabilis insania?*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Deacon Patrick]

Ha! Well, if you want to look like nobility on horseback or an orangutang in 
heat, raised heels are the way to go. To my knowledge those are the only 
functional reasons for a raised heel, other than messing up body mechanics. 
Sardonic grin.

With abandon,
Patrick

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Patrick Moore]

Well, remember that what works for one will not always work for or be true
for another. My bike shoes feel fine, though I do have narrow feet, and
though I did go through a weeding process to leave behind only the shoes
that are comfortable -- comfortable in that you don't think about them when
you ride; I ride about 30 miles max, of course, but I don't hear Jan or
others complaining about their feet.

And shoes and boots with heels have been around for centuries if not
millennia, so, invoking the principle, *quod ab omnibus et semper et ubique*,
even if referring only to Europeans, indicates that with your typical shoe
you have something that may not be entirely irrational.

And to follow up with another argument, if people can cross continents
comfortably in good boots 

On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Deacon Patrick  wrote:

> Platform pedals and a minimalist shoe that fits. Done. No hacking
> required. But the point that cycling shoes are NOT foot shaped (unless
> you’ve deformed your feet in modern footbinders to make them last-shaped,
> sardonic grin), so if your foot is foot shaped, cycling shoes will fell
> horrible, even in the “right” size.
>
> Before a decent minimalist option came out for winter boots, I hacked the
> heel off some Sorels (far harder to do than I’d have thought). It was
> usable, and I have them as back up if needed, but far, far from ideal.
>
> With abandon,
> Patrick
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>



-- 
Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews.
By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.
Other professional writing services.
http://www.resumespecialties.com/
www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmooreresumespec/
Patrick Moore
Alburquerque, New Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique
**
**
*Auditis an me ludit amabilis insania?*

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Deacon Patrick]

Walking with a healthy gate involves a gentle heel first landing/roll onto a 
fully loaded foot which includes a dynamically moving arch helping support our 
weight as we pass over it to the next step. This does not apply to cycling. 
Running with a healthy gate involves a soft forefoot landing that activates and 
loads the foots windlass mechanism (the arch is part of this), as well as 
loading the springs of our legs, returning that energy through each step. This 
also does not apply to cycling.

Cycling is far more akin to doing squats in terms of how the foot functions: a 
static position pushing down to accomplish work. For the foot to function as 
fully as possible it should have a solid platform to push down on, and one both 
long and wide enough to fully support the foot’s natural splay and arch 
functions. This is why cycling shoes are a rigid platform (which makes sense) 
but they fail to generally be wide enough. With soft soled shoes, pedal size 
and shape come into play, and a longer pedal allows for the full arch of the 
foot to engage properly with each “squat.”

With abandon,
Patrick

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Lee Legrand]

Hi Bruce,

I think they are mixing form and function.  The idea behind this is that
you are supposed to have a minimalist heal on the shoe but this applies to
walking and running, not cycling which has a another criteria. The rigid
sole for cycling is there for a reason and is it is related to cycling, not
how you walk.  I think an argument can be made for foot health that a
cycling shoe should be made wider but I am not a podiatrist.

On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Lee Legrand  wrote:

> Hi Garth,
>
> You are right in that health is not in a body part but I think shoes are
> built around the idea of narrow feet and what looks good as opposed regards
> to a foot is supposed to look like when it is healthy.  The LEMS shoes are
> wide box meaning they are have a box wide foot area up front because feet
> are supposed to function freely and not confined with a case like a shoe,
> at least that is my understanding of the website.  Feet are supposed to be
> wide and this promotes a healthy feet in that, you do not have bunions or
> foot deformities that come from wearing a narrow foot shoe.  In addition,
> the modern look of a shoe does not take into account those who have natural
> wide feet and as a person who does have wide feet, you see there are fewer
> selections of footwear.  If I would buy this shoes, it would fit me only
> because the box area is already wide and I do not have to check if it is
> wide enough for my feet to fit like a typical shoe but it is still not wide
> enough in a sense that it fits me well, but according to there philosophy,
> the box should actually be WIDER since my toes should be splayed out
> further.
>
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Garth  wrote:
>
>> Well gee, "health" is not isolated to any one body part, it either IS in
>> entirety or not at all, and there is no not.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [RBW] Re: Minimalist cycling shoe article.

[Lee Legrand]

Hi Garth,

You are right in that health is not in a body part but I think shoes are
built around the idea of narrow feet and what looks good as opposed regards
to a foot is supposed to look like when it is healthy.  The LEMS shoes are
wide box meaning they are have a box wide foot area up front because feet
are supposed to function freely and not confined with a case like a shoe,
at least that is my understanding of the website.  Feet are supposed to be
wide and this promotes a healthy feet in that, you do not have bunions or
foot deformities that come from wearing a narrow foot shoe.  In addition,
the modern look of a shoe does not take into account those who have natural
wide feet and as a person who does have wide feet, you see there are fewer
selections of footwear.  If I would buy this shoes, it would fit me only
because the box area is already wide and I do not have to check if it is
wide enough for my feet to fit like a typical shoe but it is still not wide
enough in a sense that it fits me well, but according to there philosophy,
the box should actually be WIDER since my toes should be splayed out
further.

On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 12:26 PM, Garth  wrote:

> Well gee, "health" is not isolated to any one body part, it either IS in
> entirety or not at all, and there is no not.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW 
Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.