Pretty much every pair of Sketchers shoes now has memory foam soles and everyone seems to think they are great but I hate them.
They are really hot, the foam is like a layer of insulation.
The top of the memory foam soles is somewhat elastic so it’s really smooth and slippery so your socks slide around inside
They are no more comfortable than regular shoes and in fact I think they provide less arch support since they are squishy compared to shoes with harder foam.
And most of all the memory foam gets smashed and wears out in no time with some shoes having the foam glued in so replacing the insole is impossible.
I just can’t fathom how they are so popular.
We don’t need foam or arch support or any of that shit in our shoes, it’s all marketing nonsense. We’ve got muscles in our feet for a reason. Save your feet, knees etc. and buy something like a pair of vivobarefoot shoes.
Foam I agree that is a bad idea.
Arch support? Yeah you might want to do a little more research.
Every foot is different, and for some, like those who experience a lot of supination or high arches, arch support is likely the best way to go.
But there does seem to be a growing body of evidence that modern shoe design seems to promote weak arch muscles, and thus lead to pronation and flat arches, where as shoes with zero drop and no arch support, if transitioned to slowly, will eventually build up those muscles and no longer require support. I think there’s also a strong case to be made in favor of shoes with a large toebox that doesn’t squeeze the toes together.
Happy to be provided some. I got told I needed arch support after I’d been fairly inactive for over a year due to injury. I went barefoot style instead and my feet have never been happier.
It’s different for everyone my dude. You probably have a naturally flexible flat foot, which tend to do well with little or no arch support. Some people have varus or valgus hindfoot deformities that can damage tendon or ligaments without orthotic bracing.
Soft foam like memory foam tend to not work very well as they’re too soft and can actually allow people with deformities to exceed their healthy range of motion.
Yeah if you’ve got a diagnosed problem that’s a different story. But the average foot doesn’t need that support.
There’s no such thing as the average or normal foot…the vast majority (around 70%) of people in the United States have been born with or acquired pes planus deformities (flat footed). But in that category you have flexible flat feet, which don’t usually require support. And you have rigid pes planus, that do usually require bracing.
You also have to account for age. You for one may not require support right now, but as you age you will acquire arthritis, loss of beneficial range of motion , and probably an excessive range of motion in the medial to lateral plane, allowing for over pronation.
You’re claim may be closer to correct if you specified age, weight, and activity level, or specific a foot type.
It is in fact exceedingly rare to see western people who can remain in perfect subtalar neutral while weight bearing, and thus it’s fairly rare for people to be active to a late age without sustaining chronic foot and ankle injuries over time.
The reason for that might be the fact that we’re been cramming our feet into shoes that ruin them and don’t allow the muscles to develop.
Also there can’t not be an average.
What muscles would those be? What beneficial range of motion are we limiting to a degree that shoes inhibit healthy muscle growth?
What about athletes whom do not utilize footwear while they perform or practice? Shouldn’t we see this optimum foot with dancers or gymnast?
There can be averages for certain age groups…there is no data for overall average, why would you even compile that?
just because something works for you does not mean it will work in all cases. that is a bad way to do research. try looking beyond yourself.
I suffered with foot and back pain for years until I found arch supports. They make all the difference in the world. I can wear any kind of shoe as long as I put my arch support in it and stand on my feet for 18 hours with no issue.
You got anything lower-end that are similar but not as expensive to try out?
I wouldn’t recommend barefoot running shoes unless you are running on soft surfaces. I am a provider who specializes in orthopedics and rehabilitation, specifically orthotics and prosthetics at a university hospital.
Our clinic is mainly patient care oriented, but we do get to do some research. The barefoot running fad was kicked off by from what I believe to be a purposely clumsy interpretation of some really interesting studies.
Mostly an investigative study about the bio mechanics of tribes in Africa who traditionally ran long distances without foot wear. The study is actually really great, but a lot of the proclaimed benefits aren’t really applicable to other environments or cultures.
These tribes had their runners training without shoes at a very young age, and always on soft surfaces. If you take away any of the preconditions and the benefits also disappear.
Whitin barefoot shoes on amazon are a great entry into the barefoot style, they’re very affordable and depending on the exact style you choose, actually seem to hold up surprisingly well for the price. Make sure you go for the ones that explicitly say they are Wide though, those have the most natural toebox shape.
There’s also Splay! Shoes, which offer some affordable barefoot shoes that look like Vans.
I can’t speak for other brands I’m afraid, only ever tried Vivo after taking the plunge. They are expensive so a cheaper one may be worth a shot if they’re more available now.
Xero shoes are popular and more reasonably priced though I have no experience with them myself.
Xero are great but be warned that they are truly minimal. No heel drop, very thin sole. The soles last forever though.