Author: Sorting Last Post on Top Message:
CONQUERGRAVITY Posts: 1,514
3/31/12 10:03 A

I don't really know much about the Reebok lawsuit, but in this case at least the complaints (from what I read) just seem stupid. They complain that the shoes are too expensive... so what? Don't buy them if you don't want to spend the money. They're not any more expensive than most other specialist running shoes. They complain that people can injure themselves while using them or transitioning. So what? The company warns people that there is a transition period and there is a ton of literature out there about how to properly transition to barefoot running - it's not the company's fault if people choose to ignore those warnings. Additionally, people get injured while running ALL THE TIME wearing all different kinds of shoes. Part of any kind of physical fitness program is accepting that if you over train or don't do things right, you can injure yourself. Whenever we go work out, we take that risk of injury. Runners suffer from injuries all the time for all kinds of reasons. We strain muscles, get shin splints, twist ankles... it happens all the time, and I haven't seen any evidence that, with proper use, barefoot running causes any more injuries than any other kind of running.

The whole thing just sounds stupid to me. Then again, the vast majority of lawsuits sound stupid to me.

ERICWS SparkPoints: (8,307)
Fitness Minutes: (22,220)
Posts: 1,537
3/31/12 9:14 A

I was talking to Sarge and to anyone who is interested in chatting with me. I like the people on here and enjoy interacting with you, and with them. Sorry. Just enjoying the chat.

I personally think the issue is exactly the same as it was for the toning shoes. I did read the complaint- same issues raised from what I can tell.

Peace- let's enjoy talking!

UNIDENT Posts: 33,498
3/30/12 11:49 P

But you posted it with the clear intent that this be "fair time" for Vibrams because Rebook was also sued. Yet it seems they are vastly different kinds of suits, and if Popie's summation is correct then that the Vibram suit is not so much at all that the company made testable scientific claims which were invalid.

BTW, dunno why you think I'd have anything to say on it - I neither own Vibrams nor run barefoot/minimal. Perhaps your earlier comment wasn't actually directed at me? Or did you confuse me with someone else?

ERICWS SparkPoints: (8,307)
Fitness Minutes: (22,220)
Posts: 1,537
3/30/12 2:57 P

I am not taking a position. I have never used Vibrams. I don't know what will happen with the lawsuit.

All I know is that a lawsuit was filed. if you like them and feel you benefit from them, God Bless! I'm just posting the news article!

PAPAMIKIE SparkPoints: (42,895)
Fitness Minutes: (91,385)
Posts: 3,895
3/30/12 2:48 P

Having read through the complaint I am not sure what the complaint is about. The plaintive says she paid too much and that the price of $80 to $125.00 is too much for running shoes. She may be correct but that is a going rate.

The language of the complaint seems to be that Vibram claimed that VFF provide similar health benefits to what running bare foot does, but give you some protection. The suit acknowledges that VFF warn that there is a transition and this can take week to year, and that it may require the runner to change his her gait. The suit cite a doctor in sports medicine who site a high number of injuries in runners transitioning to minimalist shoes.

I had a friend who decided that he would switch to VFF in the middle of his marathon training. He believed that barefoot running would correct gait issues, heel strike etc. He was wrong and got stress fractures in both legs. When I started to move to less shoe I went through several shoes, reducing their support as I went along and took a long, long time.

This seems to me a foolish law suit, and I would hope the court will not find in favor of the plaintiff, who seems to acknowledge that the claims are that they confer similar benefit to barefoot running, that they may require a gradual transition of weeks to years, and may require the user to learn to run differently.

It may be that the suit will be won, as the courts are not known for commonsense. I for one would like to see the option for defendants to recoup legal costs far easier in such cases.

We seem to live in a society with too many individuals wanting someone else to be responsible for his/her decisions. I know people who have sued successfully due to slipping on Ice in Ottawa in January. Well I grew up here, ice in January can be a problem, but if I fall walking on it; well surely that is my fault not some poor property owner who had weather happen on his/her property.

60 minutes had a story about a ladder company being sued because someone had stood a ladder in a frozen manure pile and then went up the ladder to work on the side of the barn. It was a warm day for winter and the manure thawed and became unstable and the ladder slid and the person was seriously injured. Apparently the ladder company did not issue a warning not to set up the ladder in a frozen manure pile, therefore a law suit. I say Sh!! Happens. Take a little owner ship for your life.

I say the same things to the VFF plaintiff, but then, maybe that is just me.

Popie


PS: I do now own Vibrams, I do not think they are a majic bullet, but having read the complain I think the plantiff might win, but I do not think the planfiff should win.

ERICWS SparkPoints: (8,307)
Fitness Minutes: (22,220)
Posts: 1,537
3/30/12 2:41 P

www.nytimes.com/1990/06/17/nyregion/l-kill
-the-lawyers-a-line-misinterpreted-599
990.html


Here's a better link- more credible! NY Times. I'll go with that! emoticon

ERICWS SparkPoints: (8,307)
Fitness Minutes: (22,220)
Posts: 1,537
3/30/12 2:39 P

We shall see. I didn't read it either- I just read the article on Runners World. I knew you'd get mad at this, given your love of Vibrams, but it is a news report from what I consider to be a credible source for this information.

As for the "let's kill all the lawyers" crack- Sarge, you should read the play. The reason for that quote is because lawyers defend the rights of the downtrodden and disadvantaged. The quickest way to establish a totalitarian regime is to eliminate the lawyers, the knowledgeable and educated people who can actually impede the bad guys.

As for the FTC claim- that remains to be seen. I believe Skechers and Reebok got in hot water w/ the FTC AFTER lawsuits were filed.

Cheers!



Edited by: ERICWS at: 3/30/2012 (14:40)
UNIDENT Posts: 33,498
3/30/12 1:24 P

Sorry I'm not reading a 28 page report. What exactly are their claims that are supposedly unfounded?

The benefits or not of barefoot running are still being debated, and generally are not expressed in terms of benefits you will get in the same way that Sketchers claimed. Sketchers claimed you could tone up your muscles, which their shoes did not do. Does Vibrams actually claim barefoot will do anything better for you than a general healthier way to run?

SERGEANTMAJOR Posts: 6,415
3/30/12 1:09 P

If you look at the plaintiffs in this case they are an association of footwear manufacturers. This is a civil suit and not one brought by a governmental agency as was the case with Shape Ups. The injuries are to someone's bottom line and not to anyone's physical well being. This is a tort or civil case not a regulatory case and is one which will most likely be found to be frivolous and without merit due to the lack of standing of the plaintiffs.

When a salesman who has no formal training sells a shoe supposed to correct pronation or some other mechanical fault they are making an unfounded claim.

The most interesting thing I noted was that the YouTube videos very close to what I have taught for years as a running coach. I suggest people watch the videos than read my description of good running mechanics posted on my Spark teams.

"first let us kill all the attorneys" Shakespeare

Edited by: SERGEANTMAJOR at: 3/30/2012 (13:11)
DRAGONCHILDE SparkPoints: (57,014)
Fitness Minutes: (14,252)
Posts: 9,646
3/30/12 10:57 A

Interesting. I've been interested in these shoes, so I'm curious to see how the whole thing plays out.

ERICWS SparkPoints: (8,307)
Fitness Minutes: (22,220)
Posts: 1,537
3/30/12 9:42 A

news.runnersworld.com/2012/03/29/vibram-su
ed-over-fivefingers-claims/?cm_mmc=Fac
ebook-_-RunnersWorld-_-Content-Blog-_-
Vibrams


Skechers and Reebok got blasted when they were sued for their toning shoes.

In the interest of fairness, here is a story about Vibrams being sued on similar grounds......

Page: 1 of (1)  




Other Fitness and Exercise Topics:

Topics: Last Post:
Calf raises, how much weight? 7/12/2013 10:55:58 PM
One more question regarding Fitbit 8/9/2013 12:58:34 PM
Should I count my walk to work as exercise? 10/6/2013 9:33:22 AM
Runners - How do you decide it's time to buy shoes 8/6/2013 9:11:12 PM
30 day shred 10/4/2013 10:52:55 PM

Diet Resources: herbal supplement side effects | herbal joint supplement | focus herbal supplement