Back in the days when we were evolving into our present form, much of our ambulation occurred on yielding surfaces. These days, however, we spend considerable time walking on unyielding surfaces, such as concrete. Concrete may yield to a 70 ton tank, but not to human feet. Concrete provides one with superior stability, which is beneficial if you're an automobile. But we're not cars - we're chordates. Backbones enjoy unyielding surfaces as much as lungs enjoy vacuum.

I've found a shoe that simulates the ambulation our ancestors enjoyed, which involves providing one with an unstable yielding surface. As a result, the pain in my knees and back has vanished. Since I spend more than 2,000 hours per year walking and standing on unyielding surfaces, the effect has been cumulative. I no more noticed the pain at age 20 than a teenage smoker notices reduced running ability. I had assumed that strange pains come with age, but this is more evidence in favor of our similarity to the Roman civilization in regards to their unawareness of the deleterious nature of drinking water from lead pipes. We are still making simple errors and walking on concrete surfaces is another such error.

For the past few years I have been aggressively taking supplements, believing the pain in my knees was a nutritive problem. This is an example of where logic fails and the solution is not obvious. The daily life of our ancestors is not at the forefront of normal cognition since thinking about them takes conscious effort. Our earliest ancestors did not wear shoes nor did they walk on concrete; the surfaces they ambulated on were uneven, often very yielding, which promotes more muscles to come into play in order to provide stability. This provides one with a better posture.

It's quite difficult to not walk on concrete, asphalt, vinyl, or linoleum, as they are ubiquitous. In fact, we discourage people from walking on normal surfaces (the real ground), since we're concerned with the visual appeal of our artificial structures. Landscaping would be ruined if people walked on it, but never mind their knees or backs. That's why we have health insurance. (The shared thought of human society seems to be complete disregard for the human body while enormous concern for artificial structures. Well, at least we'll be ready. If machines do become intelligent, it shouldn't be a problem if they want to destroy us.)

http://www.endless.com/s/ref=pe_35820_1 … boutique=1

I've heard good things about the shoes. Do you go running with them as well, or just walking?

This looked fairly interesting, but as I have a tendency to walk quickly and make long steps I wonder if my natural inclinations would defeat the purpose of the shoe... or if the shoe would defeat my natural inclinations.  I was seriously considering finding out when I discovered that they didn't make them in my size (9.5w).

Tell me though, do you feel like it would be easier to twist your ankle in these shoes?  Also, how do these shoes fair if you are already walking on uneven surfaces like say shoveled sidewalks?  And one more thing... a presentation I saw yacked about some kind of sensor, these shoes don't need batteries or anything ridiculous like that do they?

Depending on your answers (if you answer) I may keep an eye out for my size, otherwise I'll wait until I actually start getting joint pain and the like.

Thanks for posting this, it was interesting.

They're strictly for walking at work. Due to the high cost, I don't even wear them while driving, since it provides uneven wear. The rear part of the right sole tends to wear more quickly than the rear of the left sole, since the right foot handles braking and accelerating. I would imagine that drivers with manual transmissions get wear that is more even, because the left foot manipulates the clutch.

I used to think there was something wrong with the way I walked since I always noticed my right sole had more wear than my left sole. It took me a while to connect the uneven wear with driving.

  I use $115 Asics for running. Running shoes priced above $100 should be required by law. Anything less, and you're asking for trouble. The cumulative damage effect does apply to running, although the scale is measured in minutes, not years.

These shoes provide precarious motion in the dorsal and ventral planes, but not in the lateral. In other words, you are more likely to fall on your face or your back, not twist your ankle. My ankles haven't been a problem for years - the last problem was at age 16. It's the knees for me and I've noticed no tendency to twist them while wearing the MBTs.

   I had the opportunity to walk on unevenly packed snow with them and the differing angles felt like different surfaces. The shoes were designed for flat surfaces, so an uneven surface will translate, as much as possible, into flat surfaces of different angles. It felt bizarre, but I wasn't in any danger of toppling.

  Batteries are not required for these shoes.

  Walking without these shoes now feels very strange. You won't notice how unnatural a flat surface feels until you stop experiencing it for a while.