Oh, and I saw a lady walking wearing those shoes that are advertised (falsely according to a ACSM report) to tone you up or burn more calories etc. Though it is a silly waste of money on the surface, if it means that person is going to walk, which WILL help them, then let 'em wear the shoes, right!I am not sure how the lawsuit was started, but apparently someone read that ACSM article (American College of Sports Medicine) and sued Reebok. Or it may be that the Federal Trade Commission took action on their own. You can read more about the charge of false advertising in this FTC press release which announces a 25 million dollar settlement that Reebok has agreed to pay. The claim that the shoes tone the legs and butt muscles more so than walking in "other" shoes is made without proof. As we noted over a year ago.
The shoes that I talked about this year (last month) are from Sketchers and I am not sure how they advertise. Those shoes, which have lots of cushion and bounce, actually lead me to over pronate.
Pronation : When we walk we naturally have a bit of an ankle turn in. It is ever so slight with each step. IF someone over pronates their ankles dip in by inches and if they under pronate, they tend to walk on the outside of their foot. (It is entirely possible that I have this backward, but I do not think so). Anyway, over or under pronating is a sign of an imbalance that needs to be corrected - usually with a shoe insert. Since my spongey, cushiony, 50+dollar shoes cause me to over pronate - I think I too have wasted my money, but for an entirely different reason (I never intended to get a work out from my shoes). I probably can't sue Sketchers either :)