So, here’s my dilemma: As a chiropractor who witnesses everyday,  firsthand, the detrimental effects that excess weight has on the musculoskeletal system of my patients as they age (and the degeneration is happening at a far earlier age these days), I am always in agreement with any regulation that favors health. So, if it were true that “toys” seduced children into eating in an unhealthy way, then “hurray,” let’s ban them from restaurants everywhere! But, on the other hand, who’s in charge of a child’s diet?  Restaurants? Young children don’t take themselves to McDonald’s for a happy meal! I know that it isn’t easy for busy parents to say “no” to the convenience of fast foods when their children would prefer it anyway. But, I disagree with Supervisor Yeager. A child’s taste isn’t “captured.” Children learn what to eat, and they are taught by their parents and guardians.

Yes, it’s true that one in three American children is either overweight or obese, and I am all for reducing high calorie food from a child’s diet.  But, I also believe that education, not regulation, is the answer.

Daniel Conway, a spokesman for the restaurant association, said fast-food chains already offer healthy options for children, including milk, carrot sticks, apple slices and whole grains, and suggested that the ordinance was a “simplistic attention-grabbing move rather than a comprehensive, thoughtful effort to curb a serious problem.” I hardly ever agree with big business, but in this instance, I feel compelled.

Technorati Tags: fast food, healthy diet, junk food, toy ban

And according to a study by Lieberman in February’s issue of the journal Nature, the answer is “people seem to be born to run — barefoot.” The study found that running barefoot seems better for the feet because it produces far less impact stress compared to feet hampered by expensive running shoes.

People who grew up running barefoot (such as boys in Kenya’s Rift Valley province, which is known for endurance running champs) tend to land mostly on the front or middle of the foot when they touch ground. And when these runners do use shoes, they continue to run in that way, while people who have always worn cushioned running shoes usually hit the ground heel first.

The difference in the way the foot strikes the ground is important. People with running shoes strike the ground with the mass of the entire leg, nearly 7 percent of the body, which is more than three times the weight of impact for barefoot running.

For runners in cushioned shoes, “it is literally like someone hitting you on the heel with a hammer,” Lieberman said. But, he said that “the way in which barefoot runners run is more or less collision free.”

So, the next time you teens, or you twenty-/thirty-something, San Francisco runners take off for Golden Gate Park or maybe even the Golden Gate Bridge, leave your shoes at home and do as we, Baby Boomers, used to do before there were fancy running shoes, just go barefoot!

Technorati Tags: barefoot, Daniel Lieberman research, Golden Gate Bridge, Golden Gate Park, jogging, running, running shoes, San Francisco