Flat Feet and Other Geometric Measures in Biology

One of the things we love in biomechanics is geometry. We draw straight lines between anatomical landmarks, create angles, and measure them. Once we have the measurements, the next step is usually to calculate the mean—and then tell people how abnormal they are. Common examples include assessing the curvature of the spine in different planes, the carrying angle, the Q-angle, and the arches of the foot.

Today, I came across a news article from the Government of Tamil Nadu (GoTN) discussing flat feet. The article claims that individuals with flat feet have a delayed braking reflex. I thought this would be a good opportunity to write about the pseudoscience surrounding such claims.

We all know that the foot has arches. As I mentioned earlier, we identified a triangle, and like any diligent student, we measured it and established what we consider "normal" values. When those measurements deviated by more than one standard deviation, we labeled them as abnormal. And to make it sound more sciency, we gave them Latin names—pes planus for flat feet, and pes cavus for high arches.

All of this is perfectly fine—it’s the standard approach we use across disciplines, from physics to biology. However, in biology, labeling something as abnormal based solely on the bell curve can be problematic. Biological structures naturally vary, and these variations often extend beyond one standard deviation while still functioning normally and without any symptoms.

That’s why it’s important to distinguish between a statistical abnormality and a clinical or diagnostic abnormality. This distinction is especially relevant in conditions like flat feet. Most people with flat feet don’t experience any symptoms. Yet, like any good medical professional , when we can’t find a clear cause for issues like back pain or leg pain, we tend to blame these anatomical variations—like flat feet—without sufficient evidence. This is especially true for people who overtly rely on biomechanics and think biomechanics as basics of PT (biological science is the basis).

So, is flat foot really abnormal?

I know this blog is a bit out of order, but it's a valid question—and the answer is probably no, though we can't say for sure. What we do know is that most studies have found that people with flat feet typically don't show any symptoms. The common belief is that flat feet may reduce one’s ability to run faster or longer. A similar assumption exists for those with atypical Q-angles or knee alignment issues like genu varum or genu valgum.

But here's the catch—just do a quick search, and you'll find plenty of athletes who excel despite having flat feet or knee alignment variations. The human body is more adaptable than we often give it credit for.

Search Hussian bolt and flat feet- or Lebron James.

Does Flat Foot Really Affect Reaction Time?

Honestly, I don't know—but it seems highly unlikely. The idea that bus drivers, who deal with hundreds of unpredictable situations on the road every day, would be significantly handicapped by having flat feet sounds implausible.

As we know, when there are countless variables that can affect performance, we sometimes end up chasing the wrong ones. Instead of addressing complex issues, we latch onto convenient scapegoats. In this case, it seems like no proper study was actually conducted. Most likely, expert decided that flat feet must be the villain, and the rest followed without question. It's yet another example of how stupid medical science is in this country.
By the way, Formula 1 driver Alex Zanardi had flat feet. If someone can drive a Formula 1 car at over 300 km/h with flat feet, but we're being told a person can’t drive a bus at 40 km/h because of the same condition—well, that seems a bit... hmm.

Well as a note to others who give shoe insert for arches and try to build arches please stop, the human body is not a house and you are not a mason.

Love
Hariohm

Read about the news article in ToI