Some of you may be interested in the reality that innovation is alive and well in the US and that suffering a traumatic injury does not mean that you have to hang it up:

http://www.npr.org/2011/08/10/137552538 ... tter-limbs

Hugh Herr's legs were amputated below his knees in 1982 after a climbing accident. From his knees down to the floor, he's completely artificial.

"I'm titanium, carbon, silicon, a bunch of nuts and bolts," he tells Fresh Air's Terry Gross. "My limbs that I wear have 12 computers, five sensors and muscle-like actuator systems that able me to move throughout my day."...........

have read a bunch of his publications, brilliant guy. Can't wait for the day that someone designs a non-motorized prosthetic that allows someone to run faster with less energy.

Ze, you thinking of this?

http://www.ossur.com/?PageID=13008

Hugh Herr was actually part of the panel that convinced the Olympics that Pistorius' Cheetahs weren't cheaters - in other words, not an unfair advantage, based on some biomechanical considerations (e.g. 90% energy return from mechanical spring, vs 200+% "return" from well-timed calf muscle contraction). But you could tweak the design and end up with longer legs, for instance, which might be superior for particular races. (My guess, long legs mean longer stride, which would be most advantageous on longer distances.)

My last visit to the Gunks I was swapping stories with a guy who told me a tale of an amputee who built himself a longer leg so he'd have more reach on one crux move.

He is also the subject of a book - it covers his accident and the immediate aftermath. He has obviously done much since.

The book is now available in paperback - you can Google it to find a copy.

Second Ascent: The Story of Hugh Herr
Alison Osius / ISBN 978-0-8117-1794-6

Every time I see an article about Hugh Herr, I give a thought to Albert Dow, one of the SAR's who went out looking for Herr on Mt. Washington. Dow died in an avalanche during that search.

Not trying to dredge up a discussion about this incident -- from what I have read Herr is very accomplished and deserves his accolades. Just thought Dow deserves to be remembered too.

Interesting to read this thread since just a couple of days ago I heard a long radio interview with Hugh Herr on public radio driving home from work.
By the way, he stated that the thing which devastated him the most after his incident in 1982 was not the fact that he lost his legs or that him and his partner almost died but that one of the rescuers, Dow, lost his life during the search.

nartreb wrote:Ze, you thinking of this?

http://www.ossur.com/?PageID=13008

Hugh Herr was actually part of the panel that convinced the Olympics that Pistorius' Cheetahs weren't cheaters - in other words, not an unfair advantage, based on some biomechanical considerations (e.g. 90% energy return from mechanical spring, vs 200+% "return" from well-timed calf muscle contraction). But you could tweak the design and end up with longer legs, for instance, which might be superior for particular races. (My guess, long legs mean longer stride, which would be most advantageous on longer distances.)

My last visit to the Gunks I was swapping stories with a guy who told me a tale of an amputee who built himself a longer leg so he'd have more reach on one crux move.

Yes, Pistorious' case was of huge interest in the biomechanics field...the problem with the evaluations is that really there is no "control" to compare Pistorious against. The energy returns are one piece but even with a bunch of measures, an amputee with a prosthetic is essentially operating in a different mode than an able-body. While these measures (especially gross measures like VO2 consumption vs speed) help point out where Pistorious operated compared to averages, the best way to actual find out whether the prosethetic gives an advantage is versus a control group.

In other words, measure all the parameters you want on an legged person. Cut their legs off, put on the cheetahs, adapation...then measure performance again.

Or, more feasibly, don't cut off the legs but attached prosethetics that operate over the lower leg / foot, and correct for loss due to excess weight. Then you really know if the device is improving running economy.