02/04/2026    Allen M. Jacobs, DPM

Vivaia Shoes Granted APMA Seal of Acceptance (Robert Scott Steinberg, DPM)

Dr. Steinberg has raised questions regarding the
basis upon which a particular shoe was “awarded”
the APMA Seal of Acceptance.

The eclectic list of products listed as having the
APMA Seal of Acceptance is readily available to
any concerned podiatry healthcare provider, the
public, and other interested healthcare providers.

The APMA repeatedly has asked for our support and
confidence. Yet, when it comes to the Seal of
Acceptance, the basis upon which a determination of
the product efficacy, safety, and superiority was
made has been kept as a secret similar to the
security surrounding the development of the atomic
bomb in World War II.

Why, as a dues-paying member, am I not entitled to
know the following: 1. What was the basis upon
which the committee determined that a product
qualified for the Seal of acceptance, and 2. Who are
the committee members? Is approval more than
reception of a check? After all, as a dues paying
member, that APMA Seal of Acceptance represents an
endorsement by you and I. It is asking the public
to believe that WE believe the product is safe and
will be of benefit.

My suggestion is that any product applying for
seal of approval status be listed for comment by
the membership on the APMA on the website and in
the APMA news for 60 days. When approved, the
committee should announce the basis upon which the
seal of approval was awarded.

Finally, there is no reasonable basis upon which
we should be denied knowledge of those making
these decisions. This would be one more method by
which potential conflicts on interest may be
exposed.

In the past, I have raised these issues with the
APMA. They have been less than responsive. I have
been told for example that if the committee
membership were known, industry would target the
members and make efforts at inducement for
approval. However, if an individual has reached a
status to be trusted with Seal of Acceptance
decision-making authority, I would believe these
individuals can or should be trusted to act in an
ethical manner. It is insulting to the committee
members to believe otherwise if we feel the need
to “ protect” the committee members from conflicts
of interest.

If the APMA wishes to capture our support, greater
transparency is required. The APMA has a
responsibility to its membership. It has a
responsibility to the public. Secrecy and sub rosa
actions to not engender confidence by either the
membership nor the public they are charged to
serve.

Allen Jacobs, DPM, St. Louis, MO

There are no more messages in this thread.