For Brands: Send a Shoe for Testing
You cannot apply for the Podiatrist Tested seal, and you cannot pay for a test. You can send us a shoe. If we test it, the result is published whether it scores 9 or 4, the review says at the top that the pair came from you, and nothing you do after that changes the number. If those terms work for you, this page tells you what to send and what happens next.
Written and medically reviewed by Dr. Tom Biernacki, DPM, FACFAS · Last reviewed 14 September 2026
On this page
What we will and will not do
- Test a shoe you send exactly as we test one we bought: calipers, scale, three stability checks, logged miles on real surfaces, nine scores.
- Publish the result, including the scorecard and the two or more kinds of feet the shoe is wrong for.
- State at the top of the review that the pair was provided by the brand.
- List the shoe in the public registry if it earns the seal, and in the “tested — did not earn” list if it does not.
- Correct any factual error you point out, on the page, with a dated note.
- Accept payment for a test, a score, a ranking, a placement or the seal. Not in any form, not at any price.
- Show you the review before it publishes, or let you edit it.
- Guarantee that a shoe you send will be tested, or when.
- Remove or soften a published score at a brand’s request.
- Treat a sent pair as anything other than a test pair. It is worn for at least 50 miles or 14 days, kept for any re-test, and then donated — or returned worn, if you ask for that when you send it.
What to send
One pair in a men’s US 10, standard width, which is the size every measurement on this site is taken at, so that your shoe’s numbers are comparable with every other shoe in the dataset. If the model is sold in widths, say which width you sent; if you can, send the width you expect most buyers to choose. Include the exact model name and the model year or version, because the seal, if earned, is awarded to that version only. A spec sheet with the manufacturer’s own stack, drop and weight figures is welcome; we publish manufacturer figures labelled as the manufacturer’s, next to ours.
Do not send: samples that differ from the retail product, pre-production units, shoes outside the size above, or anything with a request attached to it. A pair with conditions is returned unopened.
What happens next
Testing capacity is limited because one surgeon does all of it, so pairs go into a queue and we do not promise a date. Shoes that answer a question our readers are already asking — a widely searched model, a category where nothing tested well, a shoe that claims something specific about the foot — go first. When the review publishes you will find out the same way everyone else does. If the shoe earns the seal, you receive the badge kit and the usage terms, which let you display it free of charge as long as it links to the verification page.
Why the terms are this strict
Because the only thing that makes the seal worth putting on a box is that it cannot be arranged. The Independence page makes a permanent commitment that no money will ever pass from a footwear brand to this publication, and invites readers to check it. A brand that wants the seal to mean something when it earns it should want the terms on this page to be exactly this unfriendly.
Citing or linking to an analysis
You do not need our permission to link to anything on this site, and we would much rather you linked to a page than paraphrased it. What we do ask is that the wording matches the tier the page is actually in. The distance between analysed and tested is the entire point of this publication, and a brand that collapses the two in its marketing has misrepresented us whether it meant to or not.
- “Spec analysis by Podiatrist Tested” or “Analysed by Podiatrist Tested” — accurate for any page carrying the Spec analysis — not yet tested badge, which today is every shoe page on this site.
- Quote any figure we publish, provided the source travels with it. Every number here is printed beside where it came from, and most of them are the brand’s own published figures rather than ours. Lifting a number and dropping the attribution turns a manufacturer’s claim into an independent measurement, which it is not.
- Quote Dr. Biernacki by name and credential — Tom Biernacki, DPM, FACFAS — with a link to the page the words are on, so a reader can check the context.
- Link to the specific analysis rather than the home page. It is more use to your reader and it is the page that carries the disclosure.
- “Podiatrist Tested approved”, “recommended” or “certified”. None of those exists as an outcome here. There is an analysis, and separately there is the Seal.
- “Podiatrist tested” as a claim that the shoe has been worn and benched, unless the page says so in print. At the time of writing, no shoe page does.
- A score, a rating or a number of stars. The spec tier publishes none at all, so any rating attributed to us has been invented somewhere between our page and yours.
- The Podiatrist Tested Seal, or any mark resembling it, unless that exact model and version has earned it. The Seal has its own requirements, and using it early is the one thing here we will ask a lawyer about.
The line we would use ourselves, with the review URL in place of the example, is simply this:
<a href="https://podiatristtested.com/reviews/hoka-bondi-9/">Spec analysis by Podiatrist Tested</a>For a formal citation, treat it as you would any publication: Biernacki T. “Page title.” Podiatrist Tested, 2026. URL.
We ask for nothing in return. Not a followed link, not a reciprocal link, not a mention — and a link has never been, and will never be, a condition of a shoe being analysed here. That is the same commitment the Independence page makes about money, for the same reason: the moment a link is worth something to us, the analysis is worth less to everybody else.
Journalists and editors: quotes are fine without asking, and so is a figure from any table here, on the same condition — keep the source attached. If you are running a credential line under a quote, point it at the analysis being discussed rather than at the clinical practice, because the analysis is the thing a reader can check.
Tell us what you are sending
Use the form below with the model, version or model year, the width, and where the shoe is sold. We reply with a shipping address. Please do not send product before you hear back.
Podiatrist Tested is an independent publication of Foot & Ankle Web Services LLC. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or accredited by the American Podiatric Medical Association or any other professional body. Product received for testing is disclosed on every review where it applies, in line with the FTC’s endorsement guides.
Recently reviewed
Individual shoe pages state their evidence tier, published measurements and who should skip them.
Saucony Endorphin Speed 5
Spec AnalysisLight plated neutral trainer. Saucony publishes both stack heights and they match its 8 mm drop — not yet tested.
HOKA Mach 6
Spec AnalysisLower, firmer neutral HOKA. HOKA publishes a 5 mm drop and neither stack height — not yet tested.
ASICS Novablast 5
Spec AnalysisBouncy high-stack neutral. ASICS publishes an 8 mm drop and neither stack height — not yet tested.
Our funding and evidence policy
We earn affiliate commissions from qualifying purchases. Our policy is to assess published evidence and fit needs rather than rank products by commission rate. Current reviews are specification analyses; see our method for their limits.