Winter Wellness: The Overlooked Role Of Orthotics In Cold-Weather Comfort And Safety
As colder temperatures settle in across New Zealand, health and wellness routines often shift to meet the season's challenges. But one critical area is frequently left out of the conversation – foot health, especially the role orthotics can play in helping Kiwis stay comfortable, mobile, and injury-free during winter.
While winter wellness strategies typically focus on immunity, nutrition, and warmth, fewer people consider how the season affects their feet. Yet as conditions become wetter, icier, and colder, foot-related discomfort and injury risk can increase – particularly for those with pre-existing conditions like flat feet, arthritis, or plantar fasciitis.
'Our feet are the foundation of movement, and in winter they're under increased stress,' says Lydia Charteris, General Manager at Orthotic House. Foot orthotics are custom or over-the-counter shoe inserts designed to support the feet and correct biomechanical problems. According to Charteris, foot orthotics can contribute to winter wellness in five key ways:
1. Enhanced Stability on Slippery Surfaces
Orthotics provide better foot alignment and balance, which can help reduce the risk of slips and falls. Proper arch support stabilizes the foot and ankle, offering more confidence on wet or uneven ground.
2. Improved Circulation and Warmth
Poor foot alignment can restrict circulation, especially in cold weather. Orthotics promote more natural movement and posture, which can enhance blood flow and help keep your feet warmer.
3. Reduced Joint and Muscle Pain
Winter tends to exacerbate joint stiffness and muscular tension. Orthotics can help evenly distribute body weight and reduce strain on knees, hips, and the lower back, common pain points during the colder season when we're less active and more bundled up.
4. Support for Winter Footwear
Many winter shoes can offer style and insulation but lack proper arch support. Orthotics can be inserted into certain footwear to make them more supportive.
5. Continued Activity and Mobility
Staying active is vital for physical and mental health during winter. By reducing discomfort and injury risk, orthotics help ensure you can keep walking, hiking, or even skiing safely through the season.
Winter wellness is about more than minimising illnesses, it's about maintaining comfort, stability, and mobility through the most challenging months. Orthotics support not just your feet, but your overall well-being, helping you move through winter with greater ease and confidence. 'Orthotics are more than a shoe insert, they're a tool for maintaining independence, reducing discomfort, and keeping people moving,' says Lydia Charteris.
As the season progresses, the team at Orthotic House are encouraging New Zealanders, particularly older adults, active individuals, and those managing chronic pain, to consider foot health as a vital part of their winter wellness strategy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
14 hours ago
- Scoop
Who Benefits From Outsourcing Planned Surgery: Follow The Funding
I still remember metaphorically sitting at the knee of legendary union leader Bill Andersen while listening to him opine pearls of wisdom. The most important question, when assessing a particular proposal or initiative, was 'who benefits?' This was the opening paragraph of my column published in Newsroom on 13 June: Who benefits? Follow the money. Levering off the expression 'follow the money' popularised by the film 'All the President's Men' about the Watergate scandal which brought down United States President Richard Nixon in 1974, and in the context of Aotearoa New Zealand's health system, I argued that: It is becoming increasingly clear that Government funding decisions are strongly oriented towards the for-profit private health sector rather than addressing the critical needs of our health system. I discussed this with specific reference to outsourcing (privatising) elective or planned (non-acute) surgery, public private partnerships, and funding urgent care facilities. My conclusion was: Following the funding will confirm whether or not the Government changes direction for the good of the public and their health system. The answer lies with who benefits. Benefitting private health insurers and telehealth providers Since my column was published further reporting has reinforced my conclusion that the Government's health focus is on benefiting the for-profit private health sector and enhancing privatisation. On 19 June Radio New Zealand health reporter Ruth Hill revealed on Morning Report that from 1 July taxpayers would foot the bill for cancer drugs administered in private facilities for private patients: Private health insurers benefit from publicly funding cancer drugs for private patients. This amounts to a 12-month subsidy to private health insurers while at the same time leaving the vast majority of New Zealanders who don't have private health insurance missing out. The decision is a conscious government action to benefit the for-profit private health sector instead of investing in the public hospital oncology workforce (specialists and nurses) with the objective of enabling people can get free care there. Meanwhile, NZ Doctor journalist Steve Forbes in a paywalled article (3 July) reported concerns over how 'extravagant' funding gives telehealth providers a huge advantage over general practices in the Government's new Online GP Care service. This service provides telehealth for casual patients who are not enrolled in a general practice. The rate paid to telehealth providers for casual unenrolled patients is similar to the funding rate paid to general practices for their enrolled patients through capitation. The General Practice Owners Association (GenPro) convincingly argues that telehealth providers should be paid the same (much lower) casual rate that is paid to general practices for casual unenrolled patients. GenPro Chair Dr Angus Chambers succinctly explains the differential this way: A [telehealth] provider offering the new online medical service would receive $65 for a consultation with a 14-year-old casual non-enrolled patient whose caregiver holds a Community Services Card. In contrast, a general practice would only receive $20.45. The Government's favouritism towards private telehealth providers has reinforced the view among many general practices that instead of seeing telehealth as an aid or enabler for GPs, it is seen as an alternative. Privatising planned (non-acute) surgery Back on 13 May Radio New Zealand investigative reporter Anusha Bradley had covered on Morning Report Health New Zealand's (Te Whatu Ora) intention to privatise planned surgery waitlists by outsourcing them to private hospitals on two to three-year contracts, along with extending the working hours of doctors in public hospitals: Privatising planned (non-acute) surgery. Expecting public hospital specialists (and nurses) to work longer hours in evenings and on weekends and public holidays on more complex planned cases enables private hospitals to 'cherry pick' the less complex high volume (ie, revenue generating) cases. Bradley reported Nelson Hospital based surgeon Ros Pochin, Chair of the New Zealand Committee of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons questioning what surgeons might be able to do this extended hours' work. In her words: Most surgeons already work long hours, including evenings and weekends. There are some surgeons who work purely privately, but most work privately and publicly so there isn't a cache of private surgeons sitting there twiddling their thumbs in the evenings and weekends who can suddenly call in. She added that most surgeons were already working long hours, including after-hours: There's only 800 of us in the country. We already work out-of-hours, as we all do on call. I'm about to start a week of continuous on-call myself, which I'll do 81 hours straight day and night. And so we get very little time off as it is. Outsourcing is essentially an admission that we have not got an adequately funded and resourced health system. Interestingly Health Minister Simeon Brown chose to ignore Health New Zealand advice that outsourcing to private hospitals was more expensive than expanding public hospital. Health New Zealand also advised the health minister that outsourced operations could only be delivered if there were senior clinical staff available, 'whilst ensuring Health NZ remains able to safely manage the clinical workload of our public hospitals'. Further, he was warned of the risk that private hospital capacity would be 'insufficient' due to workforce availability. Particularly important is the advice Brown received from the Chair of his Health Workforce and System Efficiencies Committee, Middlemore Hospital general surgeon Andrew Connolly: It is vital those establishing contracts recognise there are clinical obligations and responsibilities in the public sector that must not be weakened by outsourcing. Health New Zealand must consider such risks in the contracting process. Connolly is now the deputy chair of the newly appointed board of Health New Zealand. This will be interesting. His advice to the health minister became even more imperative following Brown's subsequent decision discussed below. Privatising planned surgery morphs into public-private partnerships The above-mentioned outsourcing reported by Anusha Bradley, including the warnings ignored by Simeon Brown, was trumped by the Minister's subsequent decision that private hospital contracts would be almost permanent – 10 year contracts which are longer than the terms for public service chief executive appointments. These 10-year contracts for cherry-picked surgery has rightly been called Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) by economist Brian Easton in a column published by Pundit on 4 July: PPPs based in private hospitals. PPPs enable in varying ways for private partners to maximise profit opportunities in the design, construction and operation of health facilities. These PPP opportunities have been quickly recognised by private investors as reported by Hamish McNeilly in The Post (5 July): PPPs encourage private investors change plans. The investors undisclosed company had resource consent granted to build private student accommodation in Dunedin. Now they have changed their plans by seeking to build a new private hospital instead. The only way these PPPs by another name can maximise private profits will be for the crisis-ridden rundown public hospitals to be even further rundown. This includes growing the private hospital specialist workforce at the expense of the public hospital specialist workforce. Non-evidence based decision-making On 17 June Treasury received the following request under the Official Information Act: I would appreciate any Treasury papers on the proposal that HNZ should outsource treatment to private hospitals on ten year contracts. I am especially interested in how they will impact on the government's fiscal position. On 9 July Treasury responded: I am refusing your request under section 18(e) of the Official Information Act as the information requested does not exist or, despite reasonable efforts to locate it, cannot be found. Given that the information requested would have been recent, not historical, it is obvious that Treasury's advice was neither sought nor provided. The only information received by the health minister from his official advisers (Health New Zealand and his expert committee) was apprehensive at best. Responsibility for this poor and risky decision-making rests solely and squarely on Health Minister Simeon Brown and his government colleagues. Ideology, not evidence based, has prevailed – again! Ian Powell Otaihanga Second Opinion is a regular health systems blog in New Zealand. Ian Powell is the editor of the health systems blog 'Otaihanga Second Opinion.' He is also a columnist for New Zealand Doctor, occasional columnist for the Sunday Star Times, and contributor to the Victoria University hosted Democracy Project. For over 30 years , until December 2019, he was the Executive Director of Association of Salaried Medical Specialists, the union representing senior doctors and dentists in New Zealand.
Otago Daily Times
19 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Letters to the Editor: health spend, taxes and stadium
Today's Letters to the Editor from readers cover topics including spending on health, taxes and stadium costs. Yell it from the rooftop: spend more on health Governments always yell from the rooftops about how much more they are spending on our health system. Well they are not spending enough. We personally know nurses in Dunedin Hospital who are running and are not able to give the care they have been trained to give, and it is frustrating for them, they suffer from burnout and leave. No wonder health staff are leaving for Australia in record numbers and we are recruiting from low-wage economies. Paying Kiwis to stay here would be a good start. Tax us some more to make us the world-class health system we used to have. A healthy workforce is less of a drain on the entire system and everyone in the economic chain benefits. At the moment people are reduced to be non-contributing members of society and claiming benefits while waiting for surgery. I personally know of a woman who had to sell her home and downsize to pay for a hip operation. This is not the New Zealand I grew up in. We need to be a fully functioning society supported by a fully functioning health system. Thanks to successive governments, we have failed our own people in this area. Shame on us. John Grant Alexandra Fares not fair It is terrible that bus fares have been forced on children. The result will be more traffic on the roads, increased intergenerational inequity, more stress on parents, lower school attendance, less resilient children and lower social mobility. Ironically it may increase the loss per passenger. D. Hawkins Dunedin Tax talk It all depends upon what sort of country we want: the egalitarian society generally characterised as New Zealand in the 1950s and 1960s, or the enriched minority holding sway today. The statistics (courtesy of George Bryant NZ 2050) are compelling. Today, 1% of the population owns 16% of the country's wealth - the richest 5% owns 38% - while half the population receive less than $24,000 a year. Expressed another way, the wealthiest 10% now own 59% of all wealth. What ever way you slice the cake it screams ''crisis in the making''. This has all come about recently and in the absence of a capital gains tax, Mr Eckhoff (ODT, 9.6.25). One of the ways to address this inequity is for everybody, including that small proportion of the population who enjoy the bounty that has come their way often via inflationary increases, to pay some of it back to the public purse for the well-being of all. Statistics NZ tells us that as the gross domestic product increases, almost half the increase goes to a small group who are already the richest in the country. Evan Alty Lake Hawea Unlikely solution Shane Jones appears to think that ''his'' mines will solve all economic problems. Unless mining companies pay corporate income tax every year, this is most unlikely. The majority of shareholders will not be New Zealand residents, and most of the machinery used is manufactured offshore. Jobs may be provided but housing will not be, and this could add to the homeless problem in some areas, especially in Central Otago. The pits provided to control leaching need to be constructed to a very high standard if they are to withstand earthquakes, especially where the mining is planned on known fault lines. New Zealand needs to be very careful in approving mines. The performance of mining companies in many countries has been unsatisfactory for both the people and the natural environment. Lynne Hill Mosgiel Trying to find more funds for white elephant Five minutes in the job and Dunedin City Holdings chairman Tim Loan thinks he can go cap-in-hand to get more money to pay for the stadium. How about going to all those who went against public opposition to build it? Mr Loan will just have to sell a few more pine trees from one of his council companies. What is Tim Loan doing in the job if he has to employ more consultants to do his job to develop long-term modelling for this white elephant that has a lifetime ending in about 2060, and will only have a value of the land under it. $188 million and not a cent more. Blown out to $211m that we know about, plus weekly running costs, while it sits there empty for most of the time. Life expectancy of only another 35 years. What a joke. Interesting that Ruby Shaw's ODT article (4.6.25) has no facts or figures of what the stadium still owes, just like the original fictitious promotions to hoodwink all those that are still having to pay for it. Neville McLay Opoho Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@
NZ Herald
a day ago
- NZ Herald
Living with motor neurone disease: The Kiwis making the most of every day
It's a diagnosis that no one wants to hear, one from which there is no escape. Michael Botur meets Kiwis living with incurable motor neurone disease who are making every day count. Brent Thompson can't walk, talk or lift a finger but he can fly a model plane.
