Proponents of these shoes love to make the argument that we were made to run without shoes... but they never seem to mention that we weren't made to run on asphalt and pavement either.
"Strips of old tire" (from your cited article) would be thicker than the soles of my Fivefinger Sprints. All of my running surfaces are rocky or gravelly, and the Sprints do not provide enough protection for me against stone bruising. Perhaps my feet will toughen, with more miles in these shoes... I don't know.
They're great fun as river shoes, though I have to guard my toes with greater care than I did with worn-out trail runners (my previous river shoe of choice).
I can't really say anything about the shoes, I never tried them, I am not a physician and I am not a medical professional.
That being said though, a good friend of mine is a runner on the track team at one of the University's here and he wears them for time to time(I don't think he runs in them all the time) and he says they are incredible.
The same logic (shoes don't cushion you, they weaken you) that applies to other surfaces applies to pavement. If you accept that there is no shoe that will make your running healthier on grass, then there is no shoe that will do it for pavement. The only argument would be that we should not run at all on pavement.
