Don't buy it
Sorry, but I don't buy this story. I cycle regularly (100+ miles a week) and don't generally have any problems with numbness, etc. with a saddle that fits. Not every saddle with a nose creates numbness, if a cyclist has that problem it should be easily fixed by using a different saddle shape. Most manufacturers make more than one shape for that very reason. My concern with a noseless saddle is that it does not seem like it would be very good for performance. Many cyclists tend to move around a lot during rides, partly for comfort, but also because different terrain requires a different angle for maximizing power. Sometimes a cyclist sits on the back of the saddle, sometimes very far forward, almost on the nose. A noseless saddle does not seem nearly as good for bike handling, either. The nose is very useful for steering around tight corners with the inside of the leg, especially while descending. I would feel very unsafe without being able to grip the nose between my thighs.
Perhaps I am wrong about the limitations, but this group of scientists seem to ignore how cyclists really use existing saddles. A noseless saddle might work for recreational cyclists out for a slow crawl along the bike path, but then why show a picture of Lance Armstrong in a professional race?
