Heresy in Backpacker

Hi !

Thomas Linton said:
I have challenged the believers in the traditional view (hypotherima uber alles) on this and other forums to product evidence supporting that view, and have received none.
Click to expand...

I am not surprised, as there is little relevant data about that. I, too, have been looking for such evidence, and found none, and that is precisely why I do not focus too much when teaching (as I'm a survival instructor) on hypothermia alone.

All the medical advices I did get concerning hypothermia were that a healthy person is able to maintain his/her core temperature quite stable (> 35°C) even in quite strong exposure (temperature/time) provided they :

- have enough calories / glycogen left to burn for shivering (which is limited in time)
- are generally healthy
- are not injured / hypovolemic / etc.

The problem is that this becomes an endurance race against the cold that can leave you exhausted and helpless. So conserving energy is important for the rest of the journey.

Besides, some injuries can play a great role in one's ability to keep his/her core temp stable. For example, a spinal injury can destroy one's ability to constrict small blood vessels, thus dissipating a lot of heat. In such a case, what could be the cause of death, the spinal injury (fall, rock fall) or the hypothermia ? As a rule of thumb, mountain medics here always suspect an hypothermic person of some serious trauma, because trauma is a HUGE incitator of hypothermia.

But back to the point : I think such classification of risks in a survival scenario is a lot too complex to be anything serious given the very restricted data sets we have access to, and the wide variety of contexts : activities, temperatures, etc etc.

The main reason why I keep up with the "rule of threes" in my teaching is that it is a great way for students to remember the main risks and be able to have an APPROXIMATE evaluation of their respective importance.

I think your reformulation of the traditional view has to be true as regards the heart attack component of the three main causes of wilderness death; however, there seems little connection between health and the desire to "boulder" or "climb" or folks getting into trouble in the water when swimming/diving/hunting/rafting/etc.
Click to expand...

True.

I am not arguing that we forget hypothermia or that it is an unimportant risk. I just argue that virtually ignoring what are statistically - far and away -the biggest causes of wilderness death makes stunningly little sense.
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly.

I see survival as a global thingy. To me, self protection/RBSD and fighting techniques are a part of survival. First aid techniques are a part of survival. Prevention is a part of survival. Knowing how to tie a strap correctly to make a loop and knowing how big a tree you need for belaying are also a part of survival. Learning to swim and wearing a life jacket is a part of survival. Keeping your chloesterol low and being in good cardiovascular shape as well. And knowing how to start a fire under a pouring rain as well, etc. And being able to catch a fish, gut it and cook it with nothing but a knife and a lighter is a plus.

I cannot honestly stand in front of a group and tell them "this is not important". All I can ask is "we won't have time to cover everything you might need, so what do you need from me the most ?". Most of the time, knowing what kind of activities they do and where they play is much more useful in defining their real needs than some absolute credo about hypothermia as the #1 killer, or anything else for that matter. Two years ago I tought to a girl who went out around the polar circle with a pulka. I didn't tell her about cactus juice ;)

That being said, hypothermia will rob you of your fine motor skills and, if you do get even just slightly hypothermic, you will lose precious IQ points that can push you to do something stupid like not self-belaying correctly or getting lost, wandering off trail and falling down something. I did some hypothermia tests last year. I managed to get my core temp as low as 34,9°C (which is just SLIGHTLY hypothermic) and trust me lighting a bic was out of the question, and problem solving had to be kept to a vegatal minimum. I could hardly figure out which way to put my stocking cap back on.

So things are not just as clear cut. Hypothermia will have an impact on prevention, and injuries will get you hypothermic faster, and so long. This is complex stuff and general rules are actually more mnemotechnics than anything else.

So... all in all, you're absolutely right to ask those questions. I hope my lengthy answer could justify "our" pedagogic choices a little.

Cheers,

David
 
Just another point I forgot : as far as all the other risks are concerned, most of them SHOULD be covered within specialized schools. For example, in a climbing/alpine club you should learn rope techniques and basic safety (belaying, anchors etc etc.). If learning kayak, you should learn about specific risks and techniques, etc. Our job as survival instructors often is to cover "the rest", which often starts with the physiology of stress, first aid and temp management, hydration, etc etc.

That being said, when I detect that a person or a group has specific needs in (for example) climbing safety, I consider it my duty to orient them to competent people who can teach them that better than I will.

Cheers,

David
 
It also said that Tom Brown Jr recommended a Stainless steel knife so why is his Tracker 1095 ?
 
Accidents, which I'm sure include falls and drowning are our root complaint from hiking incidents. Mostly lacerations and abrasions. People step and slip then gravity takes hold and they meet the ground.
 
Thomas Linton said:
I (almost) never argue with belief. However, how can one write a book on wilderness survival and totally ignore falls, drowning, and heart attack as risks? Cody?
Click to expand...

I say this with sincerity, not trying to be a smart ass… but who is going to read a book with a even a fair amount of attention given to falls, drowning, and heart attacks? Today, those things are common sense in most peoples minds. I would suspect a publisher would edit that out in a heartbeat, especially given the numerous variables that would lead to a fall, etc, and then having to address prevention. I am not arguing the statistics, just giving my opinion on what sells. Although, I will argue that the premise of some of the survival books out there lay down a broad enough foundation that if followed, reduce the fore mentioned dramatically in a survival situation.

Unfortunately, people of today need what was the common sense of generations past fed to them so they can 'survive'; which is the information in most survival books or classes that have a primitive twist. Can you imagine what a Native American of a few centuries ago would think about some of these books -- they would laugh their ass off as the information is so minute and something everyone already knows.

Regarding the Backpacker article, I was with one of the four ‘experts’ a couple of months ago and they weren’t thrilled with the edits Backpacker was doing to their portion. I guess most of these guys do these little blurbs for the media for free to gain exposure for their business.

Chris
 
I picked up the mag at an airport and it at least gave me something to read on the flight.

I don't think it was all bad.

I looked at it as a springboard to get people thinking more about thier safety outdoors.
 
As far as fat overweight hunters being a high risk group. In minnesota which fields about 500,000 thousand hunters every fall, we have gone a few years with very very low numbers of deaths attributed to hunting.

In an average year far more people die from driving out on thin ice to go fishing, from driving snow mobiles while intoxicated, driving 4 wheelers or snowmobiles into either traffic or trees. While swimming, while boating, while walking the dog. running marathons

Nationally record indicate you are fifteen times more likely to die swimming than hunting.

Cause of death is a hard topic to define, listing stupidity not something people like to see on the death certificate of loved ones. but in many cases, if not a lot of cases it belongs there. Drowning due to stupidity, swimming while drunk at midnight is not death by drowning, it is death by stupidity. freezing to death is not a cause of death if you freeze because you were out in late oct or early november in the mountains in a t shirt, a cotton hoodie and jeans with no warm dry clothes available nor a way to start a fire.

stats from death certificates are a poor way to gather info. Incident reports are a much better way of collecting data. First responders file that individual was found dead, clothed, and surrounded by beer bottles or whisky bottles is often cleaned up by the keeper of records to display a death from the elements, yes it did in the end kill the person, but certainly would not have had the person been sober. I had a great uncle who died from chronic alcohol abuse, but his death was listed as a fall. Sure he fell, but that was after he drank 30 dollars worth of whiskey in about 2 hours. and then he decided he needed to go out on the balcony. Yes he fell, but with a blood alcohol reading of .68, it is hard to blame the balcony railing for the fall.

People who deal with deaths a lot, often use the phrase DWS to describe people who by their own stupidity cause their demise.
 
As far as fat overweight hunters being a high risk group. In minnesota which fields about 500,000 thousand hunters every fall, we have gone a few years with very very low numbers of deaths attributed to hunting.

In an average year far more people die from driving out on thin ice to go fishing, from driving snow mobiles while intoxicated, driving 4 wheelers or snowmobiles into either traffic or trees. While swimming, while boating, while walking the dog. running marathons

Nationally record indicate you are fifteen times more likely to die swimming than hunting.

Cause of death is a hard topic to define, listing stupidity not something people like to see on the death certificate of loved ones. but in many cases, if not a lot of cases it belongs there. Drowning due to stupidity, swimming while drunk at midnight is not death by drowning, it is death by stupidity. freezing to death is not a cause of death if you freeze because you were out in late oct or early november in the mountains in a t shirt, a cotton hoodie and jeans with no warm dry clothes available nor a way to start a fire.

stats from death certificates are a poor way to gather info. Incident reports are a much better way of collecting data. First responders file that individual was found dead, clothed, and surrounded by beer bottles or whisky bottles is often cleaned up by the keeper of records to display a death from the elements, yes it did in the end kill the person, but certainly would not have had the person been sober. I had a great uncle who died from chronic alcohol abuse, but his death was listed as a fall. Sure he fell, but that was after he drank 30 dollars worth of whiskey in about 2 hours. and then he decided he needed to go out on the balcony. Yes he fell, but with a blood alcohol reading of .68, it is hard to blame the balcony railing for the fall.

People who deal with deaths a lot, often use the phrase DWS to describe people who by their own stupidity cause their demise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top