On the whole I think he did very well. I was surprised with some of the equipment he had with him.

The program highlighted the mental and physical aspects of a trip like this very well. It also highlighted how difficult it is to feed oneself from a wilderness environment.

Something that some people that I have talked or read of forums have neglected to consider is the process of starvation. Some of the most in depth and up to date medical research carried out on starvation was done on the IRA hunger strikers in the Maze prison, Northern Ireland. After 56 days the heart rate dropped to dangerous levels, the body started to shut down and eyesight is lost. This drop of function was seen in all of the hunger strikers at the same rate.

An interesting fact about this case was the fact that the hunger strikers were doing it to force a political change and not as an attempt to commit suicide. This is an important fact because these people had not given up their will to live; they were being driven on by their cause.

I hear you ask what the hell has the effects of starvation in an isolated prison population that are laid on their beds got to do with a guy on TV in the middle of the wilderness?

It all has to do with energy expenditure. The prisoners after the initial unrest just sat around and laid in their beds and didn’t expend much energy. Ed didn’t have that luxury, despite having some food and some very good equipment. His energy expenditure well exceeded his calorific intake over the 50 days. His workload significantly sped up the downward spiral towards starvation; despite having some food available. Watching how he lost weight was exactly the same as what I have seen in populations in famine areas in Africa.

It was extremely interesting to watch Ed’s mental side go down, just the way it is reported in real survival or long turn high stress situations. The physiological effects of this sort are numerous but they are all recognised and recorded. Each effect is normally recorded in every scenario but at different levels. In this case it was fear of his surrounding, the unknown and bears as well as the chronic effects of loneliness and the need of contact with other people especially his loved ones. All this compounded by the anxiety of watching yourself waste away with the lack of food and knowing your body is not functioning as it should. Similar experiences have been report so many times by people that have been in real situations.

I think this program was an excellent look into the physical and mental stresses of a man driven to the edge.

ok, so here's my 2 cents worth - after having seen ONLY about 35 minutes of the show - not realizing it was the subject of this thread - and NOT having read most of the previous posts since seeing a few minutes of the show.

a journey to everest as a producer / cameraman with a large group of support staff doing almost everything for you in no way prepares you to go out in the pristine wilderness by yourself.

they are two vastly different challenges and experiences. in this regard, he was doomed from the start.

i wondered how this would end as the show began - the man was almost tearful as the plane flew away after dropping him off. again, i had serious doubts this would end well.

i believe it's extremely difficult to focus on the necessary elements of survival if one is continually setting up camera shots and talking to the camera as if it were a real person. of course it's used to great effect, but i sense it really drives home the total isolation they experience.

i did say they. i've observed les stroud exhibit a similar type of behaviour on his show. at best, he's not exactly cheerful. that may be his personality, but at worse he seems to me to be truly depressed. lack of sleep, lack of food, lack of human contact, constant situational awareness, and constant camera setting and dialogue appear to affect him greatly.

nevermind other feelings about him, i don't see that type of behaviour in bear g. could it be the group of people supporting him, not having to set up the cameras - only to mug for them - etc. could have that much affect? no isolation here, folks.

i do believe that isolation is the key aspect of ed's shortened adventure. i do believe that if cameras weren't involved, a person could better focus on the necessary tasks at hand and survive.

boy, that was too long.

i agree - from what i saw - and as such, a much more realistic demonstration of what the average person would face than the two current name brands.

[quote=Todd W]If a 30-06 is fine in B then so would a shotgun with slugs.

I don't follow your line of reasoning. Are you saying a shotgun slug is the equivalent of a .30-06 bullet?
I'd like to see you shoot a deer at two hundred yards with a shotgun.. (you'll never get any closer in that terrain)

Five things that prevented me from taking this guy seriously at all:

1. He was crying on day one about being alone
2. He couldn't shoot a squirrel with a 12 gauge from a close range.
3. He took oatmeal? Beans would've been far superior choice, especially with rice.
4. He was using a 12" dutch oven as his primary cooking container. Why on earth would you want to pack a dutch oven that size for just yourself? Whole boiled fish is unappealing. There's a reason why you don't see many references to fine Scottish cuisine these days I think.
5. Hammock and tarp. Unnecessary if you are also building wilderness shelter. He had ample resources, tools and time to construct a proper shelter rather than a useless lean-to.

The man had no business up there doing what he did. He was unprepared mentally, physically, and intellectually for the job, and was doomed to failure. What he called a hardship I would've called a decent vacation.

Alone in the Wild <> Alone in the Wilderness. Prenneke had the right formula.

I watched the final episode last night. My conclusion: Pathetic.

If I didn't have a mountain of stuff to deal with, I would be very tempted to fly up to where he was same time next year and show him how it's done. If they let me pack 100 lbs of gear and supplies up there as he did, I would have a friggin' picnic every day! I darned sure wouldn't abandon that canoe.

Now winter time might be a different story. Don't know as I'd care so much for the Yukon in December, especially without a decent permanent shelter.

I got to see the last two episodes. I'll say I was rooting for the guy (as one would tend to root for an underdog) and was disappointed when he called for rescue.

In having watched Survivorman episodes countless times, I'm reminded of how Les constantly brings up the will to survive as being a key aspect. Seems to me this guy just gave up. Granted, Les' shows were for only a week at a time.

So tell me this: What would be more interesting/entertaining to ya'll - not from a "I want to learn something" attitude, but from a "I want to be entertained" attitude - watching a rookie try months alone in the Yukon or watching a pro like Les Stroud for months alone in the Yukon?

Les would probably still have to deal with the loneliness issue, and would likely be amusing to watch babble into the camera (though I think he'd last a lot longer and handle it better, it's just fun to watch him treat the camera like Wilson). However, with the gear this guy was allowed, it'd be very much just an extended camping trip for Les.

As for which show I'd rather watch: I'd rather watch an intelligent, prepared person deal with the problems presented by the situation. I don't think there's an unoffensive way to say it, but this guy just struck me as weak-willed and more than a little foolish. I don't think he's the kind of person I'd like to be around in any high-stress situation.

I have to agree with Brian.

If there is no story, entertainment should be at least informative. IMO.

And drauma and trauma alone do not a story make.