no.

Ok, I was trying to let this one go but you called me out Stretch. I'm reading these last few posts and trying to keep it in but now I look like this:



I can't do it, I've got to let it out!


Blackeagle & AROTC: Susan did not present any information to discredit the education, training or expertise of the authors of the original source, she simply implied that the entire argument should be dismissed because it was written by a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (yeah, what do they know!), a PHD. who operates the Laboratory for Exercise and Environmental Medicine and Dr. Hubbell, the founder of SOLO (look it up), or as she puts it, She is trying to remove the focus from the argument and onto the authors and then not even providing any facts to discredit them! You want to question their credentials? Ok, let me see your proof that they sent away for their diplomas from the back of a matchbook.

RAS: Fine, I concede. In this very limited circumstance (hypothermia victim that is in that small window where they are shivering but not yet sweating), the research shows 55% heat loss from the head. But that is the ONLY exception to the 10% rule. Again, if you want to believe and teach that we lose 55% of our body heat from our head based on that limited circumstance, go right ahead.

Stretch: Wow, where to begin? First, you need to go back and re-read my citations.

The, "abundant scientific information" SUPPORTS the 10% figure.



Someone from the original article already beat you to that question.

#3 What difference does hair on your head or facial hair make?

None.
In order for hair or fur to provide a protective thermal barrier, it has to be much denser than what we humans grow and it has to be in layers of different types of fur to provide a thermal barrier. Beards are great, but they do not keep you any warmer. And bald is beautiful.

And finally, I'll answer your question and ask one of my own. I try not to ignore common sense and logical thought, but as you can see, common sense isn't all that common. With the same sincerity that you and others feel that I'm trying to defy logic, I feel that you are refusing to let go of BAD information simply because of, "but we've ALWAYS done it this way" reasoning.

Now my question, what is it going to take to convince you that the old figure (70%,50%,25%, you pick), is wrong and the 10% figure is correct? I don't have any personal stake in the outcome either way, no agenda here, just passing on new information that I hope will make a difference to somebody, someday. I have a feeling that you and many others just don't want to admit that maybe you're wrong (I'll admit it, I LOVE to be right), but I have a suspicion that no matter how many links I provide, or how established my "experts" are, many here will keep on spreading the bad information.

And I want you all to take note, in this picture:



I"M WEARING A HAT!!!!

You've got to admit, it's a fairly significant exception in that the victim is well on the way to dying. It would be much better to wear a hat and keep the number in the realm of 10%.

But your head is so big I can almost feel the heat from here.

Stretch, you said,
"Why, in today's society, do we go against historical and empirical evidence, and sometimes even common sense and logical thought, and jump to believe the first accredited person who makes a statement or claim contrary to what the rest are saying?"

It sounds to me like LASD has done his research and qouted more than "the first accredited person"

Questioning an expert's credentials doesn't necessarily require proving, "they sent away for their diplomas from the back of a matchbook." It is perfectly legitimate to ask whether their degrees or previous research qualify them as experts on a given subject. Just having a PhD or an MD doesn't make someone an expert in every subject that could possibly be covered by that degree. For example, I've got an MA in Geography and I'm well on my way to getting a PhD (another year and a half, I hope! ). However, that doesn't mean that I'm an expert in geomorphology, or paleoclimatology, or demography. I know a little bit about these subjects, but no more than any amateur who's done a little reading and attended a couple of talks (in other words, just enough to get into trouble). On the other hand, if you want to talk about transportation or location science, I really am an expert.

Since we're discussing heat loss from the human body, I'd say that the fact that the first author is a veterinarian is possibly relevant. Of course, the best way to make this sort of judgement would be to look at a full CV, but since the blog didn't provide CVs, their degrees are all we have to go on.

First off, "Woo Hoo! Two Pages!!"

Sorry, back to business.

Blackeagle,

That's why I continue to direct everyone back to the original link from Wilderness Medicine Newsletter and SOLO, if you research for a bit it becomes pretty clear that this is arguably THE site when it comes to well, wilderness medicine (of which hypothermia is a key concern).

If you were asked to submit an article for (just a guess, sorry if it's unknown): http://www.vub.ac.be/EWGLA/homepage.htm
and then were asked by one of your peers to show your credentials before they would trust your article, wouldn't you be a little offended? Don't established, respected groups deserve the benefit of the doubt sometimes? I don't ask to see my Doctors diplomas before I allow him to take care of me, the fact that he's been hired by Huntington Memorial Hospital speaks for itself.

I think you might want to reexamine what you’re construing as opinion, conjecture, or outdated research. By removing the actual context from my quote, you’ve made it sound as if I pulled this idea out of my butt.

The point I was trying to make from the full part of my earlier post is that the research presented only state various figures and not the scenario in which these figures apply. What use is it to know how much heat escapes your head versus your body when you’re naked? And how do those figures vary between a person who is vasodilated (normal core tempterature) versus vasoconstricted (hypothermic)? I have no plans to be naked in the cold, and the entire purpose of this site is learning how to be equipped so you don’t end up naked in the cold. Personally, I am much more interested in how much heat escapes your head versus a body that is clothed in various ways, and the research you presented offers no insight into this curiosity.

If you have a specific argument about the point I was trying to make… about a normally-clothed body… then by all means make it. Until then, don’t quote my typing out of context in order to deem my (and others’) arguments as “opinion, conjecture, or outdated research”.

Never get discouraged...