I don't know if I would go as far as to say it was a 'traditional bushwalking myth'. Going without food, or eating inadequately can be dangerous, but the danger depends on the person and the circumstances. Water is critical, but a healthy well feed person won't starve to death while going without food for several days or even a week. However, there are lots of other problems that one may have to cope with and some of these will emerge after as little as one day without food. Without food people become irritable and lethargic. One will feel physically weaker. Moral will fall. Slowly the person will become more confused, will suffer from poor judgement and suffer from disorientation. As whiskeylover has pointed out, the immune system will be weakened, it will be harder to maintain body temperature, and hypothermia becomes a bigger danger. The longer you go without food the more likely you will need to contend with these problems.Tony wrote:I keep reading as an argument against lightweight walking that if stuck somewhere eg at a flood creek crossing and not having some extra food for a day or two is very dangerous eg: might require emergency rescue.
I would like to argue that this is another traditional bushwalking myth.
I'd tend to agree, a day or two should be find for most of us. However, everyone is different. It's hard to say how individuals will be affected.Tony wrote:To put this into perspective, you have to ask? is going without food for a day or two going to harm us or require an emergency rescue, NO is my answer. In this land of plenty and obesity most of us are so used to pigging out that we think the world will end if we miss a meal.
whiskeylover wrote: but it is important to note that if you are combining light weight gear with less food then you may be putting yourself at risk.
geoskid wrote:nothing but the best of several brands will do :)
Macca81 wrote:whiskeylover wrote: but it is important to note that if you are combining light weight gear with less food then you may be putting yourself at risk.
really? im sceptical of the 'fact' that lightweight gear increases risk... im sure that you can have warm and light gear just as much as you can have warm and heavy gear or crap quality heavy gear...
the "lightweight" factor does not increase risk. the human making the stupid decisions does.
Tony wrote:I keep reading as an argument against lightweight walking that if stuck somewhere eg at a flood creek crossing and not having some extra food for a day or two is very dangerous eg: might require emergency rescue.
I would like to argue that this is another traditional bushwalking myth.
Moondog55 wrote:I think it depends on how big the "Spare tire" you start with was/is; for most of us ( assuming no major underlying health problems) a few days without food will probably be good for us.
Doing without food and exercising moderately seems to switch on our bodies internal repair system
ollster wrote:It's certainly dangerous for other people - you should see me when I have a sugar crash. Grumpy!
ILUVSWTAS wrote:ollster wrote:It's certainly dangerous for other people - you should see me when I have a sugar crash. Grumpy!
Lol. Why do you think I gave you half of my last rations on Sunday.
ILUVSWTAS wrote:After the talk of Vandiemans land, I was getting nervous about the way you were eyeing off my fillets
ollster wrote:ILUVSWTAS wrote:After the talk of Vandiemans land, I was getting nervous about the way you were eyeing off my fillets
Too lean for me. I like a bit of marbling.
MJD wrote:Bit of a worry, must say that the Ollster was certainly looking hungry once we'd dragged him to the top of Tumble Tor.
ollster wrote:MJD wrote:Bit of a worry, must say that the Ollster was certainly looking hungry once we'd dragged him to the top of Tumble Tor.
I should've asked ILUV for more details... if I had've known we were doing a 24km day I would've been better prepped.
ILUVSWTAS wrote:
I sent you the map with the routes on it? Didnt you get it???
Return to Bushwalking Discussion
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 42 guests