HN

Comments (111)

• Menu

  pinkmuffinere
  > During their simulation of Mallory’s Everest expedition, the data showed that on summit night, the average body temperature difference between the twin in modern down and the twin in complicated layers of silk, wool, and gabardine was a staggering 1.8°C.The human body self-regulates, and is pretty sensitive to dramatic temperature swings. So, conditioned on the fact that they both survived the adventure, we should expect their temperature differences to be relatively small. This doesn't mean the clothing is great, it means [their body] + [their clothing] is adequate.Additionally, I'm not a doctor but 1.8 C is not small compared to normal human variation! Normal body temperature ranges between 36 and 37 C, a "high fever" starts around 39 C [0], and hypothermia is anything below 35 C [1]. The comfortable range of human temperature is 1 deg C, and the "outside of this is concerning" range is only 4 C wide. 1.8 C is quite big from that perspective.[0] https://www.health.harvard.edu/diseases-and-conditions/treat...[1] https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/hypothermia/s...
• Menu

  aidenn0
  So other than being easier to use, cheaper to buy, lighter, and warmer: modern apparel isn't any better than old apparel.
• Menu

  jldugger
  > the data showed that on summit night, the average body temperature difference between the twin in modern down and the twin in complicated layers of silk, wool, and gabardine was a staggering 1.8°C. > “In a hundred years, you’ve gained—arguably—one degree of efficiency per 50 years,” Ross reveals.Depending on where the baseline is, 1.8 degrees could be huge! But more importantly, heat dissapation is a non-linear function. The warmer you are relative to your environment, the more energy is lost. While Shackleton's kit forms a lower baseline, it probably makes sense to imagine how some imaginary perfect vacuum insulated sleeping bag would perform.
• dtj1123
  This is a massive oversimplification.The challenges of technical gear are:1. managing active body temperature by radiating heat effectively2. managing passive body temperature by retaining heat effectively3. managing internally generated moisture by allowing evaporation4. managing externally generated moisture by preventing absorption5. minimising weight6. maximising toughnessThis article talks about point 1 as though it's the entire story, but maintaining a comfortable active body temperature is by far the easiest point. You can do it with a tshirt under most circumstances. Wools do have an advantage with regard to point 3, which is why a lot of technical gear is now made of merino wool. The entire selling point of goretex is that it provides a reasonable degree of 3 whilst giving an excellent degree of 4, which is simply not possible with antique gear.Modern technical gear is genuinely incredible stuff, it's possible to pack something that will keep you warm and dry down to 8°C in a space less than a large cup of coffee and a weight less than a glossy magazine.Not to mention that from a scientific perspective, experimenting on a single pair of twins adds essentially zero statistical power to the results. This is theatre.
• Menu

  jancsika
  Important-- when they say "cotton" in the article they're talking about gabardine cotton as a water repellent layer.Neither one of these dudes is wearing cotton base layers, midlayers, socks, etc. It's too slow to evaporate moisture which can cause blisters on feet and rapid drop of body temperature drop in cool/cold weather.
• aetherspawn
  I was wondering if they’ve taken into account that one of the test subjects had a prior fractured vertebrae (and the other not). I know a lot of time has passed, but I expect that it would probably never be possible to fully recover from an injury like this? And therefore there would be differences in overall fitness between them?For example … skeletal and muscular compensation. Nerve damage. Damage to lymph system due to surgeries.
• Menu

  jancsika
  Key paragraph:> The data proves that the gear of the past is capable, but it has a narrower operating window. If you stop moving in Mallory’s kit at 8,000 meters, you will freeze quickly. Modern gear buys you a safety margin if you become static.
• gorgoiler
  ”[The twins] realized they possessed the ultimate scientific tool: a perfect control subject and a perfect variable. Ross wore modern kit while Hugo wore historic replicas. Any difference in performance could be attributed solely to the gear, not genetics.”It’s a great idea and these men are undoubtedly incredible athletes, but I’m not sure “ultimate” and “perfect” are the right words here.A killjoy would bring up double-blinding or n>1 and I don’t want to sap the fun out of this being about an interesting people-centric piece.There’s no mention though of a more basic trick: having them alternate clothes every expedition or season! Pfizer it ain’t, but it would still take it up a notch on the scale of interesting/fun to “ultimate/perfect”.
• dehrmann
  > On the vast, blinding expanse of the Greenland Ice CapBut not double-blinding. If I were the twin in the retro gear, I'd subconsciously be trying harder to try to make a point.
• Menu

  rkagerer
  Did anyone else feel like something is off with this content? Like it was written as an ad or something?
• obsidianbases1
  I thought weight would be where the modern wear performed best.More surprisingly, the footwear of yore was apparently lighter
• modeless
  This video on the subject of testing old vs. new camping gear is pretty interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Us6AVVkx_8
• Menu

  embedding-shape
  > Today, their biometrics are tracked by ingestible sensor pills that monitor core temperature from the inside outI wonder if those are pills they've developed themselves, or if it's an existing product available to consumer?
• Menu

  eagsalazar2
  I remember sleeping in old canvas tents - in the heavy rain - on boyscout camping trips around seattle as a kid. I remember waking up in a puddle, cotton lined bag soaked through, not being dry even after 12 hours of laying it out after the rain stopped.By comparison my RIE UL2 is 100x, no 1000x better in every single way. Same for my 15 degree duck down mummy.Are sweaters better now than then?? I don't know, maybe. But seriously, get out of here with the general notion that 19** is within a hundred miles of good modern backpacking gear.About boots, unless you are in snow, boots are scam. Period full stop with whatever expansive definition you want to use. Comfy $30 sneakers from Big 5 are great. I do have some trail running shoes I use personally that cost me about $100. I'm sure they had great options 100 years ago.
• Menu

  croisillon
  nice pics, nice font, pity the text went through translopification
• tigen
  If you like this stuff, have a look at the Vikings and their logistical problems.https://www.quora.com/While-at-the-sea-what-did-Vikings-do-f...
• bwv848
  Fun experiment, but it doesn’t really prove anything. On a good day, elite runners like Tyler Andrews can run up Mera and more difficult peaks with minimal gear. Next time, try testing them on a cold, windy, and wet ridgeline traverse.
• Menu

  XorNot
  I feel like downplaying 1.8 degrees C of performance is a weird choice in the article.1.8 degrees C is a huge temperature change in biology. Human bodies keep thermal equilibrium in a margin smaller then that.
• Menu

  ChrisMarshallNY
  That's pretty cool. They talk about how getting period clothes basically required custom work.Must be pricey.
• ehaveman
  really interesting - except the charts are impossible to read for colour blind people.
• Menu

  sneak
  The idea that full grown identical twins are identical humans for purposes of analysis is also fundamentally flawed. Just because they share DNA and look the same doesn’t mean anything about their relative health, fitness, metabolic rates, etc.
• Menu

  jauntywundrkind
  On the one hand I think critical assessment & deep review is vital.But this feels so not far from anti-Wayland pro-X11/Xorg grumblers. You'll hook 15% of people by being against the modern world. Theres a niche demanding rejection of modernity, current offering. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47448328There are some valid areas of investigation. I want deep critique. But mostly it's just noise, is filler, to give people their outlet against reasonability. Mostly it's not serious. It doesn't have to be: these marks want to believe. And alas alas, that 15% of fans you have against modernity: they are hot to go be loudly obnoxious against any and everything new or popular. They will be unreasonably loud for you.How humanity copes with basically anti-informed vice-signalling is our most outstanding problem of the 21st century, is our noospheric challenge.
• anon
  undefined
• Menu

  dekhn
  absolutely terrible writing.