"Survivorman" vs. "Man vs. Wild"

Nov 29, 2007 00:01

image Click to view



My comments/thoughts are behind the cut.

I prefer Survivorman. I don't watch it religiously, but, frankly, he seems to know what he's doing a heck of a lot more. Bear may be ex foreign legion and all that, but either he's not up to snuff on his survival lore or his show is irrepairably crippled by insurance/liability concerns.

The urine drinking thing is a good example, frankly. Yes, you can survive by drinking urine for a very short time (I don't know exactly how long off the top of my head) but you run the risk of fatal kidney damage, to the point that even if you survive the lack of water you will die shortly after being rescued. Not good. Urine has a high concentration of uric acid, and an extremely high concentration of this in the blood can lead to kidney failure. Basically, when you drink your own urine your body keeps concentrating out the uric acid until it just can't do it anymore. Not good.

The Survivorman method of making a solar still loses some liquid, but is much safer.

I hope both of them carry Personal Locator Beacons of some sort though. It's cool that the Survivorman guy is out there all alone, but I'm not going to lose respect if he's got a way to call for help in an absolute emergency! My entertainment ain't worth his life.

As an aside, a book recently came across my desk to be sent out on review. It was called something like "Archaeology Down Under" and it's a guide to doing archaeology in Australia. The best part? A significant portion of the book is dedicated to safely traversing, and surviving in the event of a break-down, the Outback. Things like - how to make a solar still, when you should make a solar still (AS SOON as you have a serious breakdown, because it may take a day for them to produce any appreciable amount of liquid). Archaeologists in Australia are apparently hard core.
Previous post Next post
Up