Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Physical Training For Mountain Hunts & Backpacking
Getting in mountain shape with no mountains around?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Calvin45" data-source="post: 2789108" data-attributes="member: 109862"><p>I've found this whole thread to be quite interesting all around. I live in northern Sk at a mere 1100 feet above sea level and have never experienced much for elevation (driving through the Rockies to the bc coast doesn't count haha, though my ears certainly give me hell when driving downhill in a hurry) </p><p></p><p>I have to wonder, it just makes intuitive sense to me but the truth often isn't what seems most obvious) - </p><p></p><p>Would being physically larger be a big disadvantage for altitude sickness? Or does it have nothing to do with it? </p><p></p><p>I'm not talking fat/obese/whatever you wanna call it and tremendously unhealthy and out of shape. Nor am I just referring to the bigger man having more weight to haul up the mountain. </p><p></p><p>I mean if you have two men of EQUAL cardiac fitness and strength conditioning proportionate to their respective sizes, of equal body fat to muscle ratios, about the same age and in the same health etc…all things being equal except their natural healthy size…let's go a bit extreme and say a 6 foot 4 and naturally stout build (like a football player) and a naturally thin/wiry kind of muscular 5 foot 8 (like a lightweight boxer), both in great shape. </p><p></p><p>Am I right to expect the big guy should be WAAAAAY MORE SENSITIVE to any oxygen reduction simply because his larger body burns through a lot more of it even at rest than the lightweight? I know even in competitive sports and endurance races and wrestling/boxing/any kind of fighting, the general rule is that big guys, even if in fantastic shape, "run out of gas" faster (of course in some situations the benefit of being big and strong is being able to end the situation very quickly haha) But you don't see strongman competitors able to endure a marathon and I very much doubt there's many competitive marathoners that can powerlift worth a hoot. And operating at high altitude for a long time seems a lot more like endurance than power. </p><p></p><p>Or am I totally out to lunch here and it has nothing to do with bodily oxygen need and fuel consumption, something else entirely?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Calvin45, post: 2789108, member: 109862"] I’ve found this whole thread to be quite interesting all around. I live in northern Sk at a mere 1100 feet above sea level and have never experienced much for elevation (driving through the Rockies to the bc coast doesn’t count haha, though my ears certainly give me hell when driving downhill in a hurry) I have to wonder, it just makes intuitive sense to me but the truth often isn’t what seems most obvious) - Would being physically larger be a big disadvantage for altitude sickness? Or does it have nothing to do with it? I’m not talking fat/obese/whatever you wanna call it and tremendously unhealthy and out of shape. Nor am I just referring to the bigger man having more weight to haul up the mountain. I mean if you have two men of EQUAL cardiac fitness and strength conditioning proportionate to their respective sizes, of equal body fat to muscle ratios, about the same age and in the same health etc…all things being equal except their natural healthy size…let’s go a bit extreme and say a 6 foot 4 and naturally stout build (like a football player) and a naturally thin/wiry kind of muscular 5 foot 8 (like a lightweight boxer), both in great shape. Am I right to expect the big guy should be WAAAAAY MORE SENSITIVE to any oxygen reduction simply because his larger body burns through a lot more of it even at rest than the lightweight? I know even in competitive sports and endurance races and wrestling/boxing/any kind of fighting, the general rule is that big guys, even if in fantastic shape, “run out of gas” faster (of course in some situations the benefit of being big and strong is being able to end the situation very quickly haha) But you don’t see strongman competitors able to endure a marathon and I very much doubt there’s many competitive marathoners that can powerlift worth a hoot. And operating at high altitude for a long time seems a lot more like endurance than power. Or am I totally out to lunch here and it has nothing to do with bodily oxygen need and fuel consumption, something else entirely? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Physical Training For Mountain Hunts & Backpacking
Getting in mountain shape with no mountains around?
Top