Abstract
To the Editor:
I found the article “The Impact of Footwear and Packweight on Injury and Illness Among Long-Distance Hikers” 1 interesting, but I feel more questions were raised than answered. I submit the following for consideration with the hope that the raw data may reveal additional useful correlations, possibly establishing specific recommendations or outlining new areas for meaningful research.
What was the relationship between packweight and footwear? Did people wearing the heavier pack have the heavier shoes?
Was there a relationship between packweight and other problems? For example, was a very light pack associated with wilderness-associated diarrhea? Paring down packweight may have significant trade-offs, not just comfort.
What was the average of consecutive days hiked for those with different packweight or footwear? I find it hard to imagine that someone with a pack of 10 to 20 pounds trekked as much at one time as someone with a heavier pack or that someone with sandals hiked as far as someone with different footwear.
By not establishing a relationship to the site of paresthesias the article loses some punch, since it is likely that a heavier pack causes the paresthesias to occur in the upper extremities.
What about the age of individuals as related to the various complaints? Was there an age difference in those carrying different weight packs or using heavier footwear?
I realize that some answers, to be scientifically valid, may require a much larger number of respondents than available at present, but it seems that the entire topic deserves the effort. I also wonder if the Army or Marines have data, though admittedly they use different packs/weights, and footwear. Would they be interested in assisting in gathering data?
There are several articles that these authors can write, and I look forward to them.