Bear Grylls- TV programme

[falling rain]

All the dangers you quote, were and as most people on this site will tell you, are avoidable by any sensible person with half an eye on their own personal safety, and were done exaggerated for the TV, and therefore within his/or the directors control. Not running down the slop would make the danger of the slope negligible, same with the tree climbing water dinking maggot chomping Yada Yada Yadda.

The alligators, and the snakes, would ignore the directors yelling “cut” so presented the only real danger to the actor. Ask any stunt man it’s only dangerous if you have no control of it, its’ the wild animals and wilder kid that you have no control of, they both present real dangers, ask any parent :swordfigh

Nope, still don't know what you mean.
Proceeding with EXTREME CAUTION through a snake/aligator swamp, area with grizzly's is just as valid as proceeding with EXTREME CAUTION over hostile terrain. Hostile meaning submerged sharp tree trunks, icy slopes, areas with crevaces, razor grass (tonights episode) get cut and get infected etc There is advice on how to deal with an aligator if you come across one and that's to back the hell off and go the long way round if necessary.
If you take it slowly and carefully through a dangerous area infested with dangerous animals you will indeed increase your chances of making it out in one piece of course you will. Equally if you proceed with extreme caution (instead of rampaging through it like you're in a cross country race) through an area riddled with hidden crevaces you will indeed increase you chances of getting across without falling to your death. Both situations demand your utmost concentration and respect..................dangerous animal or dangerous terrain. You can still fall to your death in a blink of an eye taking care across dodgy ground. If you're charging across it you're cutting them chances down dramatically.
Same dangers out there............. different circumstances.........................all requiring a great deal of caution and utmost respect

 

[Tadpole]

Nope, still don't know what you mean.
Proceeding with EXTREME CAUTION through a snake/aligator swamp, area with grizzly's is just as valid as proceeding with EXTREME CAUTION over hostile terrain. Hostile meaning submerged sharp tree trunks, icy slopes, areas with crevaces, razor grass (tonights episode) get cut and get infected etc There is advice on how to deal with an aligator if you come across one and that's to back the hell off and go the long way round if necessary.
If you take it slowly and carefully through a dangerous area infested with dangerous animals you will indeed increase your chances of making it out in one piece of course you will. Equally if you proceed with extreme caution (instead of rampaging through it like you're in a cross country race) through an area riddled with hidden crevaces you will indeed increase you chances of getting across without falling to your death. Both situations demand your utmost concentration and respect..................dangerous animal or dangerous terrain. You can still fall to your death in a blink of an eye taking care across dodgy ground. If you're charging across it you're cutting them chances down dramatically.
Same dangers out there............. different circumstances.........................all requiring a great deal of caution and utmost respect

is that not what I have just said, Bear didn't Proceed with EXTREME CAUTION, on the whole he exaggerated the experence for the TV. making it more "thrilling" but the bits where he faced real uncontrolable danger (the animals) he paid more attention to his own safety. that is when he Proceeded with EXTREME CAUTION.

 

[Glen]

There was a lot more sensible and sound tips and advice, like the straining the water through the shirt and making a net from the stick and shirt and boiling the water. He actually said and I quote 'Water should be boiled at all times'................So why didn't he impart the same advice when he drank the water in the first episode straight from the stream and ended up with the squits. He could have said something like in Extreme extremis these are the signs that 'MAY' indicacate water is fairly clean but my advice is to 'ALWAYS' boil water.

Without digging out the video the confirm but I think, in the first episode, he did say that he really should have boiled the water but was in a hurry and taking a calculated risk iven the water he was drinking from fulfilled some minimal requirements, clear and fast running with certain animals living in it ( not using those exact words though )
Personally I don't think it's conclusive that his illness during the night ( about 12 hours after drinking the water ) was nessesarily because of the water. eg He could have been bitten stung by a multitude of things that might have caused such a reaction as well as plant poisons picked up in cuts or tranfered to mouth while eating with fingers.

I was always under the impression that direct chemical poisons would come one quicker than bacterial ones, bacterial ones falling into 2 main catergories, those where the body react against the organism itself about 24 hours and those where the reaction is to the waste product of the organism about 48 hours.

Anyone got any good references as to how long water borne pathogens start having an effect?

I'm stumped about why he strained the dirty water straight into his water bottle then poured it into another vessel to boil, seems to me it would have been far better to strain it into the boiling vessel the pour that into water bottle to keep the bottle germ free.

Anyway much better tonight by a very long shot.

I though both 2nd and 3rd episodes were better, maybe as it's easier to get a film crew to follow and get good shots in alpine and swamp conditions than it is in jungle and therefore needing less later reconstructed shots to fill in. Maybe the first was deliberately more exagerated to try to hook in the more general veiwwing public.

 

[Martyn]

I was always under the impression that direct chemical poisons would come one quicker than bacterial ones, bacterial ones falling into 2 main catergories, those where the body react against the organism itself about 24 hours and those where the reaction is to the waste product of the organism about 48 hours.

Incubation times vary from one organism to the next, but casn be as short as 3 hours or up to a coupole of weeks. Salmonella for example ranges from 6 to 72 hours, but onset of symptoms is typically 12 hours after ingestion.

 

[Jedadiah]

Hey Glen,

with regards to your question about references to water bourne pathogens, i seem to remember an article in 'Trail' magazine last year about all things 'Water'. There was a table with names of the most notable pathogens (about 8 or 10 i think), incubation periods and how different filtration and purification methods deal with them.

To be honest, i think the conclusion was, to be safe, boil your water, then use a filter, then add puritabs, then use an iodene straw, then get a bottle of water out of your bergan that you brought with you!

I'll try and dig it out.

 

[falling rain]

I think that the reason he was not rushing about like a headless chicken, was there were real dangers, i.e. being eaten by an alligator, an animal who is not at all impressed by a camera crew, snakes feel the same way. I’m sure they would rather eat a celerity than a regular Joe.

I'm trying to refer to where you say above there were real dangers. The real dangers are also inanimate as well as animate is what I'm trying to say. Why would you want to be running down a slope risking falling into a crevass even to make exciting TV. Even if the ground has been checked first to make sure there are none............... it wasn't mentioned. It's plain irresponsible to show this to viewers.
It would have been equally irresponsible to show him charging around in an aligator swamp which they didn't.
So why (if the guy is such an action man) didn't he charge around the swamp with the big fellas with big teeth but he did charge down the slope with the possibility of crevasses or a sudden cliff edge to run over which are notoriously difficult to see in snow as it looks like a flat plain and you often don't see the drop until it's too late even if you're walking let alone running.
In my book they are both equally dangerous and very real. The exiting thrilling TV you mention............. is running down a slippery slope not a real uncontrollable danger if you suddenly come across a cliff edge?
I simply believe that animals AND terrain are real uncontrollable dangers if not approached in the correct manner for the circumstances. One programme (last nights) he showed the right way to treat dangerous animals. Another programme (the first and second episodes) there were several examples of deinately NOT what to do in a given situation....................with very real dangers present albeit not animals.
I was impressed with his knowledge on the plants and animals of the areas he's been in though. He does seem to have a good base knowledge of the flora and fauna in different environments and countries.

 

[oops56]

i went to web sit before he goes in them woods he spends weeks talking to the people to lean there ways. Things that are good to eat etc. there way of living

 

[Tadpole]

In my book they are both equally dangerous and very real. The exiting thrilling TV you mention............. is running down a slippery slope not a real uncontrollable danger if you suddenly come across a cliff edge?
I simply believe that animals AND terrain are real uncontrollable dangers if not approached in the correct manner for the circumstances.

I think you are missing what I am saying, running down a slope is insanity unless you have checked the slope, which is why someone would have checked it all in advance, by getting his stunt coordinator/ survival expert to check ahead for all the possible hazards, planning a route that would give him the most “bang for his buck”

The camera crew would not want to eat raw fish, and the amount of kit that needed would necessitate a camera car.
The maggots he “ate” would be shop bought and cleaned by keeping them in bran for a few days. The snake in this show would have been cooled to make it slow enough for him to handle. He controlled his environment; any thing that looked dangerous was carefully made safe, without it appearing so, safety harnesses, wet suits, men off camera with heat packs and blankets.

In most of the shows the things he did at breakneck speed looked more dangerous than they were, however, the alligators don’t care who they eat, and it would not help to have a guy on the bank with a rifle, if an alligator bit off his leg.

 

[falling rain]

I think you are missing what I am saying, running down a slope is insanity unless you have checked the slope, which is why someone would have checked it all in advance, by getting his stunt coordinator/ survival expert to check ahead for all the possible hazards, planning a route that would give him the most “bang for his buck”

The camera crew would not want to eat raw fish, and the amount of kit that needed would necessitate a camera car.
The maggots he “ate” would be shop bought and cleaned by keeping them in bran for a few days. The snake in this show would have been cooled to make it slow enough for him to handle. He controlled his environment; any thing that looked dangerous was carefully made safe, without it appearing so, safety harnesses, wet suits, men off camera with heat packs and blankets.

In most of the shows the things he did at breakneck speed looked more dangerous than they were, however, the alligators don’t care who they eat, and it would not help to have a guy on the bank with a rifle, if an alligator bit off his leg.

Nope still don't know what you're trying to say.
How do you know all these precautions were taken before filming?............. Although you're probably right and everything has been safety checked in advance, But as you say they don't appear so on the film. If that IS the case
So if they've gone to such great lengths of safety for everything else is it not reasonable to assume that the producers have taken the trouble to employ the services of the local Everglades alligator experts to take the lead, scout the area ahead of BG and the film crew, armed with a high velocity rifle or even a hand grenade if necessary or gator spray or whatever the gator experts use.....(Steve Irwin of the Everglades if you like) point out (off camera) where the gator(s) was/were
and start filming as though BG has just come across it himself. I'm sure there must be experts who monitor the gator population in the Everglades who know their onions, and BG didn't get close enough in the programme for the gator to get him. At least not close enough for the high powered rifle guy stood behind him out of camera shot, not to be able to shoot it with his high powered rifle before it got to him.
If they have checked everything first and made it all nice and safe for the other programmes of the series then I suppose they will have taken the same precautions to do the same for the gators, off camera and whatever was necessary. It could have been chucked a leg of lamb full of dope an hour before those camera shots were taken.
If they havn't done any of the safety stuff necessary for any of the situations, which as you pointed out they most probably have done.............. then ALL the dangers are very real whether they are dangerous animals or dangerous terrain.
However some of the previous programmes have not demonstrated entirely safe practices. Where as last nights episode was a great improvement and on the whole compared with the last 2 episodes was a lot more sensible. From a viwers perspective he quite rightly gave the gator a wide birth. In the second episode from a viewers perspective he quite wrongly charged down a snow laden hill risking avalanche and dropping off the edge of a cliff. The viewer wasn't told it's been checked first it came across to the man in the street or someone who knows no better that was an OK thing to do.

 

[David Morgan]

I think Tadpole is trying to account for the different style of the everglades episode (slower and more calm) in contrast the the first two (fast and frantic) in terms of the ability of the production team to manage the different types of risks each situation presented. Take running down the icy slope and wading through an alligator inhabited swamp. The slope is relatively static. Maps could be checked. Then the slope could be scouted for is suitability. Then Bear could walk/clambler down it to familiarise himself and pick a route. He can then do it for 'real'. He can afford to throw himself down that slope like a maniac (that is with the appearance of mania) because he could plan and prepare; It is not spontaneous nor reckless in the true meaning of the word ie incautious and heedless of the consequences of ones actions.
The alligator swamp on the other hand would be much less predictable than the slope. Leave the slope for five minutes, come back, and you can reasonably expect it to be much the same, but i would suspect that the same cannot be said of the swamp. The main danger is from the animals which move about, arrive and depart. Because Bear can't build up the danger levels in the same way he would with the static slope he must work with geater margins for error, more overt caution.
In reality he and the production team are being equally cautious in both situations, but the pedictability of the slope allows for a greater impression of recklessness.
I would speculate

I can't remember where I heard this but I think its useful to distinguish between a hazard and a danger. A can of petrol is a hazard; the danger is that it will catch fire. The danger the petrol presents can be managed by following proper precations regarding storage and handling. Both the alligator swamp and the hillside are hazards, but the degree to which the dangers they present are managable and the method for managing those dangers are different, and result in different styles of programme.

 

[Carcajou Garou]

People..people..people realize that this is a staged TV show with a host under "contract" Does nobody any good to have the Host die, be dismembered, sicken, disappear etc... before the next/last episode.
Does make you talk around the water cooler though, respond, attack, defend, discuss ad infinitum on various boards and such. That's the intended point of it all. Outlandish behaviour like this in the wilds, totaly independent of any support staff, will get you dead eventually, maybe not the first exposure but by the end nature will take a "bite" out of you, no gator pun intended. Like Illusionists, magicians, dare devils, it gives you a thrill that you don't, can't, won't do for your own self.
You have several good, sound, knowledgeable, wilderness instructor in the British Isles some are even on this board, learn from them, and enjoy the broadcast as entertaiment value, just like "pro" wrestling.
Then go out and with what kit you have experience the outdoors first hand, I garantee it will be a much better experience.

 

[Pete E]

Nope, still don't know what you mean.
Proceeding with EXTREME CAUTION through a snake/aligator swamp, area with grizzly's is just as valid as proceeding with EXTREME CAUTION over hostile terrain.

Falling Rain,

There are no Grizzly's in the Everglades, just the far smaller and usually far less dangerous black bear...They along with the Florida Panther usually give humans a wide berth...

Regards,

Pete

 

[Pete E]

Also, I noticed in the final credits for the programe, they listed a "survival expert" ...I didn't catch his name, but it wasn't Bear Grylis!!

 

[falling rain]

Falling Rain,

There are no Grizzly's in the Everglades, just the far smaller and usually far less dangerous black bear...They along with the Florida Panther usually give humans a wide berth...

Regards,

Pete

I know there are no Grizzly's in the Everglades Pete. I was talking generally about dangerous animals.

I think this is going around in circles and people seem to be not reading , taking in, and answering correspondingly, me included, and I maybe am not understanding what Tadpole is trying to say as he maybe is not quite getting what I'm trying to say.
The original comment from Tadpole was that this

I think that the reason he was not rushing about like a headless chicken, was there were real dangers, i.e. being eaten by an alligator, an animal who is not at all impressed by a camera crew, snakes feel the same way. I’m sure they would rather eat a celerity than a regular Joe.

...........................And I think that were real dangers in ALL the episodes but he didn't behave correspondingly and didn't come across to a viewer (and remember we're not all into survival or bushcraft) in all the episodes as he did with the gators. In a nutshell that's it.

I can't be bothered with this any more as it's going round and round so I'm going to leave it there for my part.
I still think that the most recent episode was a great improvement on the first 2

 

[stav]

Four pages of argument about a TV programme. :Wow:

If this thread proves anything, it's that you lot are watching far too much telly and youtube and arguing about what you saw.

Put the TV down. Put this thread down. Go do something more worthwhile.

Dear Emma and all you ladies, we have to talk about something while the next edition of 'Nuts' comes out.

 

[Jodie]

I like the adverts for Nuts, they make me laugh despite myself.

Anyway I managed to watch only five minutes of this programme on Saturday
before I had to pull back the sofa from the wall all the better to hide behind it.
Far too scary for me. He was shinning up a tree to avoid crocodiles in the
bit that I caught.

I'm afraid I turned over and watched Jane Austen's Emma At least there
was a smidgen of bushcraft-type stuff in that - they practised archery and
gathered wild foods!

 

[Pete E]

I was lucky enough to visit the Everglades several years ago...to put this in perspective, there were quite a few tourist attractions showing what they billed as alligator wrestling...

In the show I watched this consisted off a local Indian wading bare foot in a shallow pool which was absolutely chocked full of gators of all sizings..Every step the guy took he had to push the larger gators out of the way using a staff...

The gators seemed fairly lively and from the snapping of jaws they did not appear to have had them wired shut....Once the chap had selected a fair size gator about five or six feet, he grabbed it by the tail and hauled it out on to the sandbank for us to see...He then spent the rest of the show handling this gator while giving a run down of its natural history plus info on the habitat where it lived...

While the gator was certainly too small to be a "maneater" it would have been quite cablable of crushing an arm or leg if the guy had been careless..Looking at the bulk of the thing I suspect this was about the largest size that could be physically man handled with an acceptable degree of risk...Very interesting stuff and not something I would care to try!

 

[John Dixon]

The survival expert in this tv program is Drum role please.............................Kris Thoemke ( according to credits)-------------------------------------- Not Bear Grylls------------------Bear is the face of the show.. ITS TV ------------------------------ITS NOT REAL I have worked in TV Production and none of it is real.... even the news is subjective ....

 

[Greg]

Did anyone watch the Bear Grylls interview on the Richard & Judy show yesterday?

It was quite enlightening, it gave Bear the chance to explain why he did certain stuff and that in the dangerous situations such as crossing the waterway in the everglades he had rangers on the banks keeping an eye out.
It was a good interview and worthwhile watching, IMO!

 

[Wink]

I missed that!

See this though, presumably the same sort of chat...

http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/B/born_survivor/talks_1.html