Big & Tall vs. Short & Small

  • Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.

Which is better in a survival situation to be:


  • Total voters
    21
  • Poll closed .
Ok I did a small study on the phisiological aspects on the need for nutrition for larger people and smaller people. Who would be able to survive a harsh environment more?

I am a large guy 6'1" 265 lbs. I use more energy going up and down hillsides than that of someone say 5'5" and 145 lbs. The need for additional energy is amplified by a persons body mass. However in cold climates a lean body is more subjective to climate vs say that of a hefty person. Of course you have fat an insulator but also energy reserve. So which invariably would be the better survival situation to be?
 

billycan

Forager
Jan 21, 2006
240
1
Sussex
Very interesting... surely surface area has a big part to play, in terms of heat loss i.e lower for the smaller person. It seems like swings and roundabouts? - both positive and negative aspects to both body types depending on the survival scenario?
 
billycan said:
Very interesting... surely surface area has a big part to play, in terms of heat loss i.e lower for the smaller person. It seems like swings and roundabouts? - both positive and negative aspects to both body types depending on the survival scenario?


I agree it does vary on the situation however, overall if you take the major two which would be the heat and the cold and we'll throw in wet also... which one would you rather be? because several factors play a role in each persons ability to survive.

I'll give my answe later after hearing what the community has to say.
 
Normally here where conditions can be harsh we just add more clothes. To the point where everyone looks like a blimp. Without proper clothing I guess the person with a higher ratio of body mass to surface area is going to last a few more minutes.
 
Hi,

The question “Which is better in a survival situation to be..” is only really relevant to the particular survival situation surely?

IMHO I don’t believe that either Large and Tall versus Short and Small can be comparable as a general rule. For example I’m 6 feet tall and weigh 15 stone and I really feel the cold and suffer in cold climates, BUT I am more than happy to carry a 80lb plus loaded bergen all day long. So from a personal perspective I would be disadvantaged in a cold weather survival situation but would feel totally confident in my ability to walk and climb out a spot of bother in temperate weather.

It’s a very interesting poll but not one I feel able to answer. :confused:

Hope you don’t mind my contribution/rant though :D

Phil.
 
Jan 22, 2006
478
0
51
uk
ranulph fiennes' book 'mind over matter' looks into this question, well the guy who went with him, Dr Mike Stroud, did a report on it - which is also in the book. They both thought that the other guy had the better body shape, but Fiennes needed more calories as he had the larger frame, and hence had to drag more food with him...which he then gave to Stroud at times.
To me there is nothing more important than mental attitude, but in terms of body size i think its dependant on the environment.
swings and roundabouts in the uk / north america, but generally its obviously better to have the fat layer in the cold and skinny in the heat!

a positive attitude seems to be able to adapt to just about anything...just wish i knew where i could order one off the internet....
 

leon-1

Full Member
Both have good and bad points.

In extremes of cold the body has to work very hard, this generates heat and keeps us warm when we are moving. When we are static and cold the body withdraws blood to the central core (almost as with peripheral shutdown) to protect it's main functions and organs.

It is very much dependant on physical condition (level of fitness, weight and amount of fat) and levels of activity..

There is the possibility that a big guy could overheat in extreme conditions if he had to exert himself and collapse from heat exhaustion, however if he were to die as a result it would probably be due to hypothermia in the end.

Effectivley the question is very subjective, we know nothing of the actual physical condition of the test subjects in as much as thier levels of fitness, what amount of thier body weight is due to fat, what thier metabolic rates are or even the extent of the "cold enviroment" that they are trying to survive in (is it Central Canadian winter, winter on Dartmoor or Antarctic winter in South Georgia), as the types of cold are different as is the availability of shelter and food sources.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Toddy
Thank you all for replying and although there are variables to consider such as situation, climate and so on there is an overall difference. More mass means more calories and water, a heavier body is subjected to more impact force, a larger body has more surface temperature,, so with that regard things such as where a person is or what the temperature is has little bearing imo. Mental attitude is a very important factor but not one to consider in this poll because our subjects have equally matched attitudes. :cool:

in the desert SW of the US it can get up to 115* F daytime and near freezing nighttime, so here you have both temperature ranges with lack of watersources so on...
 

John Fenna

Lifetime Member & Maker
Oct 7, 2006
23,146
2,881
66
Pembrokeshire
Personally, I am short and fat -5'5" 15st - suffer in the heat, revel in the cold, struggle hauling my lardy **** up hills, especially over 2000m in altitude, have duff knees from too much weight/steep decents/hard surface training walks, high blood pressure and high lipid counts and yet thrive on leading expeditions where I carry 60lb packs in high heat/humidity conditions and in deserts and in mountains - attitude is all. I even enjoy the feeling of weight falling off me as I work too hard on 1/4 rations when things go tits up so you can see that attitude does not always mean mental balance! - I also enjoy puting the excess weight back on when things get better, so I am not totally crazy in that I love good food....OK maby I am crazy, but I enjoy myself...I think....
John
 

CLEM

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Jul 10, 2004
2,433
439
Stourbridge
Dident the bigger blokes fair the worst in Scotts losing artic race against Amundson?
 

leon-1

Full Member
Brian Curnel said:
More mass means more calories and water, a heavier body is subjected to more impact force, a larger body has more surface temperature,, so with that regard things such as where a person is or what the temperature is has little bearing imo. Mental attitude is a very important factor but not one to consider in this poll because our subjects have equally matched attitudes. :cool:

in the desert SW of the US it can get up to 115* F daytime and near freezing nighttime, so here you have both temperature ranges with lack of watersources so on...

Brian, you are generalising too much.

Age, sex and race are factors in this as well. Body mass is one thing, but also what it is made up of is a factor as fat is a significant insulator, muscle will insulate, but it also provides a benefit from shivering. The larger the muscle that shivers the more heat that it generates.

If i took a thin guy 6 feet tall, exposed him naked to a cold dry enviroment and did not allow him to be active in any way he would die faster than a guy of the same height and race with more mass (muscle or / and fat) if they were subject to the same conditions.

If I did the same thing in a cold wet enviroment he would die faster because water is more efficient at transmitting heat through wind convection than bare skin.

The enviroment can have a large effect. Dry cold has no more effect than wet cold untill the wind comes into play

Tall thin guys are worse off than shorter stockier men.

The bare arm loses more heat than a bare leg due to muscle mass or the larger amounts of insulative fat in the leg.

Levels of fitness can be factors though they are not really of massive significance as far as the regulation of the bodies temeprature.

Cold also has a large effect on the bodies metabolic rate, we burn more calories. Depending on levels of activity and the conditions that you are moving over you will generate a lot more heat in a significantly shorter time as deep snow is harder to walk on than tarmack, but a big guy could easily find it more difficult than a smaller lighter guy.

So thin people are more likely to be subject to cold injuries to thier extremities especially when they are cold, wet and it's windy. This is probably due to vasoconstriction.

However all this is totally academic as to actually prove any of this it would have to be done under laboratory conditions.

People will be wearing different clothing and have different levels of knowledge and it is very unlikely that they would ever be subject to identical conditions.

As I said before, the question is subjective.
 
Yes.. the question would have to be done inside a controlled climate with a lab. However it prompts one to think about the not so obvious doesn't it? When we trek out into the bush sometimes miles do we ever consider the bodys ability our physical condition to the condition of the elements? Like several others I am sure that I have bad ankles, someone might have bad knees, we both may be opposite size and physical stature however how would it affect one of us in a survival sutuation? would I be worse off because I am larger and it takes more physical endurance to move, or sustain myself? It is subjective to a point but I feel that there is a valid consideration by asking this type question.
 

leon-1

Full Member
Brian I can see your point and to be honest there is no definitive answer, I can appreciate your point on injuries, I have dodgy knees myself (amongst other bits which are falling apart), I am only 5' 10" and weigh about 196lbs.

Clothing, personal determination, general knowledge / common sense, knowledge of your own weak points and accepting them are all things that come into play.

The Royal Marines used to have the Mountain And Arctic Warfare Cadre, they had a set of rules, The Mountain And Arctic Saftey Rules, which were a set of common sense rules that could be applied to a walk in the hills, military work in Norway or even a survival situation.

If you couple that with a bit of training, plus the ability to think on your feet and the situation for someone that should be weaker and more susceptible to the cold could be massively changed.
 

BCUK Shop

We have a a number of knives, T-Shirts and other items for sale.

SHOP HERE