I am looking for approximately 20 to 25 volunteers in the Tucson area for a blind test of Oral IV, a "rapid rehydration ultra concentrate," and several other methods of rehydrating the human body.
These methods may include various popular sports drinks as well as "Supplement Charge," a substance with a remarkably similar description to that of Oral IV. To wit, both include these phrases in their advertising:
- Increases oxygen uptake at the cellular level
- Raises osmotic pressure level of cells to keep them strong
- Increases body enzyme production
- Enhance uptake of vitamins, macro minerals, proteins and other essential nutrients from natural food sources or dietary supplements
Other claims are similar, yet worded differently. Both descriptions also reference ions or ionic charges, crystalloid electrolytes, and other identical or nearly-identical phrases. Furthermore, both are intended to be mixed in small amounts with water. Supplement Charge, however, is much cheaper, at approximately $15 for enough fluid to "treat" 30 16-ounce bottles of water, while Oral IV is sold at the same price per package, although each package will only "treat" 4 16-ounce bottles of water.
If you are interested in helping me with this study, know that it will involve mild physical exercise and a urine test. I don't yet have a timeline, but will be discussing this with those who email email@example.com about the test.
I decided to take some detailed photos of my Enfields; here are the results, along with some comments about the rifles.
Thanks for reading. As mentioned previously, I wish that new production Enfield pattern rifles in various calibers were available.
I woke up this morning and saw a few links to this article about Oral IV. I found it interesting to read because a) SCIENCE!, and b) it mirrored my own experiences with Oral IV.
Last year, during the 24 Hour Sniper Adventure Challenge, I used a packet, or four tubes, of Oral IV. I also consumed at least twenty liters of water, most of which was infused with Squinchers electrolyte powder. I felt no immediate boost when I used the Oral IV tubes (which I did not mix with water but instead drank as a discrete unit), which I used rather randomly throughout the event. I did notice that I felt weaker at the end of the event, several hours after I had run out of Squinchers powder and was using water alone. This may also be partially due to the fact that I had just hiked 30+ miles without sleep over what was essentially mountainous terrain. Oh, and it was uphill both ways, although there was no snow.
Thus concludes my experiences with Oral IV.
When dealing with heat casualties as a Corpsman, I always preferred to have conscious patients who could keep fluids down drink water and/or Gatorade. I found that this was at least as effective in returning someone to near-full-health as spending the time to drop an IV in them - and the one time I had upwards of a dozen people badly needing fluid replacement out of twenty-six guys, I could only take the time to put a liter of LR (lactated ringers) in the most serious casualties.
In other words, my entirely anecdotal experiences have led me to believe that drinking water and keeping electrolytes in your system - giving your body the materials to replenish itself the way your genetic makeup intended - is the best way to keep yourself from being taken out of the fight or competition via dehydration. Other sciency-type articles have been written about this. Oral IV does not appear to aid this process in any material fashion.
I grew up hearing tales of Beirut from my parents, who worked there in the '70s; it became an imperative that I visit the city as well. I had no memories for comparison, but I could tell that it was an incredible example of the way cultures can come together in one small area. What follows are photographs I took of Beirut, mostly at night as I walked around the city. I will also include some brief comments.
Overall, it was a study in contrast.
One thing not shown in these photos is the extremely heavy security presence; comparable to that of Tunisia during the Arab Spring revolt. Several months before my visit, the Lebanese intelligence minister had been killed in a massive car bomb attack. Some of the soldiers and police were polite and conversational with me; others were condescending or even openly hostile towards my presence. Many military posts consisted of bombed-out, bullet-riddled buildings in the middle of otherwise rather nice areas of town.
After spending a considerable amount of time in the city, I could see why Beirut was the stuff of legends. But I found the Lebanese countryside to be far more welcoming and attractive. See my photos of Lebanon's historical sites for more on that topic.
You will notice that this blog often goes several days or weeks without updates. This is most often because I don't have anything to say which is worth a blog post. When I do have minor thoughts, I post them on Facebook or occasionally Twitter, where such content belongs. I don't have any advertising on this blog and it doesn't matter to me how many people visit it on a daily basis.
This is not the model followed by many other firearm-related blogs. I have no disdain whatsoever for those who post more than I do, but I do take issue with people who blow hot air when they should be listening and learning.
Yes, I venture into dangerous territory here, but there are some websites which focus on producing a massive volume of content at the risk of sacrificing quality, basic journalistic principles, and even common sense. I've written about guns.com before, and after reading a few things over the last few days, I have some comments about "TTAG" (The Truth About Guns) as well.
In response to a short article - part of a series - by Tim Lau on Modern Service Weapons about the Colt M45 CQBP handgun, TTAG lifted a few paragraphs from the article and commented sarcastically about both Mr. Lau's comments on 1911 reliability and 10-8's decision to not publish their function test protocol for the 1911. On the surface, the latter point seems to have merit - why wouldn't they publish the protocol? But they explain it in a way that makes sense to me - the test outside of its proper context is meaningless.
I understood immediately. It is important to step back and understand all factors relating to the performance of a firearm. Years of experience with the observation of a certain firearm are not easily compressed into a 500 or 1000 word blog post. Mr. Lau and Mr. Hilton choose to observe their test protocol firsthand, and I fully believe that they are in the right when they do so.
Of course, if one does not know the background of Tim Lau and Hilton Yam, it sounds suspicious. This is where that "journalistic integrity" thing comes in: if TTAG had bothered to mention that MSW is run by a pair of guys who teach courses specific to the 1911, their readers might have seen the comments about 1911 reliability in a different light. Similarly, their expertise regarding the 1911 platform explains their development of a test protocol specifically related to that firearm, and their decision not to release that protocol would have been, at the very least, better understood, if not fully accepted by all.
But that wouldn't have gotten very much traffic, so instead, TTAG chose to stir up their reader base by publishing a few paragraphs from an article, accompanied by cryptic and snide remarks about the source. Naturally, the people who choose to read TTAG attacked Mr. Lau on a variety of fronts (Ironically, one of the commenters pointed to some of my previous work as an example of how things should be done).
TTAG then doubled down on their retardation by publishing a comment which could have easily been written in 1992 - a further attack on Mr. Lau and that one paragraph about the 1911 - as a separate blog post. It, naturally, received lots of admiration from the TTAG faithful, who again ignored the fact that Mr. Lau is a subject matter expert on the 1911. I don't always agree with what Mr. Lau or Mr. Hilton say or do, but I do respect their experience and opinions.
Keep in mind that TTAG is the same website which published an article about why people shouldn't use ARs for self defense - written by someone with literally zero background in the offensive or defensive use of any type of firearm... which brings me back to my opening thoughts.
There are firearm-related blogs which yearn for mass appeal and end up being purveyors of garbage. I've written about this before, and I am sure that I will do so again. I don't expect this article to have any major impact. I don't expect my work to have the mass appeal of TTAG or Guns.com. Frankly, I don't want that. But if I've educated a few people about how dangerous it is to confuse enthusiasm for expertise, I will have succeeded.