The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
yeah when i was in the arctic and we were packing out caribou we were heavy i mean over 100 pounds you know maybe one time who knows 20. um it was nice to have the hip belt because i would sort of spend most of my time with the weight on the hips but eventually that just starts to burn and you need to wash that out so you pop it your shoulders for a while and you can just kind of go i love that i love that back and forth on off on off
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
but i will spare my shoulder yeah so that's kind of to me the other thing about the the rucksack that really really beats the weight vest is that you're you have the distribution to load posteriorly but you also can really distribute the load on your hips which anyone who's hunted or done any backcountry stuff knows like are really it's so important to have your pack fit well on your hips otherwise you could simply couldn't carry 100 pounds on your shoulders for very long
I do think most people benefit from a hip belt because I think it is advantageous to put more of the weight on your hips than on your shoulders