Very sad news. https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...e_iOSApp_Other
Very sad news. https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...e_iOSApp_Other
A really tragedy, sounds absolutely horrific. Some more (non-hyperbolic, non-judgemental) details here: https://www.irunfar.com/twenty-one-r...A4fPJTbDe0JvEc
Geoff Clarke
Twenty one deaths certainly suggests that no proper risk assessment was done - to say the least.
This is interesting:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...80603220302179
It does seem perverse (?- can’t find the right word!) that I carried (rightly so) full waterproofs, head torch and a survival bag, having been through a rigorous kit check for a 2hour evening jaunt around Dovedale a couple of weeks ago, and the other event took place without some of those basic requirements.
There were experienced competitors in the race who had raced internationally!
Unnecessary and avoidable tragedy.
Indeed, thanks. These 21 deaths due to hypothermia will certainly skew the numbers next time this analysis is run. So here's an evidence-based recommendation from this manuscript:
There is a charity called CRY (cardiac research in the young) who screen young athletes for cardiac abnormalities, and probably have prevented lots of deaths by doing this. There's not a corresponding charity cardiac research in middle aged and old athletes. Perhaps there should be.The relatively high percentage of sudden cardiac deaths stresses the need for preparticipation cardiovascular screenings
The Life Scientific, R4 this morning is going to be about exposure and hypothermia. From the trailer it.might be primarily about cold water immersion but likely to be of interest.
Clearly not much attention was paid to weather forecast?
I'm sure there will be repercussions on the organization and in this case rightly so, but also experienced runners heading out on mountains in possible bad weather not carrying extra kit is not so clever.
Mandatory does not mean you can't chose to be sensible and take a little extra. Space blankets on the mountains for heaven's sake.
Just throwing a comment...
without data at hand, I would say most avoidable tragedies in sport come from not previously known cardiovascular issues. In Italy, where I'm from, before you are allowed to enter any competitive event, in any sport, a cardiologist certificate is required, normally an ECG under effort. Of course not perfect, but a huge step in the right direction. I know of fit young good club runners (not fat old smokers!) that were denied participation, because the cardiologist found something.
I was shocked in Britain this is not bothered.
Speaking with a friend, English in England, who happen to be a great runner and a sport lawyer, he said "because the law is different, here the liability is on the participant themselves rather than on the race organizer, that's why they don't need to bother". From a lawyer, bad answer. Forget who is liable by law, think rather what happens next ...
Complaining about the nanny state anyone?