Ditto on read but not watched.
I like the notion. I'm also rather envious (these guys are doing what I'd love to be doing rather than be a corporate hack). One TBI and a diagnosis of Raynaud's syndrome ago and I might have chosen that lifestyle.
Two lines stuck out to me: "'The Mallory shoe went through 40 pairs of hands doing little technical details,' Ross says. 'It was an enormous undertaking because boots like that nowadays simply aren’t made.'" and "The historic gear worked spectacularly well, but it came with a caveat: it required immense skill to operate." These highlight a point sometimes lost in 'then-now' comparisons -- a lot of the reasons for modern gear changes absolutely and intentionally are for reasons of convenience (or novice accessibility) and/or because hand-crafted gear would be prohibitively expensive today. No argument, no contest, 'better at the task' was not the reason for its' adoption. A huge amount of it has always been about getting your cousin Steve backpacking in the gear, not because Shackleton (or Will Steger) would have done better using it.
Great article. Does the video say if they are going to publish somewhere? I did efficacy and specificity research on the Stroop Cognitive Test back in my public health grad school days, and would love to see an article on its' use in a setting like this.
