Hydration Status Of Air Force Basic Trainees After Implementation Of The Back Mounted Hydration System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Air Force makes an extraordinary effort to prevent heat-related illnesses associated with basic military training (BMT) in the South Texas heat. However, problems still occur. While regular intake of water reduces overheating and dehydration associated with training, inadequate hydration is still indicated as a significant contributor to lost training time and qualified BMTs leaving military service without completing basic training. PURPOSE: The purpose of the present study was to determine whether equipping BMTs with back mounted hydration systems is better than the standard issue (SI) water canteens with respect to physiological indications of hydration status. METHODS: Eighty male BMTs were randomly assigned to either back mounted (BM) or standard issue canteen (SI) groups. Baseline values were assessed on Friday of zero week of training (WOT) prior to any physical readiness training (PRT). Subsequent data collection took place starting in mid-August throughout the first 3 queried from 2002-2005, using the CPSC code for "Weightlifting." CPSC sampling and the 5th WOT following "warrior week" in the morning upon waking and after voiding the bladder prior to PRT and in the afternoon prior to dinner. BMT hydration status was assessed via body water weight using bioelectrical impedance (Tanita BF 350, Tokyo, Japan) and saliva analysis for osmolality (Osmette III, Precision Systems, Natick, MA) and total protein concentration. RESULTS: Hydration status in both BM and SI groups increased over the daily training periods and was well-maintained over the duration of BMT. Average morning hydration status (% body weight) and total body water (lb) were slightly higher in SI versus BM. Daily, saliva osmolality and total protein decreased more in SI versus BM (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Hydration status can be maintained at high levels during Air Force BMT in a hot environment using either the standard issue canteen or back mounted hydration systems. Therefore, our data does not support widespread issuance of the back mounted hydration system on the premise of improved hydration during military training.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".