Alexander Supertramp - If you've made your own conclusion, you may want to read this.

[wornoutboots]

I found this very intriguing.

http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/how-chris-mccandless-died

[wornoutboots]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/166341536/The-Silent-Fire

[Tipi Walter]

I believe he died of simple starvation. He was 140 lbs at the start, 67 lbs at the end. These two numbers tell the story.

[Dogwood]

Thanks for posting that WOB. It seems the most likely cause of McCandless demise not stupidity, naivety, idealism, romanticism, or incompetence on his part. I do however believe he was mentally balanced NOT mentally unbalanced as some would have us believe. It's good to see Krakauer being conscientious and respectful by updating the findings.

[rocketsocks]

Interesting read, thanks Wornoutboots...just goes to show you can't always believe what you read, and being your own advocate is sometimes just not good enough, a true tragedy.

[MuddyWaters]

It seems the most likely cause of McCandless demise not stupidity, naivety, idealism, romanticism, or incompetence on his part. I do however believe he was mentally balanced NOT mentally unbalanced as some would have us believe. It's good to see Krakauer being conscientious and respectful by updating the findings.

While those things might not have been directly responsible, I still don't think he was lacking in them. His whole Alaska sojourn, was basically a fiasco.

[rocketsocks]

Didn't he sell his rifle before going into the bush? can't remember.

[MuddyWaters]

No, he managed to shoot a moose and some squirrells with his 22. All the meat rotted though and he felt bad about killing it. Probably because it then attracted bears.
Duh.

[Wise Old Owl]

intriguing (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&hs=gyQ&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=sb&q=intriguing&spell=1&sa=X&ei=i6woVJiAG8aKyASo5oLIAw&ved=0CBwQvwUoAA&biw=1401&bih=739) - didn't have skills but was well book read

Tanaina Plantlore' by Priscilla Russel Kari
'Education of a Wandering Man' by Louis L'Amour
-Crime and Punishment (Fyodor Dostoyevsky)
-Death of Ivan Ilych (Tolstoy)
-Call of the Wild (London)
-White Fang (London)
-Moon-Face (London)
-Brown Wolf (London)
-To Build a Fire (London)
-Doctor Zhivago (Boris Pasternak)
-Terminal Man (Michael Crichton)
-O Jersualem! (Larry Collins & Dominique Lapierre)
-War and Peace (Tolstoy)
-Walden (Henry David Thoreau)

[rocketsocks]

No, he managed to shoot a moose and some squirrells with his 22. All the meat rotted though and he felt bad about killing it. Probably because it then attracted bears.
Duh.Yep, your right..just found it. He had a 30/06 that he took to college with him and the dorm supervisor asked that the rifle go back home with his folks...later he gets the .22LR which is what he took into the bush...crazy. Thanks Muddy Waters

[Lone Wolf]

dumbassery will get you killed every time

[Feral Bill]

dumbassery will get you killed every time

If that was true we wouldn't see rampant serial dumbassery.

[July]

If that was true we wouldn't see rampant serial dumbassery.

True that...

[wornoutboots]

I've always admired his non-conformist adventuresome spirit. After all anyone who is reading this from your work has conformed to the false security of society.

Dumbassery could be getting into a car with a complete stranger & something goes terribly wrong?? Let's hope that never happens to any of us.

[Tipi Walter]

Dumbassery is also just simply texting while driving. Or believing Lyndon Johnson when he tells you there's light at the end of the tunnel and then setting off a land mine in some jungle.

[Tuckahoe]

I believe he died of simple starvation. He was 140 lbs at the start, 67 lbs at the end. These two numbers tell the story.


As a simple layman reading the article its seems that the toxicity of the wild potato would not have been an issue if his health was not compromised by the effects of stress and nutritional deficiency. But he was stressed both physically and nutritionally, and had settled into a diet consisting of nearly only the wild potato. Which I think the article laid out as the mechanics of his starvation/poisoning.

While I do not disagree, I do think to say that he died of "simple starvation" is a serious over simplification, just as to say that he accidently poisoned himself. It seems to me that both are linked together.

[Ground Control]

I taught this novel to honors-level juniors for a few years. I have read it many, many times. My original paperback copy is annotated cover to cover, and my teaching binder is bursting with connections, activities, related research... I really enjoyed teaching it. Students seemed to be able to latch onto Krakauer's voice a little better than Thoreau's original writing...

In my years spent with this novel, I came to think of this researcher as having the answer to what happened to Chris McCandless:
http://www.tifilms.com/wild/call_debunked.htm

He has a documentary where he actually takes his camera to the bus. (Interestingly, Sean Penn finds out this guy is making his documentary and keeps trying to shut him down- pretty fascinating, but that's another story.)

Anyway, if you scroll down on the "Into the Wild Debunked" tab of his site, there is a graph that tracks McCandless's BMI in conjunction with his hunting (food) journal. The ultimate conclusion is that you don't need a fancy theory about plant misidentification or an obscure case of poisoning. Just as the coroner initially claimed, the death was one of simple starvation; a caloric deficit.

Interestingly though Ron Lamonthe also comes up with a theory as to the "injury" that McCandless's SOS note refers to. Certainly the injury contributed to McCandless's ability to hunt, gather, and even cross the Teklinika river, which might have required a bit of swimming...

I've read the 2013 New Yorker Piece where Krakauer finds some relatively obscure research that supports the plant-misidentification hastening starvation theory. Interesting, but a little self serving. Of course, this wouldn't be the first time John Krakauer's claims from a popular novel came into question (See Antoine Boukreev's account of the 1996 Everest disaster.) Once you realize McCandless DID have a map, and DID have his driver's license (See Ron Lamonthe's research), then some of Krakauer's other reasoning starts to crumble.

To Krakauer's credit, he has altered one of the final chapters at least twice over the years, each time modifying the scientific explanation of CM's death to match the ongoing debate. (It was always a pain to make sure all the students had matching books, with the same copy of ?Chapter 19.) I suppose the next update will include this research summarized in the New Yorker from 2013...

But why not fix other inaccuracies? Like the claims about having no wallet and no map, or the fact that Everett Ruess's disappearance has been solved? I guess you have to draw the line somewhere or even re-write the entrire book.

FWIW, I don't think McCandless died of dumbassery. I think, like many like-minded young men, he believed he was somewhat invincible and loved the thrill of adventure. This put him in some dangerous situations that not many people would enjoy. For McCandless, the challenge was the thrill. Eventually, he got himself into a situation unforgiving enough that he paid the ultimate price. Like many of us that hike alone, we know the margin of error is quite slim. Once McCandless was injured, keeping up the calories required for the Alaskan bush or crossing a river were both impossible. He paid the ultimate price.

As to the debate on whether McCandless should be admired or criticized... I think this cautionary tale provides a refreshing view into the adventurous American spirit. Many early colonists, explorers, and settlers paid the same ultimate price when they attempted to first live in this country, survive early American winters, head west for the land grab, or even take the covered wagon across the Rockies. Were they dumbasses too?

[Colter]

And I think I have some personal insight, having just returned this month from 70 days in the Alaska wilderness (http://bucktrack.com/Alaska_Survival_Journal.html) where I brought no food.

Compared to McCandless, I was eating large amounts of food, and I still lost 20 lbs. It takes a LOT of wild foods to keep from running a calorie deficit. I ate salmon, char, halibut, wild plants, berries, seaweed and a whole deer while I was out there. McCandless was running a huge calorie deficit which is inevitably fatal if unchecked.

The Terra Incognita Films (http://www.tifilms.com/wild/call_debunked.htm) has it right with the graph of weight loss.

If he was eating enough wild pea seeds to cause Lathyrism, he was starving to death. Starvation remains the official cause of death for good reason, despite Krakauer's changing alternate explanations.

[Affirmative]

This is a fascinating thread. I've got to check out the links when I got time and return.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lemon b]

I respect Krakauer for rethinking his conclusion and admitting he could be wrong. The sad part which can not be changed is that McCandless passed away at such a young age. We all learn much and change much in the post 24 year old age. Therefore, no one will ever know what type of person this young man would have become later in his years. My prayers go out to his family.

[rickb]

And I think I have some personal insight, having just returned this month from 70 days in the Alaska wilderness (http://bucktrack.com/Alaska_Survival_Journal.html) where I brought no food.

Very interesting to contrast some details of your very cool experience with that of McCandless. I enjoyed reading your Journal.

Did the pressure canner (what a brilliant idea) work equally well for meat and fish?

[Colter]

The sad part which can not be changed is that McCandless passed away at such a young age. We all learn much and change much in the post 24 year old age. Therefore, no one will ever know what type of person this young man would have become later in his years. My prayers go out to his family.

I agree.


I respect Krakauer for rethinking his conclusion and admitting he could be wrong.

I don't see it that way at all. I think Krakauer is desperately trying to stick to his theory that McCandless died from some unforseeable poisoning from the wild pea seeds. First he theorized it was because they were flat out poisonous. That was debunked. Then he said it was because the seeds were moldy, and therefore poisonous. To say that he had a weak case for that theory is putting it mildly. Then he has latched onto this third theory which he has successfully peddled to the NYT, NPR and many other places.

Fact: McCandless starved to death. Speculation: he would not have starved to death if he had not eaten wild pea seeds.

Thanks rickb! The canner worked great for both meat and fish. It was a very practical way to preserve perishable foods for, sometimes literally, "a rainy day." :)

[bangorme]

I taught this novel to honors-level juniors for a few years. I have read it many, many times. My original paperback copy is annotated cover to cover, and my teaching binder is bursting with connections, activities, related research... I really enjoyed teaching it. Students seemed to be able to latch onto Krakauer's voice a little better than Thoreau's original writing...

Very well said, although I much prefer Thoreau myself lol. He was prepared and came out alive.

What I liked especially was your discussion of risk and how all of us that backpack alone accept, and in some way enjoy that risk. This is very true. But, it also requires an examination of the degree of risk one needs to get that gratification. Mr. McChandless required a near suicidal amount of risk at the end. As you mentioned, the book highlights other cases where he put is life at risk for that thrill. I think it is possible to make the case that the level of risk escalated throughout his life until finally he went over the edge. He reached the point where any mistake would take his life. He made a number of them, so he lost his life. I've never thought it to be anything other than pure starvation that eventually killed him. As one nears the end of their life, when starving to death, they lose the capacity to hunt and gather. That accelerates the process quickly. When he tried to bail from his adventure, and found the river to high for his capabilities, this was the beginning of the end.

I'm not as charitable as some when considering Mr. McChandless. He did really dumb things and accepted insanely high levels of risk. I think it foolish to idolize him, but equally foolish to hate him. We are all dealt a hand of cards, and that includes our mental capabilities and characteristics. He played his hand the best he could. Whether he lost or not, only he will ever know.

[Mags]

He was a twenty-something who did something foolish. Pretty common.

Unlike me when I was twenty-something with my own dumb-ass things, he died.

I suspect if things went slightly different, Chris would be a 40-something executive at a non-profit. He may very well be at a social gathering, or an online forum, talking about the crazy stuff he did when he was 24.

I have acquaintances that fit the above category. I don't think they were any less foolish than Chris. Perhaps luckier.

[rickb]

Very well said, although I much prefer Thoreau myself lol. He was prepared and came out alive.

He also had frequent visitors, and went into town to have his mom do his laundry and get a good home-cooked meal.

[bangorme]

He also had frequent visitors, and went into town to have his mom do his laundry and get a good home-cooked meal.

The only book I read every year: http://thoreau.eserver.org/mewoods.html

It's a great read.

[Chair-man]

I don't know if this was posted before on Whiteblase but here's a video of Chris's sister hiking to the bus. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMN52iJV3qY)