4 ms·

I think that says more about the foraging skills of modern domesticated humans (and the location choices for Alone) than it does about the nutritional viability

• WalterBright 3y ago
  Have you watched the show? If you have, what could they have eaten that they didn't know about?
  • jebarker 3y ago
    I've watched a few episodes. As someone else pointed out, they choose locations where there's not going to be much available food, e.g. early winter Alaska. So you can't draw any conclusions about the viability of getting nutrition from foraging in such inhospitable environments. I can't comment on what they could have eaten that they didn't know about because I'm not a skilled forager either. I'm certain though that someone who lived their whole life as a forager would fair better even if only because they could more efficiently harvest what little is available.
    • WalterBright 3y ago
      It's clear they had some training on what was available. I doubt the show producers hid knowledge of more substantial flora - if they did, viewers would have made a stink about it. I've been told by a survival expert that gathering food is a full time job, and many of the contestants didn't seem to get that. They'd waste calories building elaborate shelters and carving toys. BTW, if I look around the woods in the PNW, I don't see much flora that could be eaten, even though it's rather lush. Although there are berries and mushrooms, those are far from a complete diet.