Response to Simpson (2024): Standard heat stress indices may not be appropriate for assessing marathons

Henno Havenga,Ben Coetzee,Roelof P. Burger,Stuart J. Piketh
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2024/17474
2024-02-17
South African Journal of Science
Abstract:We value comments on our research paper in a Commentary in this issue (Simpson, S Afr J Sci. 2024;120(1/2), Art. #16445). Acknowledging the Universal Thermal Comfort Index (UTCI)'s limitations in capturing individual physiological responses remains important; however, we argue for its appropriateness based on recent thermophysiology and heat exchange advancements during its development and broader alignment with standardised indexing efforts. Our original research paper set out with these considerations in mind, and our conclusions remain valid. We further argue for refinement of the UTCI for specific activities instead of using the RET. Finally, future efforts should focus on monitoring data in real-world scenarios to validate and improve thermal indices
multidisciplinary sciences
What problem does this paper attempt to address?