Journal of Applied Physiology Watch the video to learn how APS reaches out to developing nations.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Appl Physiol 40: 668-672, 1976;
8750-7587/76 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shvartz, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shvartz, E.

Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol 40, Issue 5 668-672, Copyright © 1976 by American Physiological Society


ARTICLES

Effect of neck versus chest cooling on responses to work in heat

E. Shvartz

Six young men performed bench-stepping at a load of 40 W, once at room temperature of 23 degrees C and 3 times in heat (39.5 degrees C db, 30.3 degrees C wb). Two of the heat exposures included cooling of either the neck or chest by circulating cool water having an inlet temperature of 8.3 degrees C. The heat exchanges for the neck and chest were of equal size and they consisted of PVC tubes, having a total length of 3m each, which covered 2.2% of the body surface area. Heat exchange between the tubing assemblies and the environment was prevented by proper insulation. As compared with no cooling in heat, each method of cooling resulted in no change in heart rate, a decrease of 0.5 degrees C in rectal temperature, small and insignificant decreases in skin temperature and 16-22% decreases in sweat rates. Heat removed from the neck and chest equalled 63.1 and61.9 W-m-2, respectively. This large heat removal and the substantial decreases in rectal temperature and sweat rate as a result of cooling 2.2% of the body surface area were explained in terms of the powerful effect of conductive cooling and the particular regions which were cooled.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online