How the Average American Man’s Body Compares to Others Around The World (Time on Line)

Laura Stampler @LauraStampler

Oct. 31, 2014
"When you look at the images side-by-side, you can really see the differences"


Pittsburgh-based digital artist Nickolay Lamm was on vacation in Catalonia, Spain, last year when he noticed something. “I think I’m being objective when I say that a lot of the people were just very fit,” he says. At least more fit than what he saw back home. And so Lamm decided to dive into body measurement statistics collected by organizations like the CDC to create models that represent the physique of the average man from different countries.


“Basically, I wanted to represent how we as a country are a little overweight when it comes to other countries,” he says. “Obesity is a huge issue, it costs our health care industry so much money, so I just wanted to create a simple way to illustrate something people probably know in the back of their minds, they just haven’t seen it all laid out so clearly.”










Nickolay Lamm




While the images first went public last year, they are making their rounds online again — right in time for Halloween. (A time when body image is at the back of people’s minds.)










Nickolay Lamm




“When you look at the images side-by-side, you can really see the differences,” Lamm says.










Nickolay LammNickolay LammNickolay Lamm




Lamm doesn’t know why exactly these images resonate with an audience, but people always seem surprised. “We see all these numbers and statistics,” he says, “but sometimes we just want to see it laid out.”










Nickolay Lamm

Response to Survey Comments- including Scheduling of Tandems

Thanks for all the great comments to our recent Survey. We’ll be moving the Tandems to Saturday morning as per the wishes of the majority. Our objective was to provide activity during the 8 hours on Friday before the Individual competition. And thanks to Cheri for bringing to our attention some of the concerns of the Competitors. We can’t respond to potential issues without input. We realize that we cannot please everyone.

I’d like to address every single comment, but the survey is anonymous; so this broadcast newsletter will have to suffice. 

The Scott Firefighter Combat Challenge is an amateur sport. We tried a box office and it didn’t work. The ability to generate revenue is directly related to the number of people who are willing to pay to watch. When an event is free, regrettably, that’s what people feel it’s worth. 

Virtually everything that you see on ESPN is a professional sport (or a collegiate sport with deep pockets). A time slot is $140,000 - way beyond our operating budget.

While we tout the fact that many of our standout athletes are world-class in their own right, this is not a sport that you can do for a living. However, we have costs not unlike those of professional sports. And for the income to support our operations, we humbly thank Scott Safety, without whom there would be no Firefighter Combat Challenge. There is nothing like this business model- anywhere: an industrial company, putting money back into a market as a way of saying thank you for all you do. 

Saying that, it’s important to understand that for us at On•Target, as a company, we must live within a budget. Sponsor-recruitment never stops. But sponsors will only contribute with an expectation of a return of their original investment and interest on that investment. Scott is a SBU (strategic business unit) of Tyco International, a publicly held company. The shareholders of that company expect a return on their investment. If we cannot demonstrate a cause-and-effect relationship between Scott’s sponsorship and the sales of Air-Paks, there would be little compelling reason to support the Challenge. 

We have been around long enough (25 years) to create a history. In this very small pond in which we exist, there are no secrets. Sponsors have come and gone; and they talk about their successes and failures. This is a niche that is uniquely filled by companies that make a market in the fire service. The fire service itself is a TLB (tiny little business). For example, Outback Steakhouse sells more product than the entire GNP of the fire service. 

Some sponsors (a very few) support the Challenge for altruistic reasons. But that has limitations. And even if they can’t track sales related to their support, they can measure thank-you’s. Regrettably, some of these companies have stated their reason for leaving is the absence of tangible recognition, including a single thank you.

So, the practical reality is that we will continue to press on, year round, with the selling of the event to hosts that recognize the family values and patriotic nature of this event. And while we would like to believe that our revenue generation would cover registration fees and more valuable prizes, the stark reality is that we have to charge our athletes, just like all the other amateur sports to help defray the costs of what is an expensive operation. The sum total of all the registration fees (which have not been increased for 10 years) for an entire year would not cover the cost for one regional event. 

There have been a significant number of international “knockoffs” and imitators of the Firefighter Combat Challenge®, with liberal “borrowing” of our Intellectual Property around the world. A few sites have formalized a relationship and executed a license agreement. I am proud to be an American and what we have accomplished these past couple of decades. But, this is a very big country- with a land mass bigger than all of the European countries put together. None of these other operators bear the cost of transporting all the equipment to multiple events or paying the salaries of a road crew. We try to accommodate and serve as many firefighters as we logistically can every year. Our transportation costs represent the lion’s share of our operating budget. Foreign sponsor’s support is limited to a single event and can therefore provide a lot of amenities. None of these foreign venues had to invent anything or invest in the years of research and development that we have. This is what our staff does for their primary employment for months out of each year. 

For those of you who expressed your heart-felt thanks and kudos, it does make the crew feel appreciated. I’m always receptive to any input and will respond personally to any email at anytime and I trust that the information above will provide you with a better understanding of the mechanics of running the Scott Firefighter Combat Challenge. 

WHAT TEMPERS THE STEEL OF AN INFANTRY UNIT

LtGen Gregory Newbold, USMC (ret)

“For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack.”  –Rudyard Kipling, The Law of the Jungle, The Jungle Book.

The current debate about women in the infantry takes place in an artificial context, because it nearly always self-limits the discussion to physical capabilities. Within these incomplete parameters, the argument is then set, and the preamble is that physical standards and performance are measurable and what is not measurable is subjective and probably unfair.

Once physical quantifications are set as the only requirement that matters, it then stands to reason that if you can define infantry requirements in terms of, for example, a number of pull-ups, a hike with 60 to 80 pounds of extra weight, or carrying a 180-pound simulated casualty to safety, then you can assess whether females are suited to infantry units.

Honest and informed observers will acknowledge that medical science indicates that, in the physical domain, the two genders are an unequal match. Even a very fit woman is not generally the equal of a fit man. The competition is no competition in aerobic capacity, load bearing, reach, body fat percentage, and other germane measures of combat fitness. But (the informed argument proceeds), even if it is only the top 5 percent of women who can replace the bottom 5 percent of men, why not allow the 5 percent to integrate and thereby improve the combat efficiency of the unit? For example, it has been argued Ronda Rousey — the accomplished and undoubtedly tough mixed martial artist — could be an excellent addition to an infantry unit.

The falsity of this debate is found in its restriction of analysis to its physical context (as most recently demonstrated in an article published yesterday at War on the Rocks). Why is the debate limited to physical capabilities? For two reasons. First, supporters of full integration will not accept what cannot be irrefutably proven (and sometimes not even then). Second, practitioners of infantry warfare have great difficulty describing the alchemy that produces an effective infantry unit, much as it is difficult for those of faith to explain their conviction to an atheist. Try that by quantitative analysis. But allow me a poor effort to explain what tempers the steel of an infantry unit and therefore serves as the basis of its combat power.

The public understands that individuals who have engaged in brutal combat seldom want to talk about their experiences, and it is broadly thought that this is because of the horrors evoked by these memories. More generally, though, this reticence is due to an inability for one side to convey, and the other to understand, not only horrors, but the context of the fight.   Saying that “It was hot” is a futile way to describe the 23rd consecutive day of temperatures over 100 degrees and flesh-soaking humidity, but the description does an even poorer job of conveying the exacerbating details — the burden of 30 to 80 pounds of personal equipment, mind-bending physical exertion, energy-sapping adrenaline highs, or the fact that the threadbare clothes you wore were unchanged for over three weeks and may have been “scented” by everything from food, to blood, dysentery, and whatever was in the dirt that constituted your bed. And don’t forget insects of legendary proportion and number. More importantly, a story thus told cannot explain that the fellow soldier or Marine who you tried desperately to put back together was the same one who shared the duties of clearing the urinals, the pleasures of a several nights of hilarious debauchery, and multiple near-death experiences — a comrade in arms who has heard more about your personal thoughts than your most intimate friends or family. So veterans of the true horrors of combat don’t talk about it. Please understand, then, that it is equally difficult to describe the ingredients of an efficient ground fighting machine, because the ingredients are intangible, decidedly not quantitative, and proudly subjective.

An infantryman’s lot is to endure what we think is unendurable, to participate in the inhumane, and to thrive in misery. Normal humans do not deliberately expose themselves to confront a machine gun that is firing at them over 10 rounds a second. “Smart” humans do not run toward the sound of gunfire. Logic does not tell you to lay down your life in the hope that you can recover an already dead comrade. And normal organizations do not strive, as their first priority, to evoke fear. For you see, the characteristics that produce uncommon valor as a common virtue are not physical at all, but are derived from the mysterious chemistry that forms in an infantry unit that revels in the most crude and profane existence so that they may be more effective killers than their foe. Members of such units deliberately reduce the individual and collective level of humanity and avoid all distractions so that its actions are fundamental, instinctive, and coldly efficient. Polite company, private hygiene, and weakness all step aside. These are the men who can confront the Islamic State, North Korean automatons, or Putin’s Spetsnaz and win every time. Believe me, you will need them, and we don’t get to choose when that will be.

In this direct ground combat environment, you do not fight for an ideal, a just cause, America, or Mom and apple pie. You endure the inhumanity and sacrifices of direct ground combat because, “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” This selflessness is derived from bonding, and bonding from shared events and the unquestioning subordination of self for the good of the team. But what destroys this alchemy — and, therefore, combat effectiveness — are pettiness, rumor-mongering, suspicion, and jealousy. And when fighting spirit is lessoned, death is the outcome.   So “fairness” is an obscenity. Fairness is about individuals. It’s selfish. And selfishness can kill.

Nineteen-year-old males everywhere are from Mars. They, and their early twenty-something brethren, are overloaded with testosterone, supremely confident about their invincibility, and prone to illogical antics. This sometimes produces intemperate behavior in everyday America, but the same traits are, by the way, nearly ideal for direct ground combat.  The same youthful ingredients produce unacceptable behavior in the pristine and low pressure environments of boarding schools, academic institutions, and cubicle farms. Truth be told, in later stages of life these traits also lead to humiliating interactions on Capitol Hill or in the White House. Why, then, do we suppose that sexual dynamics — or mere perceptions thereof — among the most libido laden age cohort in humans, in the basest of environs, will not degrade the nearly spiritual glue that enables the infantry to achieve the illogical and endure the unendurable?

Two women just graduated from the Army’s very, very difficult Ranger School. The surprise of that is that it surprised anyone. There unquestionably are women who can pass any physical challenge the military may require. We should celebrate those who succeed and encourage others. They are worthy role models, and certainly not just to women. But the issue we’re now debating has to include a recognition of cohesion and the cost of sexual dynamics in a bare-knuckled brawl, amidst primeival mayhem, in which we expect the collective entity to persevere because it has a greater will and fighting spirit, and not because it is bigger, faster, or more agile. The championship team in virtually any professional sport may only coincidentally be the most physically talented, but it most assuredly will be the most cohesive. Why not appreciate the same ingredients in infantry units?

Finally, you may bet your future earnings that the current effort to integrate the infantry will not cease with a few extraordinary females, but will eventually accommodate a social engineering goal by changing standards. Think I am wrong? It’s already happening. Read the words and understand the goals of the current Secretary of the Navy (an arsonist in the fire department) and the Secretary of the Air Force, and examine what we now call “the Dempsey Rule.”

If I’m wrong, the cost may be denied opportunity to strong and impressive young women. If you’re wrong, our national security is shaken and there is a butcher’s bill to pay. Make your choice. The line forms on the left.

Lieutenant General Gregory Newbold (U.S. Marine Corps, ret.) is a former infantryman, having commanded units from the platoon through the 1st Marine Division. His last assignment was as Director of Operations, the Joint Staff.

This story will likely get your blood boiling: from the Washington Post Outlook section

You can express your thoughts directly to the author at fmcchnesney@law.miami.edu

As fires have declined in the U.S., the number of paid firefighters has soared. (Micah Young/Getty Images)

By Fred S. McChesney September 4 

Fred S. McChesney is a professor of law and economics at the University of Miami who studies the intersection of economics and public institutions.

If you want to chat with a firefighter or see a fire truck up close, you can go down to the local firehouse at any time of day. The crew will probably be there, lifting weights or washing down the already gleaming red engines. Career firefighters usually live at the firehouse for a day or two, then take as many as three days off. Between eating and sleeping at the station, they mop floors, clean toilets and landscape the yard — with a few hours set aside daily for training and drills. Mid-morning, you’ll find several of them at the local supermarket doing the day’s grocery shopping.

In other words, being a firefighter these days doesn’t involve a lot of fighting fire.

Rapid improvements in fire safety have caused a dramatic drop in the number of blazes, according to the National Fire Protection Association. Buildings are constructed with fire-resistant materials; clothing and curtains are made of flame-retardant fabrics; and municipal laws mandate sprinkler systems and smoke detectors. The striking results: On highways, vehicle fires declined 64 percent from 1980 to 2013. Building fires fell 54 percent during that time. When they break out, sprinkler systems almost always extinguish the flames before firefighters can turn on a hose.

But oddly, as the number of fires has dropped, the ranks of firefighters have continued to grow — significantly. There are half as many fires as there were 30 years ago, but about 50 percent more people are paid to fight them.

This is no secret. Across the country, cities and towns have been trying to bring firefighting operations in line with the plummeting demand for their services. Many solutions have been attempted: reducing the length of firefighters’ shifts; merging services with neighboring towns; and instituting brownouts, which temporarily take an engine out of service. But often, these efforts have failed against obstinate unions and haven’t reversed the national increase in fire department payrolls.

Instead of addressing this municipal waste with patchwork plans to cut overtime and shrink staffs, many cities and towns should consider throwing out the very concept of the career firefighter and return to the tradition of volunteers. 

Volunteer companies have always been the primary model for firefighting in the United States. Many of the American revolutionary patriots were volunteers, including George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Paul Revere. It wasn’t until the mid-19th century that cities began establishing fire departments with full-time staffs, as the cost of firefighting grew and more training was needed to operate new steam engines. The size and complexity of structure fires during the era also demanded more professionalism. Almost all of the nation’s deadliest fires occurred between 1850 and 1950.

But the era of massive fires that claim hundreds of lives is over. Large-scale disasters, such as the 1942 Cocoanut Grove inferno in Boston that killed 492 people, and the 1903 Iroquois Theatre conflagration in Chicago, which killed 602, are largely forgotten. As recently as the early 1980s, it wasn’t unusual to have a couple of home fires a year that resulted in 10 or more deaths each, according to the National Fire Protection Association. Today, that kind of fire-related tragedy is almost unheard of. There wasn’t a single one between 2008 and 2013 (the most recent year recorded). 

For fire departments, building blazes — catastrophic or not — have become infrequent. Firefighters responded to 487,500 structure fires across the United States in 2013, which means each of the nation’s 30,000 fire departments saw just one every 22 days, on average. And yet, taxpayers are paying more people to staff these departments 24-7. As a result, the amount of money shelled out for local fire services more than doubled from 1987 to 2011, to $44.8 billion, accounting for inflation.

To be fair, fire departments have shouldered additional responsibility since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and are expected to have the training and equipment necessary to respond to various types of terrorism, including biological and chemical attacks. Still, in a November report, the National Fire Protection Association blamed the surge in fire department funding on ballooning staffs, overtime pay and retirement and health benefits — things that have nothing to do with the threat of terrorism.

Local firefighter unions have fought hard to grow their ranks as fires decline. Although private-sector unions have been diminishing, representation of government employees has remained strong, and firefighters have been among the beneficiaries. Labor contracts have allowed them to maintain healthy incomes: Firefighters earned a median salary of $45,250 in 2012, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, but overtime can more than double that. In Los Angeles, for example, the average firefighter was paid more than $142,000 in 2013, including overtime and bonuses, the Los Angeles Times reported. Exorbitant overtime costs are fueled by union-negotiated minimum-staffing levels that often mandate four firefighters per engine be on duty at all times, regardless of the cost or workload.

At the national level, the International Association of Fire Fighters has an annual budget of nearly $60 million, most of it derived from its 278,000 members. IAFF calls itself “one of the most active lobbying organizations in Washington,” advocating for pension, safety and overtime laws. Its political action committee, FIREPAC, spent nearly $6.4 million in 2014, according to OpenSecrets.org. The union’s constitution forbids members from serving as volunteer firefighters, under penalty of fines or expulsion.

Union leaders and fire department chiefs have found new ways to justify their growing budgets and payrolls. In a February 2001 report, the Wall Street Journal noted that 90 percent of firehouse calls in Los Angeles, Chicago and certain other cities were to accompany ambulances to medical emergencies. “Elsewhere, to keep their employees busy, fire departments have expanded into neighborhood beautification, gang intervention, substitute-teaching and other downtime pursuits,” the newspaper added.

Not much has changed. Today, fewer than 4 percent of fire department calls are for fires. Meanwhile, requests for medical aid more than quadrupled between 1980 and 2013, to more than 21 million, according to the National Fire Prevention Association. In other words, for every structure fire a fire department responds to, it receives 44 medical calls, on average.

So “fire” department has become a misnomer. In practice, these agencies have become emergency medical responders. The problem with that? Most communities already have ambulance services, whose staffs are less expensive and more highly trained in medical aid. Many cities mandate that their firefighters be certified EMTs, which requires about 120 to 150 hours of training in basic emergency medical care. That’s far less than the up to 1,800 hours of training for the paramedics who staff emergency medical services. Yet paramedics are cheaper than firefighters, earning a median of $31,020 in 2012. 

Still, you’ll often see a large ladder truck respond to medical calls along with an ambulance, resulting in multiple uniformed cadres when just one person needs attention. To justify this, firefighters have touted themselves as “first responders” who can answer a medical emergency faster than paramedics in an ambulance. But when they arrive without the training and equipment to deal with severe medical emergencies, they are of little use.

Recognizing the overlap, some cities have merged their fire and EMS services, over union objections. Some require that all members of the newly combined agency be certified to respond to both types of crisis, which improves efficiency and lowers costs. But other cities have struggled to merge the cultures and operations of the departments.

Municipalities that have stuck with the volunteer model got it right — and that is most of them. About 69 percent of all firefighters in the country are volunteers. It is mainly larger cities and towns that have been burdened by union staffing and salary demands that are incompatible with their declining firefighting needs. The number of volunteer firefighters fell by 3 percent in the time paid firefighters grew by nearly 50 percent.

Protecting a sizable city with a volunteer force is possible. Since 1930, the city of Pasadena, Tex., has used 200 active and 50 semi-active volunteer firefighters to protect its now more than 150,000 residents. If all towns up to that size moved to all-volunteer forces, the national payroll of career firefighters would be reduced by more than half. Using the median firefighter salary, municipalities would save more than $8.8 billion a year in base pay. 

This is not to say that our largest cities could operate with volunteer firefighters alone. Sheer population size may necessitate a core group of full-timers. But payrolls certainly shouldn’t be growing as fires are decreasing.

Nor is this to say that professional firefighters are not heroic. They are and have repeatedly proved as much, most notably during the Sept. 11 attacks. But volunteers also are capable of such bravery. When we entrusted them with protecting our largest cities from blazes, they showed up and courageously put their lives on the line. In 1835, New York’s volunteer firefighters faced freezing conditions to battle the conflagration that destroyed Lower Manhattan but killed just two people.

Today, heroism isn’t what our firefighting services need most. As the risk of massive infernos declines, what we really need is to rethink our entire firefighting model — and how much we should be paying for it.

fmcchesney@law.miami.edu

Read more from Outlook and follow our updates on Facebook and Twitter. 

+49.3%

Increase in the number of paid firefighters in the United States since 1986.

i	i	i	i
’86	’91	’01	’13
238	262	294	355
(in thousands)

-58.5%

Decrease in the number of fires in the United States since 1980.

i	i	i	i
’80	’88	’01	’13
3.0	2.4	1.7	1.2
(in millions)

Fred S. McChesney is a professor of law and economics at the University of Miami who studies the intersection economics and public institutions.

Fairdale High School Fire Science and EMS Academy

Dr. Davis,

I want to thank you and your staff for allowing my students to participate in the Corporate Challenge segment of the Firefighter Combat Challenge event in Louisville, Kentucky on August 22, 2015. I expected that my students would learn just how taxing the occupation of firefighting can be (they did); what I did not expect was the lengths to which your outstanding staff would go to make them feel a part of the brotherhood and culture of the fire service.

During the initial introduction of the competitors, they arranged for my students to exit the tent last and to walk the gauntlet of all the other competitors, high-fiving and fist-bumping the  other competitors the entire length of the course. I am a 25-year veteran of the fire service, and even I thought that was an incredible experience; I can only imagine what it meant to the kids. We stood with the other competitors through the National Anthem, and the introduction of the state MDA spokesperson. It really showed my students what the firefighting family is all about. Many of my students took the time during the event to seek that young man out just to say hello. They found that he is also from the Fairdale area, and will be in the community parade in which we are marching next month.

We initially had 3 4-person teams compete, and again, the staff showed their support, assisting where necessary (some of my students overestimated their fitness level) and announcing their names to the crowd, which was also very supportive. Later in the event, we put together what we felt would be our fastest five-person team. I challenged them to break 3 minutes, and they did, finishing in 2:51.

Again, thank you for providing my students with such an outstanding opportunity.  We look forward to future opportunities: I have already been promised an assault on the two-minute mark.

Sincerely,

Jeffery T. Birt

Chief Instructor

Fairdale High School Fire Science and EMS Academy

Jeanie Allen Tribute and Memorial Service

The memorial service for Jeanie was held in Idaho on July 11. A lack of internet connectivity precluded our ability to do a live webcast.

Subsequently, we engaged the services of a company that produces documentaries and have captured the service in its entirety.

Because of the DMRA (the digital millennium rights act protecting copyrighted music), initially, we were unable to upload this to our Vimeo or YouTube accounts.

We are hosting this video on our server. It can handle modest amounts of downloads. You may view the service by clicking on this link.

https://vimeo.com/135415360

What's Better Than Water?

Since the advent of Gatorade, there's been a host of "sport drinks" flooding the market. Sweat is a by-product of the metabolism of glucose and provides evaporative cooling. With sweat is a loss of electrolytes. However, more fit individuals lose less than their unfit counterparts. The scientific litature on this subject numbers in the thousands of articles. Sugar based drinks come with a downside, since insulin is required to metabolise the carbohydrate. But, dehydration is a huge risk for crashing and a constant concern in any athletic setting.

This article from the Washington Post, orignally published in Consumer Reports is a reasonably accurate assessment of fluid replacement.

By Consumer Reports July 13

Plain old bottled water is sharing more shelf space these days with flavored and fortified drinks. The labels on many drinks say they contain added minerals and even vitamins, or suggest that they pack the benefits of fruit and vegetables. Those minerals, or electrolytes, help regulate muscle function and water balance, which you can lose during intense exercise.

But are those drinks more hydrating (and more healthful) than regular water? It’s unlikely, Consumer Reports’ experts say.

Few people exercise so vigorously that they need to replenish electrolytes. And Leslie Bonci, a dietitian and director of sports nutrition at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, says that “any liquid is going to be hydrating, even coffee,” adding, “Do vitamins and minerals add to hydration? No. What’s hydrating is the fluid.”

Most Americans simply don’t need fortified drinks. More than 90 percent of us get enough of the important nutrients, according to a 2012 report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And because of fortified foods and supplements, we might even get too much of some of them.

In addition, many of those beverages are packed with calories, sodium and sugars. Some labels list food coloring, sweeteners, preservatives and other agents.

Consumer Reports experts evaluated the ingredients and nutritional value of 20 flavored and fortified beverages. (They didn’t test these products to ensure that they contained claimed levels of nutrients.) They also had expert tasters try the drinks. Here’s what they found:

Sports drinks

These beverages were developed to help athletes replace carbs used for energy, and electrolytes and fluids lost through perspiration. For years, Gatorade and Powerade were the top ones. Now there are “premium” sports drinks with natural flavoring or ingredients such as coconut water that are marketed to all health-minded consumers.

But most sports drinks have a lot of sugar. A 16-ounce container of Bodyarmor, for example, which costs $2.70, has 140 calories and 36 grams of sugar. Compare that sport drink with a 16.9 fluid-ounce bottle of Pepsi, which has 210 calories and 58 grams of sugar.

All of that added sugar increases the risk of Type 2 diabetes and obesity, according to a 2014 report from the Atkins Center for Weight and Health at the University of California at Berkeley. Zero-calorie and low-calorie sports drinks might not have any sugar (or as much sugar), but they might have artificial sweeteners. And both types might have food coloring, preservatives or other added ingredients.

The takeaway: Unless you’re working out intensely for more than an hour, you’re unlikely to lose significant electrolytes. So stick to water, says Marvin M. Lipman, Consumer Reports’ chief medical adviser. For dealing with pure thirst, the Berkeley report says, water is the “gold standard.” Drinking it before, during and after exercise should quench your thirst and restore lost fluids.

Coconut water and more

Sales of coconut water, the mildly sweet liquid found in coconuts, have zoomed, increasing more than fivefold between 2008 and 2012. The craze seems to have spurred the introduction of a variety of other plant-based drinks, such as artichoke water, maple water and cactus water.

Many manufacturers claim that the drinks offer better hydration. Zico, for example, says that its Pure Premium Coconut Water, which costs $2.25 for 14 ounces, is a “miracle of hydration and replenishment.”

Other companies make more far-reaching promises. Arty claims that its artichoke water, which has many other ingredients in addition to artichokes and costs $2.70 for eight ounces, can “elevate antioxidants, increase metabolism, enhance digestion, purify toxins.”

Happy Tree says that its Organic Raw Maple Water is 100 percent maple sap with “nothing added,” and has 48 calories and 12 grams of sugar in a 16-ounce bottle. Consumer Reports’ tasters described it as “sweetened water.” It costs about $4.

The takeaway: If you’re tired of the same old same old, coconut water and maple water can make for a nice — but pricey — change once in a while.

Water with vitamins

These drinks might contain the daily recommended amount or more of certain vitamins. Vitaminwater’s orange-flavored drinks, $1.20 per 20-ounce bottle, have 150 percent of recommended vitamin C and 100 percent of three B vitamins.

But there’s no need to replenish vitamins just because it’s hot out or you went for a run. “You don’t lose vitamins when you sweat,” Lipman points out.

More might not be better when it comes to vitamins. And fortified drinks can displace food sources of vitamins and nutrients in children’s diets, according to the Berkeley report. The drinks also might have a lot of sugar: A 20-ounce Pomegranate Cherry Sobe Lifewater, $1.10, has 25 grams of sugar and 100 calories.

The takeaway: An occasional vitamin-supplemented water is fine if it helps you get enough fluid, but you’re still much better off getting your vitamins from a balanced diet.

Purified water drinks

There’s a booming market in bottled water that’s been through a purification process. One such process is reverse osmosis, which forces water through a membrane to remove contaminants. Another is distillation, which involves boiling water and then turning the vapor back into liquid water.

Those processes strip away minerals that give water body and taste, so some manufacturers add electrolytes such as sodium to restore flavor. Propel’s Purified Water with Electrolytes, $6 for six 25.4-ounce containers, has 107 milligrams of sodium in an eight-ounce serving, and it does taste a tad salty. Others brands have artificial sweeteners, but you might not know it unless you read the ingredients list on the back.

The takeaway: Next time you’re looking for a refreshing, noncaloric drink, try chilled tap water with a squeeze of lemon.

Copyright 2015. Consumers Union of United States Inc.