Talk:Edward L. Atkinson

message: There seems to be a discrepency in the account of what rations were man hauled to One Ton Depot in January 1912.
Scott left orders that 5 XS (summit) rations should be brought by the dogs but if this was not possible then "by all accounts a minimum of 3 XS rations" sould be deposited before the earliest returning party arrived.
This would be 1 week's ration for Atinkinson's party, 1 week for Evans' party (minus Bowers' share) and 1 week for Scott's party.
By the time Cherry-Garrard arrived on March 4th, this would mean only 1 week's ration remained. In South with Scott Evans records that Cherry-Garrard set off to One Ton Camp with "2 weeks surplus stores for the Southern party with all kinds of special delicacies" ie: NOT sledging rations. 
He also states that "On 10th March after satisfying himself that over a month's travelling rations were in the depot, Cherry-Garrard started homeward." E Evans: South With Scott ps245-246 Collins London 1953
If only 1 weeks sledging rations remained then there would not be over a month rations at the depot. For there to be over a month's rations, 3 weeks rations would have to be remaining and the "surplus special delacicies" would make up the remainder. If the 2 extra XS rations were not in place Cherry-Garrard would have surely brought them with him along with or instead of the surplus treats.
If anyone can supply a first hand record of precisely what number of XS rations were man hauled to One Ton Depot it would help to clear this matter up. The assumption that because Scott specifically stated that a minimum of 3 must be man hauled, that is exactly what happened isn't supported by Evans' account. 86.178.255.8 (talk) 12:00, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Missing" rations at One Ton Depot. 

message: I see this section as nothing more than a rebuttal of unsubtantiated conjecture.
If there is no evidence that Scott's party suffered from Scurvey, why should it be deemed appropriate to bring the subject up in order to deny it?
Just because someone made the suggestion in  a book without providing evidence. That is not controversy regarding Atkinson. That is controversy regarding Huntford's book.
Scurvey is not a predictable condition. Humans are one of the few species that do not produce vitimin C naturally. The onset of scurvey is depamdant on a number of vairiables and this can occur between one and eight months on a vitemin C deficient diet.
One of Atkinson's party suffered from mild scurvey on the return journey (it would seem to be Keohane) this wasn't concealed, but brielfly mentioned by Evans, as of minor importance compared to his own condition.
Huntford suggests Oates suffered from Scurvey, other accounts say his leg was so badly frostbitten that he resorted to leaving the frozen limb outside his sleeping bag because the process of thawing it out every night and then trying to replace his footwear on his raaw foot the next morning was too traumatic.
Scott's team made good progress, despite the death of PO Evans and the strain to Wilson's leg until the beginning of March. On 29th February they had 3 day's food in hand and increased their rations. The next day they reached their depot and recorded a critical shortage of fuel. On the 2nd March Oates was found to be suffering from frostbite and their progress dropped below the limit of their fuel supply. They resorted to eating their pemmican rations as a barely thawed block rather than cooking in into a thick soup as designed.
Scott records in his dairy that he was the posseser of best feet until Oates died. Distracted by a stomach ailment he failed to take precutions and also suffered frostbite by March 18th. His condition deteriorated rapidly, much faster than Teddy Evans recorded. In 3 days they were unable to make futher progress. Nothing suggests that they suffered from Scurvey. 86.178.255.8 (talk) 14:21, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scurvey controversy.