The most ecologically valid approach to determining the trainability

of the CIVD response is to track individuals before, throughout, and after a prolonged period of natural exposure to cold stress. However, from a methodological and research design perspective, this approach is difficult to control, and it is not easy to isolate individual factors and mechanisms that can contribute to local thermal adaptation of the extremities. For example, it can be difficult GPCR Compound Library manufacturer to accurately quantify the duration and intensity of both whole-body and local cold exposure, such that results from field studies present equivocal evidence for adaptation. Table 1 summarizes a number of the existing field and laboratory studies on CIVD trainability. A number of studies suggest minimal adaptation even from occupations experiencing extensive local and/or general exposure to cold. One such study tracked a group of SCUBA divers stationed with the British Antarctic Survey for a year, with monthly laboratory immersions of the index finger into ice water [11]. Compared with a control group of nondiving Survey members, no significant differences

were reported in CIVD response between the groups over the study period, nor were there differences in subjective pain response. While one potential explanation may have been that an overall drop in core temperature during diving blunted the potential Y-27632 concentration CIVD response, an earlier study on the same population reported that rectal temperature during

diving did not decrease below 36.0°C, even though finger temperature decreased to 10°C over the approximate 30-minute dives [10]. Therefore, it must be concluded that significant peripheral cooling repeatedly occurred in the diving group over the course of the year, but that such repeated local cold exposure did not significantly affect core temperature nor enhance CIVD response. Furthering the lack of response, Livingstone [50] and Livingstone et al. [51] reported lower mean finger temperatures in groups of Canadian soldiers upon immersion of the middle finger into ice water following a Aspartate two-week Arctic expedition. However, one potential caveat in interpreting these studies, especially with the Canadian soldiers, is that the subjects were already living in winter environments, and may have experienced natural cold acclimatization and therefore limited further potential for adaptation. Other literature suggests that field acclimatization is indeed possible. Tropical inhabitants—soldiers from the plains of India—exhibited an improved peripheral blood flow and CIVD response after seven weeks of exposure to the Arctic environment [63], but this remained below the level found in Arctic natives, and suggests that full adaptation requires much longer exposure periods.