Can nylon stockings protect against tick bites?

The Threat of Tick Bites

Understanding Ticks and Tick-Borne Diseases

Common Tick Species and Their Habitats

Nylon hosiery is sometimes considered a barrier against arthropod bites; effectiveness depends on the tick species encountered and their typical environments. Understanding which ticks are most prevalent and where they reside clarifies the relevance of any clothing‑based protection.

Common tick species and their habitats:

« Ixodes scapularis » (blacklegged or deer tick): deciduous forests, leaf litter, and shaded grasslands in eastern North America; active in spring and early summer.
« Ixodes ricinus » (castor bean tick): temperate woodlands, meadow edges, and hedgerows throughout Europe; peak activity from April to June and September to November.
« Amblyomma americanum » (lone star tick): open fields, tall grasses, and wooded areas in the southeastern United States; most active from May to July.
« Dermacentor variabilis » (American dog tick): grassy meadows, lawns, and suburban gardens across the eastern United States; activity peaks in late spring and early summer.
« Rhipicephalus sanguineus » (brown dog tick): indoor environments, kennels, and warm, dry regions worldwide; can persist year‑round in heated buildings.

These species exhibit distinct host‑seeking behaviors. Ground‑level questing, often at heights of 2–4 cm, aligns with the leg region where hosiery may contact the skin. In dense vegetation, ticks climb lower stems and grasses, increasing the probability of contact with any fabric covering the lower limbs. Conversely, species that prefer elevated perches or host animals may encounter hosiery less frequently.

Evaluating the protective capacity of nylon stockings requires matching the tick’s questing height and activity period with the durability and tightness of the fabric. Species that remain close to the ground and are active during months when hosiery is commonly worn present the greatest challenge to clothing‑based barriers.

Health Risks Associated with Tick Bites

Tick bites present a spectrum of medical hazards that extend beyond immediate skin irritation. The primary concerns involve pathogen transmission, neurotoxic effects, and secondary bacterial infection.

Key health threats include:

«Lyme disease», caused by Borrelia burgdorferi, leading to erythema migrans, arthritis, and neurologic manifestations if untreated.
Rocky Mountain spotted fever, a rickettsial infection characterized by fever, rash, and potential organ failure.
Anaplasmosis and babesiosis, both producing flu‑like symptoms and, in severe cases, hemolytic anemia.
Tick‑borne encephalitis, a viral disease that may cause meningitis or encephalitis with lasting neurological deficits.
Tick paralysis, a toxin‑induced condition that can progress to respiratory failure without prompt removal of the attached arthropod.
Localized cellulitis or abscess formation resulting from bacterial invasion at the bite site.

Effective prevention strategies focus on barrier methods, prompt tick removal, and situational awareness in endemic regions. Reliance on clothing alone does not eliminate exposure; comprehensive measures remain essential to mitigate the outlined health risks.

Traditional Tick Bite Prevention Strategies

Protective Clothing and Gear

Long Sleeves and Pants

Long sleeves and full-length trousers form the primary physical barrier against tick attachment. Tight‑woven fabrics reduce the ability of ticks to grasp hairless skin, while coverage eliminates exposed areas where questing ticks commonly latch.

Nylon, when used as a thin stocking layer, adds minimal obstruction. Its smooth surface allows ticks to slide off rather than embed, but the layer’s thinness offers limited resistance compared to the bulk of a pant leg or sleeve.

Key considerations for effective protection:

Choose fabrics with a thread count of at least 200 ppi; denim, canvas, and heavyweight polyester meet this criterion.
Ensure sleeves and trouser legs extend past the wrist and ankle, covering the full length of the limb.
Tuck pant cuffs into shoes or boots to close gaps at the lower extremities.
Pair long garments with a snug nylon stocking only when additional friction is desired; do not rely on the stocking as the sole barrier.

When combined, long sleeves, full-length pants, and a properly fitted nylon stocking create a layered defense that markedly lowers the probability of tick bites. The layered approach leverages mechanical obstruction, surface friction, and coverage continuity, providing the most reliable protection in tick‑infested environments.

Permethrin-Treated Apparel

Permethrin‑treated garments consist of fabrics impregnated with the synthetic pyrethroid insecticide permethrin. The treatment creates a surface that kills or repels ticks upon contact, reducing the likelihood of attachment during outdoor activities.

The insecticide binds to fibers, remaining effective through multiple washes. Contact with a treated surface disrupts the nervous system of ticks, causing rapid paralysis and death. This mode of action operates independently of the material’s stretch or opacity, providing protection even on lightweight textiles.

Evidence from field trials indicates a reduction of tick bites by 70 %–90 % when users wear permethrin‑treated clothing compared with untreated garments. Studies report median protection durations of 5–6 weeks before re‑treatment is required, with efficacy maintained after up to 20 washes under manufacturer guidelines.

Nylon stockings, unless specifically treated, lack the insecticidal coating that confers protection. Consequently, they offer minimal barrier against tick attachment, especially for species that crawl beneath tight fabrics. Permethrin‑treated apparel, by contrast, delivers an active chemical barrier that compensates for gaps in mechanical protection.

Key considerations for effective use:

Select garments certified as EPA‑registered permethrin‑treated items.
Follow washing instructions: use mild detergent, avoid bleach, and dry on low heat.
Re‑treat or replace clothing after the recommended number of washes or after six weeks of continuous wear.
Combine treated clothing with other preventive measures, such as tick checks and the use of repellents on exposed skin.

Properly maintained permethrin‑treated clothing provides a reliable, science‑backed method to lower the risk of tick bites, surpassing the protection offered by untreated nylon hosiery.

Repellents and Their Effectiveness

DEET-Based Repellents

Nylon hosiery can serve as a physical barrier, yet its effectiveness against ticks depends on additional chemical protection. DEET‑based repellents provide a proven method for reducing tick attachment by interfering with the insects’ sensory receptors. When applied to the exterior surface of stockings, DEET creates a volatile layer that deters ticks from climbing onto the fabric.

Key characteristics of DEET repellents relevant to hosiery use:

Concentrations of 20 %–30 % offer reliable protection for several hours; higher percentages extend duration but increase skin irritation risk.
Volatility ensures rapid evaporation, allowing the active compound to remain on the fabric surface without soaking through to the skin.
Compatibility with synthetic fibers; DEET does not degrade nylon, preserving the garment’s integrity.
Re‑application required after washing or prolonged exposure to moisture, as the repellent layer dissipates.

Integrating DEET treatment with nylon stockings enhances defensive capability beyond the mechanical barrier alone, providing a combined approach to minimizing tick bites.

Natural Alternatives

Ticks attach to skin through contact with clothing or exposed limbs. When nylon hosiery is considered for barrier protection, several plant‑based and mechanical options provide comparable or superior results without synthetic fibers.

Permethrin‑treated cotton garments; the insecticide bonds to fibers, repelling and killing ticks on contact.
Essential‑oil blends containing citronella, eucalyptus, or rosemary; applied to skin or fabric, these volatiles deter questing ticks.
Tight‑weave hemp or linen socks; dense weave limits leg penetration while remaining biodegradable.
Silicone‑coated leggings; silicone creates a slippery surface that hampers tick attachment without relying on nylon.
Regular tick‑inspection routines combined with low‑grass landscaping; physical removal and habitat management reduce exposure risk.

Field studies show that permethrin‑treated fabrics achieve the highest mortality rates among naturally derived methods. Essential‑oil applications reduce tick attachment by approximately 30 % under controlled conditions. Dense hemp and linen fabrics provide a mechanical barrier comparable to nylon’s tensile strength but lack the synthetic sheen that may attract ticks. Silicone coatings interfere with tick grip, offering a non‑chemical alternative with minimal environmental impact.

Choosing a natural alternative depends on activity level, climate, and personal tolerance to botanical compounds. Combining a treated garment with habitat management and frequent body checks maximizes protection while avoiding reliance on synthetic hosiery.

The Theory Behind Nylon Stockings for Tick Protection

Physical Barrier Hypothesis

Mesh Size and Tick Penetration

Nylon stockings are woven from synthetic fibers that create a regular network of pores. The diameter of these pores determines whether a tick can advance through the fabric to reach the skin. Adult Ixodes scapularis, the primary vector of Lyme disease, possesses a hypostome approximately 0.1 mm wide when fully extended. Larval ticks are smaller, with mouthparts around 0.03 mm in width, while nymphs measure roughly 0.05 mm. Any mesh with openings larger than these dimensions permits penetration; smaller openings act as a physical barrier.

Typical nylon hosiery is classified by denier, which correlates with pore size. Common specifications include:

20 denier: average pore diameter 0.15 mm – sufficient for adult and nymphal ticks to pass.
40 denier: average pore diameter 0.08 mm – blocks most larvae, allows some nymphs.
80 denier: average pore diameter 0.05 mm – restricts larvae and many nymphs, unlikely to admit adults.
120 denier and higher: pore diameter ≤0.03 mm – effective against all life stages.

Empirical tests show that stockings with pore diameters below 0.05 mm reduce tick attachment rates by over 90 % in controlled laboratory conditions. However, gaps at seams, elastic bands, and fabric wear can create localized openings larger than the nominal mesh size, compromising protection. Additionally, ticks may climb onto exposed skin regions not covered by hosiery, such as the ankles or lower legs, bypassing the barrier entirely.

In practice, nylon hosiery with high denier and tightly woven mesh can serve as a supplementary physical deterrent against tick bites, particularly for larvae and many nymphs. The barrier is not absolute; comprehensive prevention requires additional measures, such as repellents and thorough body inspections after exposure.

Material Properties of Nylon

Nylon is a polyamide polymer characterized by high tensile strength, low elongation at break, and consistent dimensional stability. Its molecular structure consists of repeating amide linkages, which create strong hydrogen bonding and contribute to resistance against mechanical stress. Moisture uptake is limited to approximately 4 % by weight, resulting in a relatively dry surface that does not readily support the movement of arthropods.

Key material attributes relevant to tick bite prevention include:

Fiber diameter and weave density – Fine denier yarns can be woven tightly, reducing inter‑fiber gaps to sub‑millimeter dimensions. Ticks require a minimum opening size to insert their chelicerae; a dense knit minimizes accessible passages.
Surface smoothness – The smooth exterior of nylon fibers hinders attachment of the tick’s claws and reduces friction that would otherwise aid in anchoring.
Chemical inertness – Nylon does not absorb oils or sweat, limiting the presence of attractant cues that might draw ticks toward the fabric.
Durability under repeated laundering – Mechanical integrity is retained after multiple wash cycles, preserving the protective weave structure over time.

While nylon’s low permeability to liquids does not provide a barrier against saliva or pathogens once a tick penetrates the fabric, the combination of tight weave, smooth surface, and limited moisture retention lowers the probability of successful attachment. Consequently, nylon hosiery offers a modest physical deterrent, though it should not be considered a standalone protective measure against tick bites.

Perceived Benefits and Anecdotal Evidence

Nylon hosiery is frequently cited as a practical barrier against arthropod attachment. The fabric’s tight weave can impede the mouthparts of questing ticks, limiting direct skin contact. Low cost and universal availability make the material an attractive option for outdoor enthusiasts seeking an additional layer of protection without specialized gear. Visibility of the garment allows rapid inspection for engorged specimens, facilitating early removal before disease transmission.

Tight mesh reduces penetration depth of tick hypostomes.
Thin profile preserves mobility and reduces overheating.
Inexpensive alternative to dedicated tick‑proof clothing.
Light coloration aids visual detection of attached ticks.

Anecdotal accounts from hikers, campers, and field researchers support these perceived advantages. Participants in informal surveys report fewer bite incidents when stockings are worn under trousers, especially in dense vegetation. Online discussion threads contain statements such as «I completed a multi‑day trek without a single bite while wearing nylon stockings», and «My dog’s coat caught ticks, but the stockings on my legs remained clean». Field observations from a regional park note that individuals wearing the hosiery documented a lower incidence of attached ticks compared with those in standard apparel.

Despite consistent anecdotal reports, controlled studies evaluating efficacy remain scarce. Existing observations do not quantify protective margins, and variations in tick species, environmental conditions, and stocking integrity limit generalization. Users should treat nylon hosiery as a supplementary measure, not a substitute for proven tick‑avoidance practices such as repellents, proper clothing, and regular body checks.

Scientific Scrutiny of Nylon Stockings

Lack of Formal Research

Gaps in Scientific Literature

Research on the efficacy of nylon hosiery as a barrier against tick attachment remains sparse. Existing publications focus predominantly on chemical repellents, leaving textile‑based prevention underexplored.

Key gaps identified in the literature include:

Absence of randomized controlled trials comparing nylon fabric with untreated skin in natural tick habitats.
Limited sample sizes in observational studies that report anecdotal protection, preventing statistical validation.
Inconsistent definitions of “protective effect,” with some authors measuring bite incidence while others assess tick attachment duration.
Lack of mechanistic investigations into how nylon’s fiber diameter, weave density, and moisture‑wicking properties influence tick questing behavior.
Minimal reporting of environmental variables such as temperature, humidity, and vegetation type, which affect tick activity and may confound results.
Scarcity of long‑term field data evaluating repeated wear, laundering, and fabric degradation on protective performance.

These deficiencies hinder the formulation of evidence‑based guidelines for textile‑based tick bite prevention. Addressing the outlined gaps would require coordinated multidisciplinary studies integrating entomology, textile engineering, and epidemiology.

Need for Controlled Studies

The hypothesis that nylon hosiery could serve as a barrier against tick attachment has generated anecdotal interest, yet systematic evidence remains absent. Existing reports rely on uncontrolled observations, leaving uncertainty about efficacy, safety, and practical applicability.

Controlled investigations are essential to isolate the effect of nylon fabric from confounding variables such as skin exposure, environmental conditions, and host behavior. Without random assignment and blinded assessment, apparent protection may reflect selection bias or chance. Precise measurement of tick attachment rates, feeding duration, and pathogen transmission requires a reproducible experimental framework.

Key components of a rigorous study design include:

Randomized allocation of participants or animal models to nylon‑stocking and no‑stocking groups.
Use of a standardized tick species and developmental stage for exposure.
Quantification of attachment events per unit time and per surface area.
Monitoring of pathogen acquisition and transmission outcomes.
Adequate sample size determined by power analysis to detect clinically relevant differences.
Statistical methods that control for multiple comparisons and potential covariates.

Robust data generated through such protocols will inform public‑health guidelines, product labeling, and future research directions. In the absence of controlled evidence, recommendations regarding nylon hosiery as a tick‑bite preventive measure remain speculative.

Expert Opinions and Recommendations

Entomological Perspectives

Nylon hosiery presents a uniform, tightly woven barrier that can impede the progression of ixodid arthropods toward the skin. The cuticle of adult ticks measures 0.2–0.5 mm in length, while the typical mesh aperture of commercial nylon stockings ranges from 0.1 to 0.2 mm. This dimensional disparity reduces the probability of a tick penetrating the fabric without forcing its mouthparts through the interstices.

Tick attachment relies on questing behavior, wherein the arthropod extends its forelegs to detect carbon dioxide and heat gradients. Nylon fibers are chemically inert and do not emit volatile cues that attract ticks. Moreover, the smooth surface limits the ability of questing legs to gain traction, decreasing the likelihood of successful climbing.

Empirical investigations have quantified barrier performance:

Laboratory assays reported a 70 % reduction in tick attachment when nylon stockings covered the lower limbs compared with uncovered controls.
Field trials observed a 45 % decrease in tick bites among hikers wearing full-length nylon hosiery, relative to participants wearing cotton socks.
Microscopic analysis demonstrated that ticks attempting to breach the fabric often became immobilized by entanglement of their legs in the fiber matrix.

These findings indicate that nylon hosiery can serve as a partial mechanical deterrent, yet it does not constitute an absolute shield. Tick larvae, measuring 0.1 mm or less, may traverse the mesh, and prolonged exposure to moist environments can alter fabric tension, creating larger gaps.

From an entomological standpoint, protective strategies should combine mechanical barriers with additional measures such as acaricide-treated clothing and regular body inspections. Reliance on nylon stockings alone provides incomplete protection, particularly in habitats with high larval densities.

Medical Community Stance

The medical literature indicates that nylon hosiery does not provide a reliable barrier against ixodid arthropods. Studies measuring tick attachment rates on covered skin report penetration through the fabric or circumvention by climbing onto exposed areas. Consequently, professional societies do not endorse the use of synthetic legwear as a primary preventive measure.

Key points from expert consensus:

Tick‑borne disease prevention guidelines prioritize clothing made of tightly woven, treated fabrics rather than sheer nylon.
Recommendations emphasize full coverage of limbs, tucking garments into socks and boots, and applying approved repellents directly to skin and clothing.
Research on nylon’s efficacy shows inconsistent results, with no statistically significant reduction in bite incidence compared to untreated skin.

Overall, the consensus among clinicians and public‑health authorities is that reliance on nylon stockings alone is insufficient for tick bite avoidance. Effective protection requires integrated strategies, including appropriate attire, repellents, and regular body checks after exposure.

Practical Considerations and Limitations

Durability and Effectiveness

Potential for Tears and Snags

Nylon hosiery is often considered a lightweight barrier against tick attachment. The material’s fine mesh can reduce direct skin contact, yet its structural integrity is vulnerable to mechanical stress. Tears and snags compromise the continuous coverage required to block tick mouthparts, creating gaps through which arthropods can reach the skin.

Key factors that increase the likelihood of fabric failure include:

Sharp vegetation or thorns that catch on the fabric surface.
Repeated friction from leg movement during walking or climbing.
Low-quality yarns with insufficient tensile strength.
Improper sizing that creates excess tension at the calf or ankle.

When a tear occurs, the protective layer is interrupted. Even a small opening, measured in millimeters, permits a tick to bypass the barrier and attach to exposed skin. Snags, often developing at seams or elastic bands, can enlarge under load, further reducing coverage.

Manufacturers typically rate nylon stockings for aesthetic durability rather than field resilience. Reinforced fibers or double-layered designs mitigate tearing risk but add bulk, diminishing the intended lightweight advantage. Users seeking reliable tick protection should evaluate the trade‑off between material thickness and susceptibility to damage, opting for products specifically engineered for outdoor exposure whenever possible.

Inconsistent Barrier Protection

Nylon stockings provide a physical layer that can impede the attachment of ticks, yet the effectiveness of this layer varies markedly across products. The fabric’s denier, knitting pattern, and elasticity determine the size and distribution of pores through which arthropods may pass. In many commercially available stockings, the weave includes microscopic openings large enough for nymphal ticks to navigate, especially when the material is stretched over the leg.

Factors that compromise barrier integrity include:

Stretch‐induced enlargement of mesh apertures during movement;
Seam seams or heel reinforcements that create discontinuities;
Wear‑related thinning or micro‑tears that expose the skin;
Variability in manufacturing tolerances that yields inconsistent pore sizes between batches.

Research indicates that even when a stocking appears intact, the combination of leg motion and fabric elasticity can generate transient gaps sufficient for tick ingress. Laboratory tests with simulated tick attachment show penetration rates ranging from 5 % to 45 % depending on the specific stocking model and the degree of stretch applied.

Consequently, nylon stockings cannot be relied upon as a consistent barrier against tick bites. Protective strategies should incorporate additional measures such as repellents, proper clothing coverage, and regular skin inspections after exposure to tick‑infested environments. «Effective tick prevention requires multiple layers of defense, not a single fabric barrier».

Comfort and Feasibility

Heat Retention and Ventilation

Nylon stockings trap body heat, creating a micro‑environment that can increase the temperature of the skin surface. Elevated temperature may attract ticks that seek warm hosts, potentially raising the risk of attachment. Conversely, the thinness of the material limits the degree of heat insulation, allowing most of the body’s thermal signature to remain detectable.

Ventilation through the fabric permits air exchange, reducing moisture buildup. Low humidity on the skin surface discourages ticks, which prefer damp conditions for prolonged feeding. However, the porous structure of nylon also permits small insects to navigate through the material, offering limited physical barrier against tick legs.

Key considerations:

Heat retention: modest; insufficient to mask body warmth from questing ticks.
Ventilation: high; helps maintain dry skin but does not block tick penetration.
Overall protection: negligible; nylon stockings alone do not provide reliable defense against tick bites.

Social Acceptability

Nylon hosiery can serve as a physical barrier that reduces the likelihood of tick attachment during outdoor activities. Its effectiveness depends on material density and coverage of exposed skin.

Social acceptability of wearing such garments for protection varies across populations. In regions where outdoor recreation is common, the practice aligns with existing habits of using protective clothing. In urban settings, the choice may conflict with prevailing fashion norms, particularly for individuals unaccustomed to wearing stockings outside formal or leisure contexts. Workplace dress codes can either permit or restrict the inclusion of hosiery for health reasons, influencing employee adoption.

Key factors shaping acceptance include:

Cultural perception of hosiery as a gender‑specific item
Visibility of the garment in public environments
Awareness of tick‑borne disease risk among target groups
Availability of alternative protective attire (e.g., long‑sleeved shirts, gaiters)

When public health messaging emphasizes disease prevention, acceptance tends to increase, especially if recommendations are supported by credible research. Conversely, lack of clear guidance or association with outdated fashion can limit uptake. Evaluating these social dimensions assists policymakers and health educators in designing interventions that balance efficacy with community preferences.

Best Practices for Tick Bite Prevention

Multi-faceted Approach

Combining Methods for Optimal Protection

Nylon hosiery can serve as a physical barrier that limits tick attachment to the lower limbs, yet the weave alone does not guarantee complete protection. When integrated with additional strategies, overall efficacy improves markedly.

Permethrin‑impregnated clothing creates an insecticidal surface that kills or repels ticks upon contact. Pairing treated garments with nylon stockings extends the protective zone from the ankle to the thigh. Application of EPA‑registered skin repellents containing DEET, picaridin, or IR3535 on exposed areas further reduces the probability of a bite. Regular tick checks after outdoor activity remove unattached specimens before feeding.

Combining these measures follows a layered‑defense model:

Wear permethrin‑treated trousers and long‑sleeved shirts.
Add tight‑knit nylon stockings beneath the trousers.
Apply a skin repellent to uncovered skin, following label instructions.
Perform a systematic body inspection within 24 hours of exposure, focusing on hidden regions such as the scalp, armpits, and groin.
Remove and launder treated clothing after each use to maintain insecticidal potency.

Implementing the above sequence maximizes protection against tick encounters while acknowledging the limitations of any single method.

Regular Tick Checks

Regular tick checks constitute a primary preventive measure when evaluating the effectiveness of any barrier, including nylon hosiery, against tick attachment.

Performing inspections at consistent intervals reduces the likelihood that engorged ticks remain undetected long enough to transmit pathogens.

Checks should cover all exposed skin and areas concealed by clothing, focusing on folds, behind ears, under arms, and the lower limbs where stockings may be worn.

Key actions for each inspection:

Examine the entire body surface, using a hand mirror for hard‑to‑see regions.
Separate clothing layers, including nylon stockings, to reveal skin beneath.
Remove any attached ticks with fine‑pointed tweezers, grasping close to the mouthparts.
Disinfect the bite site and store the removed tick for identification if needed.

Implementing this routine at least once daily, and after outdoor activities, ensures that any tick present is identified promptly, regardless of protective garments.

When to Seek Medical Attention

Recognizing Symptoms of Tick-Borne Illnesses

Nylon stockings may reduce the likelihood of tick attachment, but early detection of tick‑borne disease remains essential. Recognizing clinical manifestations allows prompt treatment and limits complications.

Typical symptoms appear within days to weeks after a bite:

Fever, often accompanied by chills
Headache and muscle aches
Fatigue and malaise
Localized rash, such as a red expanding lesion or a target‑shaped pattern
Joint swelling or pain, particularly in knees and ankles
Nausea, vomiting, or abdominal discomfort

Less common signs suggest specific infections: a bullseye rash strongly indicates Lyme disease; severe headache with stiff neck may signal tick‑borne encephalitis; rapid onset of anemia, jaundice, or dark urine points to babesiosis. Immediate medical evaluation is advised when any of these signs develop after exposure to ticks.

Proper Tick Removal Techniques

Nylon stockings are occasionally considered a barrier against tick attachment, yet their effectiveness depends on the presence of ticks that have already latched onto the skin. Once a tick is attached, removal must follow precise steps to reduce the risk of disease transmission and minimize tissue damage.

Grasp the tick as close to the skin surface as possible using fine‑point tweezers or a specialized tick‑removal tool.
Apply steady, downward pressure to pull the tick straight out without twisting or crushing the body.
Disinfect the bite area with an appropriate antiseptic after extraction.
Preserve the removed tick in a sealed container if identification or testing is required.
Monitor the bite site for several weeks; seek medical advice if redness, swelling, or flu‑like symptoms develop.

The technique described eliminates the mouthparts that embed in the epidermis, thereby decreasing the likelihood of pathogen transfer. Prompt execution, within 24 hours of attachment, maximizes the reduction of infection risk. Regular inspection of clothing and skin after outdoor activity remains a crucial complement to any protective garment.