I can’t imagine wearing anything tight while hiking, and even if some medical evidence was found to support compression socks, I’d probably ignore it. Loose fitting gear just feels better! And keeps mosquitoes further from the skin. And allows freedom of movement. But I don’t even understand what the problem is that people are trying to solve with compression socks in the first place. What are they for, how are they supposed to help you?
As for the ankle rash, the Livestrong article indicated that the vasculitis occurred above the sock. I get ankle rashes too, only under the sock cuff, regardless of what sock I wear. If it is above 60 degrees F., I get the nasty rash. If it stays hot for several days, my ankles start to bleed. It’s quite ugly but doesn’t hurt as much as it looks like it should. Then it sticks around for another week.  Putting baby powder on before hiking seems to help a bit. My doc said to take Zantac before a hike, but I haven’t tried that yet because the last med she prescribed for my immune condition caused a major stomach bleed, from which I’m still recovering.
Sorry, that’s a bit of drift, so back to socks. If I could hike with no socks, that would be optimal. The very short kind always slip down. I like both Wright and Darn Toughs, but both give me the rashes. I can only imagine that compression socks would make that condition ten times worse. Do people really want something tight on their legs while hiking?

