Actually, every article I’ve read has included the Sherpa in the numbers. As she should be. If the Sherpa climber was a she. No name has been mentioned.
His name was Phurba Sherpa, and shame on news outlets who don’t say his name as often as the others.
Best thread title I’ve seen in a long time.
Because it’s there?
Well of course it’s there. But if Timmy and Bobby down the street decide they want to climb up to dangerously hypoxic altitudes, does that mean you have to?
The vegan lady did try a couple other mountains first, to prove she could do it. Her whole thing was proving that vegans could do anything.
Not surprising (since this is prime climbing season) today is the 6th anniversary of a good friend’s successful summit of Everest. I just found the summit photo and she looks extremely happy and extremely tired. And so it goes.
And she did! Vegans can die on Everest as well as meat eaters. Equality for all!
(JAQ, who thinks people can climb Everest all they want, and perhaps die trying knowing the risks, but I wish they wouldn’t leave so much trash while doing it)
I have a smart ass friend who’s answer to his mother was always “If it looks like they are having fun, then YES!”
But seriously, I have mixed feeling about this kind of thing. I am not a mountain climber, have no desire to do it. My brother is an extreme sport enthusiast, although not mountain climbing (yet) This has given me perspective of respecting people who do utterly insane dangerous things for fun, even while I am in actual fear for him/her. I do find the Everest stories oddly fascinating, partly from a physiological standpoint. I can see the appeal, but I too think that it has become commericalized and people who have no business doing that kind of climb do it because the permanent ladders etc have made it easier. I don’t think it is my job to tell people what to do or not to do, but leaving the mountain full of bodies and trash and scrambles to the summit make it less appealing.
Hey if you die in the right place you can live on as a landmark for others.
Not sure where you got that. They may not be getting the social credit they deserve for their mountaineering achievements and their role in helping westerners to the summit, but as far as money is concerned,they get paid 4-7 times the average annual salary in Nepal for one climbing season.
What did you think they should be paid?
I think part of my emotional response to Everest-climbing stems from the sheer randomness of the dangers people find there. You’re a good climber and … boom, avalanche comes down on your tent, you’re dead. You’re a good climber and … too bad, your body still collapses at 8km+, you’re dead. It seems more like mountaineers’ Russian Roulette than a situation where finely honed mountaineering skills will save you, even if you do in fact have those finely honed skills.
The vet got down ok, and is now trying to figure out how to get his wife’s body down off the mountain. The survivor guilt must be incredible.
It’s hard to put a price tag on those kinds of risks, especially if the Sherpas don’t have protection for their families, such as life or accident insurance. Should the major breadwinner be injured or killed, it might leave their families destitute. So it seems perfectly fair that they should earn a lot more than the average Nepali.
Not really. The other mountains she climbed were absolute cakewalks compared to Everest.
“Over the last eight years, Dr Strydom climbed Denali in Alaska, Aconcagua in Argentina, Mount Ararat in Turkey and Kilimanjaro in her continent of birth, Africa.”
The summit of Denali is about 9000’ below Everest, which makes a huge difference as far a altitude sickness goes. Everest Camp 2 is even higher than the Denail summit.
Aconcagua at 22841’ is still far below Everest (29,000’+).
Mount Ararat 16854’.
Kilimanjaro 19341’ and one can walk to the top without ropes or even using your hands.
None of these mountains are easy to climb, but none of them come even close to preparing one to climb Everest.
How do you propose climbers get experience climbing peaks over 8000 m before they attempt their first 8000+? As noted, Everest is actually one of the easier 8000+ peaks to climb, so it seems like a logical one to attempt.
I think what’s happening on Everest is ridiculous: there are too many people allowed to climb each year, there are no controls to prevent everyone from attempting on the same day, there are plenty of people who lack serious climbing experience. But this woman was a climber with a lot of experience on challenging mountains. She might have made some bad decisions about when to turn around, maybe her diet had an impact, maybe she didn’t acclimate for long enough. But I don’t think it’s fair to lump her in with people who have no business attempting the climb.
Start by climbing difficult summits closer to 7000 m. and work your way up. Above 8000 m is considered the death zone where the human body starts to break down from lack of oxygen.
Here’s 5 to get you started:
GAURISHANKAR
Country/Continent: Nepal-Tibet border/Asia
Height: 23,405 feet (7,134 meters)
BAINTHA BRAKK
Country/Continent: Pakistan/Asia
Height: 23,900 feet (7,285 meters)
GASHERBRUM IV
Country/Continent: Pakistan/Asia
Height: 26,152 feet (7,925 meters)
NANGA PARBAT
Country/Continent: Pakistan/Asia
Height: 26,660 feet (8,126 meters)
DHAULAGIRI I
Country/Continent: Nepal/Asia
Height: 26,794.6 feet (8,167 meters)
I don’t know the difficulty of all those, but the ones I recognize are quite a bit more challenging than Everest, despite not being as high. If her sole issue was lack of experience over 8000 m, then climbing shorter ones wouldn’t help with that, and climbing a different 8000 m peak could have created worse issues.
I think there are people who attempt Everest that are rightly criticized for their lack of experience. I think there are probably reasonable things Dr. Strydom could be criticized or second-guessed on, but lack of experience isn’t the first I’d pick. She wasn’t some noob.
And you might be right.
But the exact quote, from two months ago, according to the article, was this:
“We’ve all heard stories of frostbite and having to turn around from excessive waiting times due to inexperienced people blocking routes,” she said in March. “This can lead to life-threatening situations and death where Sherpas and other climbers have to risk their lives to attempt rescues.”
Seems to me that it’s perhaps a bit foolhardy to lump yourself in with Everest’s “experienced” climbers when your highest ascent has barely brought you to within seven thousand feet of the elevation of Everest’s summit (if I’m reading this right).
Seems to me it’s the kind of thing you probably shouldn’t be saying, when you come right down to it, unless you’ve already summited Everest without difficulty a couple of times at least.
Maybe she made some mistakes, maybe she didn’t. Maybe it was bad luck. Maybe it wasn’t. The us-vs-them nature of the quote bothers me, is all. It seems like something that fails to acknowledge the possibility that she *might *have gotten herself in over her head. Of course, knowing what happened afterward, it’s easy to draw broad lines.
Well. I just hear my tenth grade English teacher’s voice in my head: “Just a *bit *of hubris here, hmm?”
I agree and it gives me the willies. There’s no shortage of experienced climbers, and ones who have summited multiple times, who have been killed by sheer random bad luck, whether it’s avalanches, bad weather, equipment failure, or whatever. Mother Nature’s nothing but a big fat bitch.
[QUOTE=Ulf the Unwashed]
Seems to me it’s the kind of thing you probably shouldn’t be saying, when you come right down to it, unless you’ve already summited Everest without difficulty a couple of times at least.
[/QUOTE]
I get the distinct impression that no Everest climb is easy. The only way to know if you can summit Everest is to climb it. There’s no way to predict how your body will react to the altitude and thin air, and no matter how crazy prepared you are, it doesn’t matter if a rope snaps at the wrong moment or you get stuck in a blizzard with no shelter handy.
Plus, no matter what she said, or did, or didn’t do, a man’s lost his wife, and if he makes it out alive, his life will never be the same. 
The vast majority of climbing literature that I have seen puts Everest (with its Khumbu Icefall) second only to K2 in difficulty when one looks at the total package (technical challenges plus altitude).
The following mountains are extremely challenging, but many people still rank them below Everest, however they are still very much in the same league. And no one IMHO should get anywhere close to these summits without first experiencing years of extreme mountaineering.
MAKALU
Country/Continent: Nepal-China border/Asia
Height: 27,825 feet (8,481 meters)
ANNAPURNA
Country/Continent: Nepal/Asia
Height: 26,493 feet (8,075 meters)
LHOTSE
Country/Continent: Nepal-Tibet border/Asia
Height: 27,940 feet (8,516 meters)
KANGCHENJUNGA
Country/Continent: India-Nepal border/Asia
Height: 28,169 feet (8,586 meters)
What experience at high altitude extreme mountaineering did she have?
Aconcagua at 22841’ is by no means a easy climb, but from what I’ve read, that was her most difficult summit.
I hate that 4% number (or the 33% number), because it’s people who’ve died/people who have summited. What it neglects are the people who attempted the climb, but turned around before reaching the summit. When you account for that, it’s closer to 1%. Not great odds, but not bad for a life-changing opportunity like that. You should also take into account that climbing in the Himalaya’s has gotten safer since these mountains were climbed in the 1950s. If you look at the fatality rate for K2 since 1990, for example, it’s more like 20% death/summit ratio (though Everest hasn’t really improved in this way).
Also, I think it’s important to note how much more popular Everest is than any of the other 8000 m peaks (by an order of magnitude in most cases). While it’s easy to decry the set rope lines and ladders, they do make the climb safer.