4 ms·

I was planning a trip to Nepal, to hike to Base Camp - Macchu Picchu was a great experience, so I thought this would be the same. But then a friend send me thi

I was planning a trip to Nepal, to hike to Base Camp - Macchu Picchu was a great experience, so I thought this would be the same. But then a friend send me this: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brain-cells-into-thin-air/ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brain-cells-into-t... Apparently, hiking at altitude causes permanent changes in the brain, even at "low" altitudes like EBC - which has kinda freaked me off about the trek. I wonder how the sherpas/local populace deal with that?

hvs 11y ago
Probably a lifetime of living in low-oxygen conditions has caused their lungs to compensate. That, and I would assume some effects on their brains.
vanattab 11y ago
>I wonder how the sherpas/local populace deal with that? Evolution. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_adaptation_in_humans https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_adaptation_in_... From the wiki page: "In fact, the adaptation account of the Tibetans has become the fastest case of human evolution in the scientific record, as it is estimated to have occurred in less than 3,000 years."
DanielStraight 11y ago
Study behind the article: http://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(05)00674-1/fulltext http://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(05)00674-1/fulltext
- victorhooi 11y ago
  Yeah, I read the study - the sample size is small, but I'm still freaked out by the science - as in, I'm worried if I go hiking to that altitude and what the permanent effects could be.
caio1982 11y ago
I've trekked the whole Annapurna circuit and its max altitude is about the same EBC IIRC. Really, it hurts a bit for a little while but getting tattooed hurts more in comparison to what you are doing and seeing. Also, the more you stays there the less it hurts or affects your body (I have spent 40 days in the mountains). Machu Picchu is nothing compared to Nepal's mountains, go for it! You won't regret it :-)
- the_af 11y ago
  Did you read the article from Scientific American? The mentioned studies argue that most climbers show brain damage (irreversible, even if asymptomatic in many cases), including memory loss, slower thought processes and diminished vision. Veterans are not spared, either; this isn't simply a case of newbies climbing too fast.
  - sshykes 11y ago
    Here's a link TFA... http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brain-cells-into-thin-air/ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brain-cells-into-t... @the_af: In the future it'd be most courteous of you to provide links to that which you cite; it spares everyone from having to google it ;)
    - the_af 11y ago
      I didn't see the need to repost it, since it was already in the grandparent post (victorhooi's, to whom caio1982 was replying). No need to google it at all.
      - sshykes 11y ago
        My mistake, sorry.
VLM 11y ago
The problem is the lack of context... how does a month in the mountains compare to a month of heavy drinking bar hopping?
wooster 11y ago
The study shows no lesions on the Kilimanjaro trek, which is more akin to an EBC trek than to climbing Everest, even if you climb Kala Patthar on the EBC trek. Even then, Kilimanjaro is much more intense than hiking to EBC, and a lot more people proportionately get some sort of altitude sickness on Kilimanjaro due improper acclimatization. Honestly, if you want to hike to EBC, I'd worry more about the flight into Lukla. Or edema from AMS. (I've climbed a "trekking peak" [Lobuche East] in Nepal as well as Kilimanjaro.)
- victorhooi 11y ago
  That's a good point. Kilamanjaro is 5895 metres, and EBC is 5380 metres. You're correct that in the study, the Kilamanjaro climbers (n=7), most of them came back with normal brain scans. That is definitely encouraging. Also, I have heard that Kilamanjaro is tougher than EBC, due partly to the rate ascent and people pushing themselves too aggressively - if I was to do EBC, I'm happy to take it slower, to avoid AMS. I'll probably be taking diamox, but I don't know if that makes a difference here. (I did the Inca Trail to Macchu Picchu with a group, fairly aggressive pace, but it's considerably lower - although I just Googled and apparently the highest point on the trail is 4215 metres, so maybe not that different). There may be hope yet...haha. How did you find your trek via Lobuche East? Any ill effects? And you found it easier than Kilimanjaro?
  - wooster 11y ago
    The trekking part of my Nepal trip I found a lot easier (and interesting) than my Kilimanjaro hike. The trek to EBC lends itself to a lot of flex days being built into itineraries (delays of flights between Kathmandu and Lobuche are normal) and some nice side trips that help with the "climb high, sleep low" pattern that helps prevent AMS. Kilimanjaro, on the other hand, is a straight shot up and down, tends to be a much shorter trek, and doesn't have as interesting terrain for side hikes. Climbing Lobuche East and glacier traverse+rescue training on Cho La glacier were both harder than hiking Kilimanjaro, but were my favorite parts of the trip. As far as ill effects… there were some injuries, sickness, and minor AMS symptoms among my group on both trips (headache, cough, shortage of breath… nothing serious). We were careful about acclimatization, though. Of the two, I'd really recommend trekking in Nepal. It's one of those places I find myself missing, and I'd love to go back.
jetbeau 11y ago
Use the Wim Hof method
tim333 11y ago
You can tell if you're harming your brain - you get a sore head, feel ill and similar. It's not necessary to get that going to base camp - just take it easy and ascend slowly. (Been to base camp a couple of times and to 8100m on the main hill. It's hard to go to the summit without damage but base camp's ok.)

hvs 11y ago

Probably a lifetime of living in low-oxygen conditions has caused their lungs to compensate. That, and I would assume some effects on their brains.

vanattab 11y ago

>I wonder how the sherpas/local populace deal with that? Evolution. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_adaptation_in_humans https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-altitude_adaptation_in_... From the wiki page: "In fact, the adaptation account of the Tibetans has become the fastest case of human evolution in the scientific record, as it is estimated to have occurred in less than 3,000 years."

DanielStraight 11y ago

Study behind the article: http://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(05)00674-1/fulltext http://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(05)00674-1/fulltext

victorhooi 11y ago
Yeah, I read the study - the sample size is small, but I'm still freaked out by the science - as in, I'm worried if I go hiking to that altitude and what the permanent effects could be.

caio1982 11y ago

I've trekked the whole Annapurna circuit and its max altitude is about the same EBC IIRC. Really, it hurts a bit for a little while but getting tattooed hurts more in comparison to what you are doing and seeing. Also, the more you stays there the less it hurts or affects your body (I have spent 40 days in the mountains). Machu Picchu is nothing compared to Nepal's mountains, go for it! You won't regret it :-)

the_af 11y ago
Did you read the article from Scientific American? The mentioned studies argue that most climbers show brain damage (irreversible, even if asymptomatic in many cases), including memory loss, slower thought processes and diminished vision. Veterans are not spared, either; this isn't simply a case of newbies climbing too fast.
- sshykes 11y ago
  Here's a link TFA... http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brain-cells-into-thin-air/ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brain-cells-into-t... @the_af: In the future it'd be most courteous of you to provide links to that which you cite; it spares everyone from having to google it ;)
  - the_af 11y ago
    I didn't see the need to repost it, since it was already in the grandparent post (victorhooi's, to whom caio1982 was replying). No need to google it at all.
    - sshykes 11y ago
      My mistake, sorry.

VLM 11y ago

The problem is the lack of context... how does a month in the mountains compare to a month of heavy drinking bar hopping?

wooster 11y ago

The study shows no lesions on the Kilimanjaro trek, which is more akin to an EBC trek than to climbing Everest, even if you climb Kala Patthar on the EBC trek. Even then, Kilimanjaro is much more intense than hiking to EBC, and a lot more people proportionately get some sort of altitude sickness on Kilimanjaro due improper acclimatization. Honestly, if you want to hike to EBC, I'd worry more about the flight into Lukla. Or edema from AMS. (I've climbed a "trekking peak" [Lobuche East] in Nepal as well as Kilimanjaro.)

victorhooi 11y ago
That's a good point. Kilamanjaro is 5895 metres, and EBC is 5380 metres. You're correct that in the study, the Kilamanjaro climbers (n=7), most of them came back with normal brain scans. That is definitely encouraging. Also, I have heard that Kilamanjaro is tougher than EBC, due partly to the rate ascent and people pushing themselves too aggressively - if I was to do EBC, I'm happy to take it slower, to avoid AMS. I'll probably be taking diamox, but I don't know if that makes a difference here. (I did the Inca Trail to Macchu Picchu with a group, fairly aggressive pace, but it's considerably lower - although I just Googled and apparently the highest point on the trail is 4215 metres, so maybe not that different). There may be hope yet...haha. How did you find your trek via Lobuche East? Any ill effects? And you found it easier than Kilimanjaro?
- wooster 11y ago
  The trekking part of my Nepal trip I found a lot easier (and interesting) than my Kilimanjaro hike. The trek to EBC lends itself to a lot of flex days being built into itineraries (delays of flights between Kathmandu and Lobuche are normal) and some nice side trips that help with the "climb high, sleep low" pattern that helps prevent AMS. Kilimanjaro, on the other hand, is a straight shot up and down, tends to be a much shorter trek, and doesn't have as interesting terrain for side hikes. Climbing Lobuche East and glacier traverse+rescue training on Cho La glacier were both harder than hiking Kilimanjaro, but were my favorite parts of the trip. As far as ill effects… there were some injuries, sickness, and minor AMS symptoms among my group on both trips (headache, cough, shortage of breath… nothing serious). We were careful about acclimatization, though. Of the two, I'd really recommend trekking in Nepal. It's one of those places I find myself missing, and I'd love to go back.

jetbeau 11y ago

Use the Wim Hof method

tim333 11y ago

You can tell if you're harming your brain - you get a sore head, feel ill and similar. It's not necessary to get that going to base camp - just take it easy and ascend slowly. (Been to base camp a couple of times and to 8100m on the main hill. It's hard to go to the summit without damage but base camp's ok.)