3 ms·

Something morbid that comes to mind when I see something about Mt. Everest: “There Are Over 200 Bodies on Mount Everest, And They’re Used as Landmarks” https:

Something morbid that comes to mind when I see something about Mt. Everest: “There Are Over 200 Bodies on Mount Everest, And They’re Used as Landmarks” https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/there-are-over-200-bodies-on-mount-everest-and-theyre-used-as-landmarks-146904416/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/there-are-over-200...

saiya-jin 3y ago
Well results of extreme popularity (so that total noobs from ie California or China would show up in base camp, paid for full expedition with personal sherpa, and start asking how this weird alpinism equipment like crampons should be used), extreme environment due to altitude killing your brain and rest of body well below 8000m and Nepal's leniency on climbing permits. Thus you have repeated stories of big egos bagging popular peaks, ie part of 7 summits, who simply refused to turn back even after hours of pleading by their personal sherpas due to their poor state, and they simply collapse up there. The mentality of 'pushing through the pain' which gets you to finish marathon fast will kill you up there. People don't understand what it means to have mental capacity at 10% and barely be able to slowly walk and keep balance, while doing life & death decisions where 1 wrong step can kill easily. Also its extermely hard to bring a body down, they say its around 20 well-faring people per body. As per stats you basically have high risk of 1 death by bringing 1 dead body, so its rarely done. Not all of these 'landmarks' have same story, some were good seasoned professionals with bad luck, but most have some trivial, or stupid mistakes attached to them and refusal to turn back. Even though most die on the way down, the seed for it is planted in slow ascent. I am pretty sure this is well known, but just to be 100% sure - in elite/professional alpinism circles, going up Mt. Everest via 2 standard routes by throwing bunch of money around as part of huge 300-500 group gains 0 respect, quite a lot of contrary and puts you firmly in 'rich fool' bracket. Sherpa community deserves help, but this is very bad (since its super selective to few individuals in vast region who take all the profits) and very very dangerous way of improving livelihoods. /rant

saiya-jin 3y ago

Well results of extreme popularity (so that total noobs from ie California or China would show up in base camp, paid for full expedition with personal sherpa, and start asking how this weird alpinism equipment like crampons should be used), extreme environment due to altitude killing your brain and rest of body well below 8000m and Nepal's leniency on climbing permits. Thus you have repeated stories of big egos bagging popular peaks, ie part of 7 summits, who simply refused to turn back even after hours of pleading by their personal sherpas due to their poor state, and they simply collapse up there. The mentality of 'pushing through the pain' which gets you to finish marathon fast will kill you up there. People don't understand what it means to have mental capacity at 10% and barely be able to slowly walk and keep balance, while doing life & death decisions where 1 wrong step can kill easily. Also its extermely hard to bring a body down, they say its around 20 well-faring people per body. As per stats you basically have high risk of 1 death by bringing 1 dead body, so its rarely done. Not all of these 'landmarks' have same story, some were good seasoned professionals with bad luck, but most have some trivial, or stupid mistakes attached to them and refusal to turn back. Even though most die on the way down, the seed for it is planted in slow ascent. I am pretty sure this is well known, but just to be 100% sure - in elite/professional alpinism circles, going up Mt. Everest via 2 standard routes by throwing bunch of money around as part of huge 300-500 group gains 0 respect, quite a lot of contrary and puts you firmly in 'rich fool' bracket. Sherpa community deserves help, but this is very bad (since its super selective to few individuals in vast region who take all the profits) and very very dangerous way of improving livelihoods. /rant