I have to say I'm one who is disgusted with the Everest mentality. In a recent National G Adventure travel magazine they feature 12 people for their accomplishments. One was an Everest guide who found a man dying who another party had left behind. A number of other parties also passed by leaving him unaided to die. This guide made the choice to forgoe summiting with his clients (they were near the top) to perform a 12 hour rescue and save the deserted climber. I can't believe this is even a choice -- save a life or summit a mountain. As a result this guide is having trouble getting any clients because no one wants to go with a guy who might stop to save a life, even though it may well be their own.

As a few have pointed out this is the ultimate selfish activity. I am not overly impressed that if you can spend ungodly amounts of money, and have sherpas and guides do a huge portion of your work that you can then stand on the highest mountain and tell everyone for the rest of your life that you did it. I'm much more impressed by people who work hard to save a life. My values must be quite different from these goal oriented climbers because I can't imagine 10 minutes at any location providing more euphoria than saving a person from death.

PB-
Very good food for thought and very well said!

Yep it is a pretty horrible attitude. Basically if you are insane enough to go to Everest, you must sort've acknowledge that you will be left there if anything goes wrong.

By the way, "top level climbers" look with disdain upon the whole Everest industry, with inexperienced rich clients having Sherpas do most of the work for them including settings up ladders and building camps and of course tons of bottled oxygen.

Climbing K2 without oxygen is often considered the ultimate climb.

Wow, this is a timely thread for me.

I did not see the TV program. For 20 years I have climbed technically in Europe, Himalayas, Africa and in the Pacific NW so I do understand the draw.

I have a couple comments:

There is no certificate of training requirement to climb (other than $ for a permit). Most climbers do have a climbing resume. The guide typically determines if you are worthy. And sometimes this decision is not made until you are a week into the climb, or even on summit day.

It’s tough because most don’t want to turn away $...but guides / climbing companies do also regularly publish their summit success rates. It boils down to each individual climber knowing and understanding their own limits.

Most climbers I know understand the risks, and know they are basically on their own if something happens. I think the heavy risk is an enticement to climb. We are looking for the risk and the pain. Most people cannot understand this, but it is a drug.

Imagine spending days / weeks of pain to get 5 minutes on the summit. I have never spent more than 10 minutes on any summit because you always have this fear that you cannot get back down. Summiting is only half way there. But many feel it’s totally worth it.

Guess I feel a bit melancholy as today is the memorial service for one of my closest climbing friends. She was climbing in China last month, and was assumed hit by an avalanche. Her body has not been recovered.

If you do not know anyone who has died climbing, you have not climbed for very long. It’s just the nature of the sport.

Oh, and btw, comparing Kili to Everest is like comparing a step stool to the Matterhorn. Kili is not even technical. Many climbers do not even mention climbing this peak.