Team Forced to Leave Blinded Climber on Everest descent

by **fatdad** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 7:22 pm

Dingus Milktoast wrote:Teammates are different. Teams are different. Commercial guided groups are not the sort of teams one can rely upon, imo, when the shit gets grim.

That's really the issue. Your "teammates" are paying to have their asses dragged to the summit, not stick their necks out to save someone whose primarily qualification was their ability to write a big check.

I still like to think I'd be willing to dig in to save someone in trouble but it's a sliding scale. I'd be less willing to do so for someone with limited skills who went up there with limited skills, knowing they'd be at greater risk because of that deficit. From what I've read, there are people up there who barely know how to use an ice axe and crampons. Danger invites rescue, which puts your rescuers in danger. I think if someone is incapable of getting up and down without putting others in danger (apart from the unforeseeable), you shouldn't ask others to risk their lives for you.

by **Hotoven** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 7:33 pm

fatdad wrote: From what I've read, there are people up there who barely know how to use an ice axe and crampons. Danger invites rescue, which puts your rescuers in danger. I think if someone is incapable of getting up and down without putting others in danger (apart from the unforeseeable), you shouldn't ask others to risk their lives for you.

True, this is just my speculation...That's why people who know how to use crampons and Ice axes steer clear from Everest. Think about it, all the books and videos on Everest aren't about professional climbers who finally get up Everest. Its about novices making it up and down. Just my two cents...

by **Diver** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 7:55 pm

I was one of the members of the Summit Climb expedition that Peter was part of. While I was not personally there when it happened (my summit was North Col) I know that people who were with him did everything they could and spent as much time as they could without requiring a rescue themselves before leaving him behind. This is grim reality of 8000 meters rescues.

I don't believe it was a case retinal hemorrhaging, otherwise it would manifest itself on the way up and be at it's worst on the summit. One of the members turned around at North Col due to very bad case of retinal hemorrhaging when it started blocking his vision.

Peter started stumbling on his way down from the summit and even though he mentioned that it happened before, my guess would be it was HACE induced blindness in this case. This matches his irregular walk on the way down and symptoms delay from the summit since HACE might take some time to develop.

He was in a good shape and spirits before the summit push and it's real unfortunate things turned out this way.

by **fatdad** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 8:18 pm

fatdad wrote:
Dingus Milktoast wrote:Teammates are different. Teams are different. Commercial guided groups are not the sort of teams one can rely upon, imo, when the shit gets grim.

That's really the issue. Your "teammates" are paying to have their asses dragged to the summit, not stick their necks out to save someone whose primarily qualification was their ability to write a big check.

Let me qualify that statement by saying I don't know anything about the background of the blinded climber. He may have been totally solid, he may have been a gumby. I don't know. However, I don't want to lump him unfairly into one category not knowing the facts.

I had a friend who was rescued after facturing some vertebrae innocently slipping on some moss at the base of the Mountaineer's Route after an uneventful climb on the East Face. Because he worked at Disneyland climbing the Matterhorn (as did I at the time), a couple of news stations got wind of it and have no end of fun at this guy's expense ("I guess this guy must be feeling kind of Goofy"). The assumption was that he got hurt and had to be rescued was proof he was an incompentent idiot. All that was really hurtful to him. I wouldn't want my comments to cause this person's family any grief.

For some people, I understand how a commerical expedition is probably the most feasible way of coordinating the permits, logistics, etc., of a big climb and how, on that basis, even competent climbers may opt to join one. It's probably the only way I'll ever get there (though I've already decided that's not the scene for me). Unfortunately, as evidenced by several tragic summers on Everest, and even recently on K2, there appear to be a lot of people who would not be there if not for the massive amount of assistance provided.

by **Diver** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 9:04 pm

here is an update about the ordeal from summit climb dated June 3rd: http://everestnews.com/everest2010/summitclimbeverestnorth06012010.htm

by **Buz Groshong** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:24 pm

fatdad wrote:
fatdad wrote:
Dingus Milktoast wrote:Teammates are different. Teams are different. Commercial guided groups are not the sort of teams one can rely upon, imo, when the shit gets grim.

That's really the issue. Your "teammates" are paying to have their asses dragged to the summit, not stick their necks out to save someone whose primarily qualification was their ability to write a big check.

Let me qualify that statement by saying I don't know anything about the background of the blinded climber. He may have been totally solid, he may have been a gumby. I don't know. However, I don't want to lump him unfairly into one category not knowing the facts.

I had a friend who was rescued after facturing some vertebrae innocently slipping on some moss at the base of the Mountaineer's Route after an uneventful climb on the East Face. Because he worked at Disneyland climbing the Matterhorn (as did I at the time), a couple of news stations got wind of it and have no end of fun at this guy's expense ("I guess this guy must be feeling kind of Goofy"). The assumption was that he got hurt and had to be rescued was proof he was an incompentent idiot. All that was really hurtful to him. I wouldn't want my comments to cause this person's family any grief.

For some people, I understand how a commerical expedition is probably the most feasible way of coordinating the permits, logistics, etc., of a big climb and how, on that basis, even competent climbers may opt to join one. It's probably the only way I'll ever get there (though I've already decided that's not the scene for me). Unfortunately, as evidenced by several tragic summers on Everest, and even recently on K2, there appear to be a lot of people who would not be there if not for the massive amount of assistance provided.

Actually you've lumped quite a few people into "one category" without knowing the facts. Your statement:

Your "teammates" are paying to have their asses dragged to the summit, not stick their necks out to save someone whose primarily qualification was their ability to write a big check.

lumps all those who use hired guides into the category of those having "their asses dragged to the summit" and "whose primarily qualification was their ability to write a big check." An extremely ignorant assumption.

by **Brad Marshall** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 10:42 pm

Dingus Milktoast wrote:The opening of Chapter 1, K2, The Savage Mountain:

In 1939, American Dudley Wolfe was trapped alone, by storm at nearly 25,000 feet. They had no radios in those days, of course.

Quoting Houston:

"Then, on July 28, 1939, two Sherpa porters, Pasang Kikuli and Tsering, made one of the most amazing climbs in mountaineering history. In one day they ascended nearly 7000 feet of dangerous rock and snow to reach Camp VI at 23,300 feet on K2. On the way they were joined by two other sherpas who had previously climbed to Camp IV."

These 4 men spent the night in a single tent, 1500 feet below Dudley. They had food and fuel for 2 days. The next day 3 of the sherpas climbed up to Dudley but found him too weak to walk and descend under his own power. He was too heavy to carry.

They cooked him a meal and explained their plight - they had no gear to camp with him and only one more day's food and fuel back at camp VI. So they went back down to their camp, promising to come back the next day for one more try.

The next day the storm had worsened. Nevertheless, 3 sherpas started up to rescue Dudley, leaving Tsering behind.

They were never seen again nor has any trace of them ever been found.

Subsequent to WWII and Partition, it was no longer politically acceptable for sherpas to visit the Karakorum and the Hunzas began to learn mountain porter skills.

Even on Houston's expedition, these Pakistanis risked their lives to help the sahibs down the mountain.

Also, in the forward of K2: The Savage Mountain:

"The most remarkable aspect of the 1953 expedition was the way these men stuck together - through thick and thin - to the end. There was absolutely no thought of leaving Gilkey to save themselves. They would get down together, or not at all. In the years that followed - most notably during the tragic summer of 1986, when 13 climbers lost their lives - equally dramatic events occurred on K2. But never has the 1953 expedition's unified resolve in the face of extreme peril been matched. It was what enabled these men to survive one of the epic experiences of Himilayan mountaineering. It was what enabled them to maintain lifelong friendships afterward." - Jim Wickwire

Different times. Not an excuse, just a fact.

by **fatdad** » Fri Jun 04, 2010 11:48 pm

Buz Groshong wrote: Actually you've lumped quite a few people into "one category" without knowing the facts. Your statement:
Your "teammates" are paying to have their asses dragged to the summit, not stick their necks out to save someone whose primarily qualification was their ability to write a big check.

lumps all those who use hired guides into the category of those having "their asses dragged to the summit" and "whose primarily qualification was their ability to write a big check." An extremely ignorant assumption.

Fine. A broad assumption, but hardly ignorant I would argue. Show me I'm wrong.

by **jdzaharia** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 5:02 am

John Duffield wrote:So this is not an unheard of or semi common condition? Suddenly going blind at high altitude? Pretty frightening. I wonder what the occurence ratio is? Is it the the altitude or the proximity to the sun? Or both? I'm going to make a point of attempting to climb varying degrees of difficulty this summer blindfolded just to see. Start with simple flat hiking.

It has nothing to do with the sun, as far as I know. It's not like being blinded by a bright light. Instead, a blood vessel bursts, and blood literally fills the inside of the eye, blocking the light from getting to the optic nerve. In my case, it was the central retinal vein, which is in the center of the eye, as the name implies. So, my blind spot is in the center of my vision. It takes the body a considerable amount of time to absorb the blood back into the system. And scar tissue can remain, causing permanent vision loss. I think altitude aggrevates the situation in two ways. The article states that blood thickens at altitude. And, I would say relative eye pressure would go up, due to decreased ambient atmospheric pressure.

Diver wrote:I don't believe it was a case retinal hemorrhaging, otherwise it would manifest itself on the way up and be at it's worst on the summit. One of the members turned around at North Col due to very bad case of retinal hemorrhaging when it started blocking his vision.

Peter started stumbling on his way down from the summit and even though he mentioned that it happened before, my guess would be it was HACE induced blindness in this case. This matches his irregular walk on the way down and symptoms delay from the summit since HACE might take some time to develop.

To qualify: You were there, and I've never been above 15,000 ft, so your statements hold some good water for me. I'm unfamiliar with HACE and especially HACE-induced blindness, but from each article I've gathered that most people thought it was NOT HACE. Hmm.

Hemorrhaging could start any time. Especially for somebody who is prone to it. And, it seems Kinloch had it before when it was clearly NOT related to altitude. Things can go "pop" at any time, not necessarily the most likely time. My point is that the hemorrhaging could have started at any time, or may not have been noticed right away. Or it could have been due to something other than altitude, and it just happened to occur while he was on Everest. If that was the case, that's some pretty tough luck.

by **Brad Marshall** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 5:26 am

fatdad wrote:
Buz Groshong wrote: Actually you've lumped quite a few people into "one category" without knowing the facts. Your statement:
Your "teammates" are paying to have their asses dragged to the summit, not stick their necks out to save someone whose primarily qualification was their ability to write a big check.

lumps all those who use hired guides into the category of those having "their asses dragged to the summit" and "whose primarily qualification was their ability to write a big check." An extremely ignorant assumption.

Fine. A broad assumption, but hardly ignorant I would argue. Show me I'm wrong.

An excellent example that proves both your points would be the case of Lincoln Hall in 2006. Lincoln's team mates on a commercial expedition (7 Summits Club) left him for dead at 8700m but another commercial expedition comprised of Dan Mazur, Andrew Brash (go Canada), Myles Osborne and Jangbu Sherpa (Summit Climb) gave up their summit bid to save Lincoln.

I think times have changed significantly from the early days of climbing though. Back in the pre-commercial expedition days only climbers that were very strong and had proven themselves were selected to join expeditions. Now a days many climbers on Everest are strong enough to get their own asses up to the summit (maybe) but no where near strong enough to effect rescues at those altitudes.

by **Ejnar Fjerdingstad** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 11:23 am

Alpinisto wrote:
Ejnar Fjerdingstad wrote:If you read books on Himalayan mountaineering in the 1930s it was not uncommon for a Sherpa to die trying to help a European climber down. But I guess the general 'me first' attitude, combined with the commercialization of especially Everest climbs probably has changed that.

I'd be curious to know if these deaths were due to the inherent selflessness on the part of the Sherpa or the result of their being paid well by the sahibs and feeling that they owed it to their Western bosses to try to save them.

Also, were these Sherpa dying whilst helping European climbers on the the summit ridge or elsewhere high on the mountain? IIRC, often the Sherpa/HAP's weren't even invited/allowed to be on the summit teams on many early expeditions, leaving the "real climbing" for the "real climbers" (i.e., white guys). I've not read extensively about early Himalayan climbing, but the several books I have read talked about Sherpa deaths due to crevasse falls, avalanches, illness, etc. but I don't recall m/any who died while saving/attempting to save a Westerner.

Ejnar Fjerdingstad wrote:In Europe it would be unthinkable for a guide to leave an incapacitated client to die on a mountain.

Um, did you read the online news reports? The guides/Sherpa DID try to help the climber down, but, after hours of assistance, he was still unable to descend. It's not like they saw he was having a problem and simply said, "Too bad. We're leaving without you."

There are places (summit ridge on Everest being one) where you just ain't gonna make it if you can't move under your own power.

Here in the U.S., the first rule for rescue folks responding to an incident is "Don't create another victim." Is there a different mindset in Europe? Are mountain guides expected/encouraged to die alongside clients?

Mountain guides in Europe are expected to be able to handle such a situation as bringing down a severely disabled client (which may also happen without any fault of the client, e.g. rockfall). Moreover, although the Alps are lower than the Himalayas, the technical standard of some routes are much higher than the summit ridge of Everest by the normal route (yes, you can have a guided ascent of the Eiger north face nowadays, although very few would be accepted by a guide for doing that).

by **simonov** » Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:29 pm

jdzaharia wrote:Hemorrhaging could start any time. Especially for somebody who is prone to it.

Hmm. So are epileptics allowed on Everest?

by **Alpinisto** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 2:07 am

redneck wrote:
jdzaharia wrote:Hemorrhaging could start any time. Especially for somebody who is prone to it.

Hmm. So are epileptics allowed on Everest?

If they gots the green, there's probably some guide service that will take them... :roll:

by **simonov** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 2:12 am

Alpinisto wrote:
redneck wrote:Hmm. So are epileptics allowed on Everest?

If they gots the green, there's probably some guide service that will take them...

My friend is an epileptic and he tells me the seizures can happen at any time, with very little warning (in his case, enough warning to pull his car over).

On the other hand, they don't last very long, so perhaps they wouldn't really be life-threatening up there, aside from the risk of rolling down the Lohtse Face.

by **Big Benn** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 3:23 pm

Not sure if I should really comment on this. Certainly not from a first hand mountaineering point of view, because that's not what I do.

But I have sensed as my life continues past 60, that human values on matters such as in this have changed. There are a lot more people embarking on massive adventures: climbs, arctic/antarctic walks etc these days. Quite often with a strong commercial spin. Nothing wrong with that, except IMHO it's maybe often a different sort of person who sets out. Not the hardy adventures of old who would undoubtedly give there lives in an effort to save others in their team. That's what people did back in the past. What was expected of them. What they did naturally. It's how they were brought up. It was in their blood.

And such people are still around, but maybe outnumbered now when it counts. Outnumbered by a new breed of people who, when the chips are really down, just look to their own survival. I don't criticise them for doing that. They have been able to join in those adventures, but don't have the same make up as those who, I guess, monopolised such things in the past.

But we still have the old school, around. No matter what their age is.

Like The Chief. Someone I have enormous respect for. That must be obvious from a lot of my postings in the past.

I have always seen him as one of the old school, with the sort of values that were hammered into me by my dad when I was a kid. And of course there will be others like him here on SP. And others that man services like SAR. Not just the USA SAR but in other countries as well.

I guess the most important issue in all of this, is for anyone embarking on such an exploit as climbing Everest should think and try and find out what they would do in such circumstances. And about what their fellow team members would do. And then decide whether or not they want to continue.

Team Forced to Leave Blinded Climber on Everest descent

Who is online