Everest the right way



I have just read the account of the double amputee who climbed Everest.

I am frankly appalled, on the way to the summit they passed a man "hours from death". I assume our heroic no legger (I have just one) had a few blokes with him. Was getting to the summit more important than saving a life?

It is not as if Everest has never been climbed before. I salute the amputees spirit and determination but I am sickened by the lack of moral courage displayed.

I hope that our chaps who will be attempting the summit soon do not do this type of thing, far better to fail and act morally than to succeed with the knowledge that you left a stranger to die.
Hear hear!

Incidentally, our guys on the West Ridge are looking at a summit attempt tomorrow morning. Good luck to them.


Extract from Daily Telegraph report is below, Sobering???????????????

Feeling on top of the world - with no legs and laryngitis

In an interview by satellite phone, he said of the final ascent: "We came across a chap sheltering under a rock, who was perhaps hours from death. That was probably only two and a half hours into the climb.

"He had made a mistake the day before. He started too late and couldn't get off the mountain. That was a very sobering reality, that every pace you took further from that point was further from safety, and we had to all make it back. It didn't deter Mark."

It is not yet known what happened to the climber they passed on the way up.
Aha, Now it makes sense.

My only thought when I saw the title was that Everst the wrong way would be something to do with potholing!

I can't find a reference to the 'hours from death' bit as it's not on the Beeb's site link above and I couldn't find it on my own searches either. Could you (bokkatankie) post it here please?

Such actions go against everything that climbers live by and I'm shocked and saddened if this account turns out to be true (legs or not).


I hope that he did do something to help the bloke who was "hours from death" seeing as he himself was in that position years ago which led to him losing both of his legs.


Not too good on the linking thing hope this works:


Sad thing is that this is not the first time: I have read similar accounts - the Death Zone is one about other climbers summiting whilst in this case leaving two Japanese climbers to die. It is beyond my understanding and the reality is is that modern climbers seem to think that this is acceptable.

I think that much has to do with the "paid" Everst tourist syndrome, not my problem the guides are the ones who will sort it out etc.

The cold caalm way in which the bloke say's "he made a mistake and set off too late" seems to sum up the entire attitude of me first and F**k the rest.


It would appear that nothing was done for the individual and that worse no one knows what became of him!!!
This does indeed sound like the 'tourist' climbing mentality. Pays your money and have to get there (and back) stuff regardless.

Even in Snowdon when I started climbing back in the 80's we were told the rules and these included getting people off the climb (no matter what or where) unless it would endanger you as well. In such situations, we were told contact was to be made with the relevant people (i.e. 22 sdn at Valley, Mountain Rescue Team, Police, etc.) by whatever means were possible and aid given but the person wasn't just left alone.

This applied to anyone you came across, not just members of your own party.

Is this wasn't the case, and the article suggests it wasn't, then this is a disgrace not a triumph.

Thank you Bok, will watch with interest,

This was on BBC News (on-line) this morning:

Everest climber dies on descent

A climber has died after achieving his ambition of conquering Mount Everest, the British Embassy in Nepal has said.
Experienced climber David Sharp, 34, of Guisborough, Teesside, was on his way down from the world's highest mountain when he got into difficulties.

His body was found in a cave by other climbers on Wednesday, 1,000ft below the summit.

Mr Sharp, who was making the attempt alone, was on his third climb of the 29,028ft mountain.

On Thursday, 42 people made it to the summit as the Everest season entered its busiest spell.


Letters page in today's Telegraph, my reply is below, as usual it will never get printed, but well done to Maggie for her courage.

Lets stop celebrating this "mans" achievment and lets start examining his moral credentials.

Everest conflict

Sir - Having heard the news of the ascent of Mount Everest by the double amputee Mark Inglis, I read your report (News, May 17) so that I could understand more fully this huge triumph over adversity.

Yet having done so, I find myself torn. On the final ascent, Mr Inglis and his climbing companions passed a man "who was perhaps hours from death". Would the greater achievement not have been to know that they had done everything physically possible to help this man live?

Maggie Ralph, Stirling

I was appalled to read the same article. How can anyone climb past a man in clear difficulties and leave him to die. It is sad to say that this is not the first time. It has been documented many times in triumphant books about ascents of Everest. That people can do such a thing is beyond all normal understanding, is standing on the summit of a mountain that has been climbed thousands of times before more important than a life? Any excuse that to help may endanger their own lives is groundless and may I say cowardly. If climbers are not capable of helping others, they should not be on the mountain in the first place.
A book called dark shadows falling by Joe Simpson of "Shit, Im in a crevasse" fame studies this more closely, According to him their is a trophy hunter attitude going on with big climbs in which summiting is everything and the benefits of team work and co-operation found in Mountaineering are secondary.
what a cnut, legs or no legs

he may have not been able to help the bloke but he could have at least tried

hes acheived his lifetime ambition and thats all that matters to him.


Book Reviewer
mark1234 said:
what a cnut, legs or no legs

he may have not been able to help the bloke but he could have at least tried

hes acheived his lifetime ambition and thats all that matters to him.
Tough call.....but I agree.

Any seaman knows that taking a life back from the sea is the most important thing you can do - and takes priority over everything else.....because some day the boot may be on the other foot.....even if it's a prosthesis.
Read that book by Joe simpson .Made some mountainers are complete cnuts if true this guy should be shunned .If your really high up
there maybe nothing you can do if someone gets injured .But hours from death! you 'd at least try and get him out . I 'm sure if the british army team came across a casualty even if he was french :lol: they would try and get him out even if cost the summit .
Fellas, over 8000m there's very very little chance of saving anyone's life if you find someone in this situation. It's not physically possible unfortunately.

Morally, this inaction is also accepted by all those who participate, again this is unfortunate but a true reflection of the harsh practicalities of high altitude mountaineering.

Please do some research before you condem the actions of other guides and their clients.
G_R is right on this guys. There's nothing you can do except sit by him and provide some moral support as he dies in front of you. Of course by doing so you risk your own life and your chance of summitting.

Even if you did manage to get him back to top camp, the chances are he would still die. He'd been sitting out on the mountain overnight, probably couldn't walk. Beck Wethers is the exception that proves the rule here.

Everest climbers accept that this is the way things are. For a large part of the route above top camp, the climbers don't even rope up. Human reactions are so slow at that altitude that if one member of a rope fell he would drag the others off.

PB Out.
mark1234 said:
its widely accepted that chavs mug grannies where i live, but it doesnt make it anymore acceptable to me.
I see your point mark, but the two situations are not comparable. Grannies being mugged by chavs is an unacceptable part of urban life in some UK cities.

Attempting to rescue someone from over 8000m is a technical no-go, which has been accepted morally by those who volunteer to participate in this extreme high risk sport.

High altitude climbers (whether guide or guided) are aware of the risks and accept them. Over 8000m they know they will not be rescued and do not expect help/rescue from others who may be aware of their predicament.

There is no shortage of reading material on this if you care to investigate the technical/practical aspects. In simple terms, we are not talking here about sharing your flask of coffee with the lost tourist on the Fan in winter and taking them back down the track to the burger van in the bottom car park, this is completely the other end of the spectrum.

Similar threads

Latest Threads