High Sierra Topix

I'll post it here too since this is the most recent installment in the series. This doctor seemed to be skeptical, but concluded that many of the benefits of the Wim Hof Method of breathing were plausible, including high altitude climbing without getting AMS. In the case of AMS, the doctor said hyperventilation was the key to avoiding AMS. If you're interested, the AMS discussion begins around minute 28. https://youtu.be/D6EPuUdIC1E I may try this in a month or so on an ascent of Mt Shasta; I live at 600'. Though in my case I plan do it as an overnight trip, camping at 9,000 feet then summiting the next morning before descending back down to my car and home on Day 2.

Great opening statements on that "Medlife Crisis" video! I don't have 44 minutes to watch right now so will have to bookmark it.

As for the various breathing methods - there are light & inexpensive pulse oximeters, so you can experiment to find a method that works for you. There's been some back-and-forth discussion on pursed lip breathing vs hyperventilation or other methods. What I've found is that both get me to the same O2 level, but pursed-lip gets me there faster.

Wandering Daisy wrote: ↑Fri Apr 23, 2021 12:12 pm I doubt the chemistry of it will give practical answers without more well designed studies with a more inclusive group of subjects, rather than just mountaineers.

Years ago, there was an Everest expedition that did a physiology study. At sea level, they divided the subjects into three groups. Group 1 included some ultramarathoners, so there were some world class athletes in there. Group 2 were mostly moderate athletes, weekend skiers, and occasional joggers. Group 3 were mostly medical school students, so some were barely athletic at all, and I don't believe that any of them went past Everest Base Camp. Each time that they got to some elevation checkpoint, they ran tests using a bicycle ergonometer, plus blood tests and respiration measurements.

Who adapted best? Group 2 actually did best. The weekend warriors had been up and down in the mountains a lot, and their bodies seemed to know how to adapt to the high elevation, and do it quickly, and do it thoroughly. Group 3 didn't do too bad. Their level of performance was much lower than the others, but their bodies adapted up to a point. Group 1 did not do so hot, even though their sea level performance was great, it was almost as if their bodies had only one gear that was finely tuned for sea level air pressure, but when they got up to 17,000 feet, their bodies could not adapt nearly as good as the others.

I read a similar study (maybe the same one??) done in the Alps with various people in various shapes. The least fit ones actually did better because they felt too poorly to go very fast. The fit competitive ones did worse. So the "turtle and hare" analogy works here. That study did not have a separate group of fit weekend warriors.