Preventable Deaths
“Into thin air” by Jon Krakauer is a personal account of the Mt. Everest Disaster. One out of every four climbers, dies on the mountain, according to Jon Krakauer's book. Fifteen climbers died in the 1996 climbing season alone. With odds such as these, who should decide who is allowed to climb the mountain, and who is not? Should an individual decide they can do it, all on their own? I think it should be a chain of decisions, between several people, and groups of people. First, an individual should have a doctor decide if they are medically fit to climb. Next, it should go through the company, specifically through the guides themselves. Finally, they should get approval from the government of Nepal. I think the only way people should be allowed to climb is if they have gone through this chain of decisions.
Some individuals families have a history of, or are prone to certain issues. Some have underlying health issues that would affect the individuals lives, or the lives of the people on their teams, …show more content…
Should an individual decide they can climb Mt. Everest, all on their own? I think it should be a chain of decisions, between several people, and groups of people. First, an individual should have a doctor decide if they are medically fit to climb. Next, the people who want to climb should go through the company, then through the guides themselves. Finally they should get approval from the government of Nepal. I think the only way people should be allowed to climb is if they have gone through this chain of decisions. These decisions should prevent deaths in climbers by inexperience, or medical issues, it should also help the government of Nepal, to conserve and protect Mt. Everest. I hope that this essay shows how I think approval to climb should be granted in the future, for safety and environmental
“Into thin air” by Jon Krakauer is a personal account of the Mt. Everest Disaster. One out of every four climbers, dies on the mountain, according to Jon Krakauer's book. Fifteen climbers died in the 1996 climbing season alone. With odds such as these, who should decide who is allowed to climb the mountain, and who is not? Should an individual decide they can do it, all on their own? I think it should be a chain of decisions, between several people, and groups of people. First, an individual should have a doctor decide if they are medically fit to climb. Next, it should go through the company, specifically through the guides themselves. Finally, they should get approval from the government of Nepal. I think the only way people should be allowed to climb is if they have gone through this chain of decisions.
Some individuals families have a history of, or are prone to certain issues. Some have underlying health issues that would affect the individuals lives, or the lives of the people on their teams, …show more content…
Should an individual decide they can climb Mt. Everest, all on their own? I think it should be a chain of decisions, between several people, and groups of people. First, an individual should have a doctor decide if they are medically fit to climb. Next, the people who want to climb should go through the company, then through the guides themselves. Finally they should get approval from the government of Nepal. I think the only way people should be allowed to climb is if they have gone through this chain of decisions. These decisions should prevent deaths in climbers by inexperience, or medical issues, it should also help the government of Nepal, to conserve and protect Mt. Everest. I hope that this essay shows how I think approval to climb should be granted in the future, for safety and environmental