[ghost of nixon]

Very dangerous to be climbing with a weaker climber - especially one attempting an historic first. Once you step foot above base camp, and especially above camp 3, you have to be totally focused on your own safety and survival. Any help given to a weaker climber such as lending precious oxygen or delaying your descent can be fatal.

[DoodleBob]

There have been many stories of climbers passing distressed climbers that died hours later. It is real easy for me, in a climate-controlled HEPA-filtered area, to pontificate about what an exhausted hiker in the Dead Zone suffering from mild edema who spent $100k to summit Everest should do about ANOTHER hiker in the same situation who is dying. Of course I am going to say he should help his fellow man...but I don't know if the dying hiker ignored advice, if the surviving hiker could have put himself (and others) in harm's way by helping, etc. It is sort of like me saying whether those four Navy Seals in the Lone Survivor saga should have killed the villager who found them.

This is part of the reason why I don't go to Kathmandu. Then there is the $100k...

[Bedford Forrest]

Of course, all true in spades. But what is the objection [aside from greed] to requiring some serious physical and psychological tests before allowing someone on the mountain? I know nothing about the criteria [if such exist] other than a bankroll.