acclimatizing- Men Vs. Women

[Carmel]

Is there a relation to gender and acclimatizing?

How about age? Children vs. old people?

I've heard smokers acclimatize better than non-smokers, true?

I'm looking for real scientific facts, not personal experiences. That could always be another thread!



I'm pretty curious as to what the board will find.

-c-

Merry Non-Denominational Winter Holiday!!! oh yeah...and Festivus!!!

 

[Kevin Rooney]

I'm not certain there's been alot of scientific research done on the topic, and when you consider the logisitics of trying to test control groups, it's easy to see why. I have my own opinions on the questions you asked, but it's based upon my own experiences and observing my climbing companions.

Wikipeida has some general info which most people who've been to altitude would probably agree with, although it doesn't answer your questions.

There are a few things most people agree - altitude sickness does not follow specific patterns within individuals (i.e. someone can climb to altitude 100 times without problems and on the 101st climb encounter severe problems); adequate sleep and excellent hydration tend to relieve symptons; and physically fit individuals seem to have a slightly higher rate of acclimization issues.

Kevin

 

[DougPaul]

* Is there a relation to gender and acclimatizing?

Not that I have heard of.

* How about age? Children vs. old people?

I think children and old folks are more susceptable, but I'd guess that there is a lot of individual variation. (Sir Edmund Hillory can no longer go above ~15K...)

* I've heard smokers acclimatize better than non-smokers, true?

Smoking usually degrades lung function. I would think that it makes the situation worse. High altitude climbers are studied for insight into emphysema patients...

* I'm looking for real scientific facts, not personal experiences. That could always be another thread!

Read "Going Higher", by Charles S. Huston.

Doug

 

[spongebob]

I have found women do not have any acclimization to me at all, regardless of altitude.

Sickness usually ensues or the spraying of mace.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

I have found women do not have any acclimization to me at all, regardless of altitude.

Sickness usually ensues or the spraying of mace.

Is this scientific fact or personal experience?

Tim

 

[sierra]

In relation to smokers, many high altitude climbers seriously believe smokers perform better for thew simple fact that they are used to huffing and puffen and they have a high tolerance to shortness of breathe. Ive tested this theroy over the years and can confirm its true.

 

[erugs]

I agree with Kevin, about acclimatization not fitting into specific categories, that it can change from one experience to another and one person will experience it differently from another. But based on my experience a lot of it has to do with one's attitude. Only after I actually experienced climbing at high altitude could I really understand how it felt. Only after I could recognize the sensations my own experience, could I undertand that what I was feeling was "normal" for where I was. And then, I felt "better" -- even though the symptoms hadn't changed. Does that make sense? I call it "Mental Acclimatization."

 

[Dugan]

* I've heard smokers acclimatize better than non-smokers, true?

Smoking usually degrades lung function. I would think that it makes the situation worse. High altitude climbers are studied for insight into emphysema patients...

Doug

Just wondering - would the reverse be true of runners? I went to Yosemite a few years ago with a group of friends. Most of our time was spent in the high country - our base was Tuolmne Meadows. All, except me, had previously spent time at altitude. All, except me, experienced some minor troubles adjusting in the first couple of days. I was the only runner of the group and always wondered if that's what saved me.

 

[DougPaul]

I agree with Kevin, about acclimatization not fitting into specific categories, that it can change from one experience to another and one person will experience it differently from another. But based on my experience a lot of it has to do with one's attitude. Only after I actually experienced climbing at high altitude could I really understand how it felt. Only after I could recognize the sensations my own experience, could I undertand that what I was feeling was "normal" for where I was. And then, I felt "better" -- even though the symptoms hadn't changed. Does that make sense? I call it "Mental Acclimatization."

I would have described it a bit differently than Kevin did:

Some individuals tend to do well and altitude, some don't. (It's a bit more complex than "do well or not". Individuals tend to have patterns--some acclimatize quickly, some slowly. But the slow acclimatizer might ultimately be able to go higher than the quick.) But just because you have done well in the past does not mean that you will do well next time--the next time might be a life-threatening disaster. (For instance, it happened to Sir Edmund Hillary.)

I think what you are experiencing is familiarity. You are learning how your body responds and perhaps altering your behavior to help it. I'm not aware of any evidence that a positive attitude helps phisical accimatization.

Doug

 

[erugs]

I think what you are experiencing is familiarity. You are learning how your body responds and perhaps altering your behavior to help it. I'm not aware of any evidence that a positive attitude helps phisical accimatization.

Doug

True to a strong point, but I've seen people who were so bothered by the syptoms that they bailed out of what they were doing. If they had been able to understand and accept that they would be feeling differently, but that it was okay, they would have continued on. I'm talking about the non-life threatening discomfort. Not HACE, or HAPE, but HAFE* or mild headaches that indicate one should hydrate more than they have been.

*HAFE = High Altitude Flatulence Expulsion

 

[DougPaul]

Just wondering - would the reverse be true of runners? I went to Yosemite a few years ago with a group of friends. Most of our time was spent in the high country - our base was Tuolmne Meadows. All, except me, had previously spent time at altitude. All, except me, experienced some minor troubles adjusting in the first couple of days. I was the only runner of the group and always wondered if that's what saved me.

The evidence is that people who are in shape are more likely to get into trouble. One guess for the reason is that people in good shape are likely to push themselves harder at altitude or rush higher faster.

Tuolmne Meadows is at about 8600-8700 ft. Most people can go from sea level to that altitude without undue difficulties. A few develop serious problems.

The evidence suggests that, assuming that your recent altitude history was similar, that you are just a bit more tolerant of that altitude or did something a bit different that was beneficial.

A personal example of variation: I (live at 150ft) visited my sister who lives in Denver (~5Kft). We went quickly to Rocky Mtn Ntl Pk and drove to 12Kft. I was able to do a short hike, she had difficulty. One would have expected that she would have an advantage since she lived at 5K. Perhaps, but I was also consciously hyperventillating and pressure breathing. So perhaps my advantage was behavioral. (We have other evidence that she may be more sensitive to altitude that I.)

Doug

 

[DougPaul]

True to a strong point, but I've seen people who were so bothered by the syptoms that they bailed out of what they were doing. If they had been able to understand and accept that they would be feeling differently, but that it was okay, they would have continued on. I'm talking about the non-life threatening discomfort. Not HACE, or HAPE, but HAFE* or mild headaches that indicate one should hydrate more than they have been.

*HAFE = High Altitude Flatulence Expulsion

Different people have different tolerances for discomfort. And if you have past experience to the effect that the discomfort will go away if you stay put for a day or two, then you also might be more willing to put up with it.

Inadequate hydration is only one cause of headaches. Headaches are pretty much a basic symptom of hypoxia.

Doug

 

[Pete_Hickey]

My experience

My own experience tells me that I have no idea. 4 times I had no problems at all with altitude. I did Whitney after accliminating a day and a half in Death Valley, and I had no problems at all.

One time, however, after acliminating 3 days at 8K feet, I ran into problems at 12K.

Neither women nor men have any acclimization to me (swing both ways) so that shouldn't have anything to do with it.

For me... You don't know until you try.

Oh yeah... and just because statistically, some group has more/less problems, don't expect that you'll necessarily follow that.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

In my own experience with altitude and observing others, I've noticed that many of us can go to relatively high altitude, like the gift shop at Rocky Mtn NP (around 12K') and not notice anything except a bit of shortness of breath. It's been my observation that issues with altitude often don't show themselves until you've been at altitude for several hours. I believe that one of the reasons for this delay is that physiological reactions, and the so-called 'byproducts' which are released into the bloodstream as a result of the acclimization process, don't increase to high enough concentrations for a few hours so that people feel symptoms.

In terms of what constitutes 'elevation'? Again, in my experience, it's usually above 7 or 8K', (surprisingly low,) as there are many mountain passes higher than that along US395 in California and thousands of people drive over them on a busy weekend without noticing much of anything.

Here's a case in point - on several occasions I've accompanied my wife to a yoga conference (she teaches) held each year in Estes Park, Colorado, at a center just outside Rocky Mtn NP. The elevation is about 8,100', and a few thousand people from around the world attend. For the first day or so of the conference, as many as 1/4 to 1/3 of them will complain of some symptom related to altitude, a few severe enough to require urgent medical care. After about 3 days most people seem to have adjusted. About 80% of those attending are women, and as you know if you've ever taken a yoga lesson - amazing fit people. I'm not implying that women are any more likely to experience altitude issues, but Carmel had asked about gender. Personally, I've not observed any gender differences.

I've organized many climbing trips with people new to elevation, and my technique is to urge/insist that people climb slowly. Using Whitney as an example (as I know many people on VFTT have climbed Whitney) I try to get the group started by 10AM (the trail head is at 8K'). Most backpackers can reach Consultation Lake (high camp at 12K') rather comfortably by 3PM. But, I try to slow it down so we reach there around 5 or 6, telling people that if they feel the slightest twinge of a headache to stop, take a sip of water, wait a minute and then progress slowly. By doing this the twinge usually goes away, and while people many not feel 100% at high camp that evening (most have problems sleeping) at least they're not in great discomfort. My own theory is that the slow ascent, along with a high level of hydration, allows the body to adjust, including enough time to move byproducts causing headaches out of the bloodstream.

Much of this is anecdotal of course, but I've had good luck helping people up tall hills using this technique. I've also found that if I can hike to 9-10K' at least once (preferably twice) a month I can maintain some level of acclimatization so that when I'm at 12 or 14K' I don't feel quite so cruddy.

Kevin

 

[erugs]

Kevin - your technique is a good one, I think. My first experience at high altitude was on Kilimanjaro. We chose the trip that gave us the lengthiest trip up, in order to help us adjust from sea level living. Our guides insisted that we hike slowly (pole pole) and didn't let any of us pass their wedding step pace. That and drinking water -- another thing they urged and encouraged us to do. I remember wondering why I was so giddy at Shira Plateau and one of my friends said, "Why that's the Colorado High, dear." The people we saw struggling up the shorter Coca Cola route as we were descending differed greatly from our group. They looked miserable, whereas we only looked a bit dazed.

 

[Kevin Rooney]

Person experiences need not be submitted as per Carmel, mind you an EE.

I think that's the point some of us are trying to make, albeit indirectly - there's little scientific info available. Recent experiences, which took place over over multiple days and which corroborate each other may be as good as it gets.

 

[DougPaul]

In my own experience with altitude and observing others, I've noticed that many of us can go to relatively high altitude, like the gift shop at Rocky Mtn NP (around 12K') and not notice anything except a bit of shortness of breath. It's been my observation that issues with altitude often don't show themselves until you've been at altitude for several hours. I believe that one of the reasons for this delay is that physiological reactions, and the so-called 'byproducts' which are released into the bloodstream as a result of the acclimization process, don't increase to high enough concentrations for a few hours so that people feel symptoms.

Time at altitude is a significant factor:

There tends to be a short window (up to 24 hrs, IIRC) with a lower chance of serious problems during which an individual can go up high and get back down. For instance, Ned Gilette and Galen Rowell climbed McKinley (20Kft) from a 10K camp, reaching the summit in 19hrs and descending immediately. One suffered some moderate AMS on the ascent, On the descent, one reported gurgling in his lungs. Both recovered uneventfully at base camp. They were pushing the edge of the envelope, but this same window allows many to do a 3Kft+ summit day and return safely when they would not be able to climb to the summit and stay safely.

The situation is rather different if you are attempting to move up to and stay at altitude. It may take days or weeks depending on how high one wishes to get and one's indivudual responses to altitude. (Full acclimatization takes about 6 weeks and the highest any mammal can live continuously is about 17.5Kft.)

In terms of what constitutes 'elevation'? Again, in my experience, it's usually above 7 or 8K', (surprisingly low,) as there are many mountain passes higher than that along US395 in California and thousands of people drive over them on a busy weekend without noticing much of anything.

About 8Kft is frequently given as an altitude that most healthy people can pop up to and stay at from sea level safely. Some may get mild symptoms (headaches, etc), but only a few are at serious risk. (Colorado ski areas know all about this...) A short drive over a pass above 8Kft may not have any effect, but if they become stuck at the pass, the situation could be rather different.

Doug

 

[Kevin Rooney]

There tends to be a short window (up to 24 hrs, IIRC) with a lower chance of serious problems during which an individual can go up high and get back down. For instance, Ned Gilette and Galen Rowell climbed McKinley (20Kft) from a 10K camp, reaching the summit in 19hrs and descending immediately. One suffered some moderate AMS on the ascent, On the descent, one reported gurgling in his lungs. Both recovered uneventfully at base camp. They were pushing the edge of the envelope, but this same window allows many to do a 3Kft+ summit day and return safely when they would not be able to climb to the summit and stay safely.

Doug - I think 19 hours was pushing it as well, especially given the height differential.

I had the good fortune on my first climb of Rainier to have a physician in our group who had been to altitude many times. As he listened to each of us breathe/talk/cough (we were stormed in at 10K for a few days) he would occasionally comment on what stage of HAPE he though we might be in. It was a real eye-opener, and have been grateful for what he taught us. Have used it many times to monitor myself and others.

 

[DougPaul]

I think that's the point some of us are trying to make, albeit indirectly - there's little scientific info available.

Actually there has been a significant amount of scientific study of the effects of anoxia, due to altitude or otherwise. It has been studied for pilots, climbers, residents of high places, people with lung problems (emphasema, etc), etc. Climbers make good subjects because they are healthy individuals who voluntarily expose themselves to altitude and push the limits.

Many of the (particularly earlier) Everest expiditions used the climbers as subjects to study the effects of altitude. And there has been a continuing sharing of experience as humans attemted to climb the higher peaks. The modern climbers have a significant advantage over earlier climbers due to this accumulated knowledge.

References:
Going Higher: Oxygen, Man, and Mountains, 5th Ed, by Charles S Houston, MD is one of the better, perhaps the best reference for the mountaineering community.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_g...ords=going+higher+houston&Go.x=0&Go.y=0&Go=Go
http://www.rei.com/online/store/Pro...99&parent_category_rn=4500417&vcat=REI_SEARCH
Includes an extensive bibliography.

Medicine for Mountaineering, edited by James A Wilkerson, MD also has a good section on altitude acclimatization and diseases of altitude.
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_g...untaineering+by+wilkerson&Go.x=0&Go.y=0&Go=Go
http://www.rei.com/online/store/Pro...9&parent_category_rn=10574127&vcat=REI_SEARCH

There is a short section in Freedom of the Hills. If you are seriously interested, get Houston's book.

A significant portion of the info on the effects of altitude that I post here can be found in these references.

BTW, the oft repeated advice of drink a lot of water is only part of dealing with altitude. Altitude scheduling, where you sleep, how hard you work at altitude, what you eat, etc are all factors.


To address the orignal question, Houston does not list "men", "women", or "gender" in his index (in my 1983 edition). He only lists "sex" in relation to performing it at altitude. (Now lots of people will rush out and buy the book... ) There is also a small amount on fertility (reduced) and menstruation (seems similar to low alttitudes, but some evidence to the contrary).

Doug

 

[Kevin Rooney]

Sorry, Doug - I just don't buy the notion that definitive scientific study has been done on the effects of altitude - the sample sizes are just too small, the sample is self-selecting, etc. Lots of reasons to view those 'results' with skepticism. Having said that - look at how many studies on eggs & cholesterol, or salt intake have been done, with often completely contradictory results, and these studies do follow scientific methods.