Posted on: November 16, 2007

I realize that my periodic paragraph-long rants followed by a link are not fully within the sphere of what is construed as a blog, per se, but really, most of this speaks for its painfully stupid self.

As an example, I present to you this wonderful news story from Hays, Kansas in the good ol' USA in which doctors caution us not to climb, wait, ladders, for the good of our own health.

Yes, that's right. Ladders. Now, this may blur the line for a climbing website, but I did find it by googling "climbing", so I feel moderately vindicated. Following, is my slightly longer rant that will theoretically tie us back to the actual act of climbing mountains or rocks or small rocks or whatever else it is that we do.


Isn't this overt nanny-state-ism going to far? Normally, when encountering examples of the government telling me that I"m not capable of making my own decisions, I simply sit, staring at my computer screen, seething with rage, and then vote angrily for some other guy. This, of course does nothing. Why is this climbing related? How about what the Oregon State government did, as outlined in a post by a Reader's Blog post from Wyoming Girl from some time ago? Or this, an article I stumbled across a few days ago. The pertinent quote, buried in the bottom so some of us won't see it, is as follows:

"Monasterio says that further research on harm avoidance may eventually help to identify vulnerable individuals and offer early interventions. "Further studies of risk-taking sports people could have important public health benefits," the study says.

Important public health benefits, eh?

Here at Alpinist, our small editorial staff works hard to create in-depth stories that are thoughtfully edited, thoroughly fact-checked and beautifully designed. Please consider supporting our efforts by subscribing.