Mt. Whitney Portal Store & Hostel Forums General Mt. Whitney Portal Store Message Board infant to summit

We are thinking of carrying our 9 month old daughter up to the top (Basically, if I am to do any hiking or camping she comes with as we don't have other child care options). She has been doing all day hikes since she was born and is used to spending most of the day in a child carrier.

We were planning on doing high elevation camping to get us all acclimated prior to the trip, and I quess if she gets fussy we'll have to turn around. Does anyone have experience with small children?

I don't know about taking a nine month old up Whitney but take a look at the "Question on youngest age to take someone up" post.Many good experiences told.
On a personal note: The other day I took my 13 month old with me on a day hike in the Tahoe area, about 6300'.I dressed her in a long sleeve top and pants.Had booties on her feet, mitts on her hands and a bonnet on her head.Plus, I put a sun shade made of blackout screen around the baby backpack for extra measure and used Bullfrog 36 spf sunscreen.And guess what, her face still got sun.Not burnt but definately rosey.I was only hiking for an hour.The light reflecting from the snow is probably what did it.Now, I was only at 6300' I can't imagine what the sun and snow will do to a baby at 13 or 14000'. Could probably get pretty bad in a hurry if your not careful.
V-man

V-Man the other thread I started on this subject of young bodies is terrific, but perhaps I did not express my concerns adequately. Here is a good place to say what I'm worried about.

Young bodies, geez especially newborns, grow fairly quickly and I worry about capillaries busting. This could do permanent damage in lungs, eyes, brain, other parts.

I'm pretty sure no one has exploded at 15 or 16 inches of pressure but a young body might not have enough substance in the blood vessels to keep them intact. My concern was whether or not it's OK for a 12-year-old but a newborn or less than a year old causes me even more worry. I'm not an expert, that's why I ask here, there is no better place to ask.

Thanks

Hike of your life,
You don't have to tell me the dangers of taking a baby up to altitude.There is no way I would take my 13 month old up Whitney.I was trying to tell the topic starter "Aunie" the dangers of babies and altitude.
When I was a kid my mom was a leader for Sierra Club family trips, so I spent the better part of 8 summers in the backcountry.On one trip in particular, I remember a kid who was probably about nine at the time get really bad altitude sickness.We were in Humphreys Basin at about 11,500' in the John Muir Wilderness.On the first day out of nowhere this kid started puking and couldn't stop.He had a raging headache, couldn't keep water or food down and was just about helpless to walk.He didn't have a temp. so we ruled out the flu.He spent the rest of the week in the tent sleeping.On the drive back down to Bishop the kid started to perk up and by the time we were in Bishop he was laughing and acting normal.An extreme case of altitude sickness I know, but this example shows that altitude can affect kids very quickly and suddenly.I would feel terrible if my daughter was going through such discomfort all because she had knuckle-headed parents that wanted to "knock off the big one" this year rather than wait until later.The mountain's not going anywhere,people just need to wait until their kids are old enough to fend for themselves.
V-man

Aunie - I think that it would be unwise to take anyone up Mt. Whitney who is not old enough to communicate that they have physical discomfort. A 9 month old cannot tell you that she has a headache or nausea or dizziness (commmon adult altitude symptoms). A 9 month old can only cry. The mountain isn't going anywhere. Wait until she is older.

I started my son on San Gabriel Mtn. hikes when he was a month old. I trained him so well, that I was still carrying him when he was four! I also started my girls in their infancy, but, thankfully, they did not seem to need to be carried (after they learned to walk)like my son. All this being said, I never took them to Whitney until they were much older--my son was 12 and my twin girls were 9. They had been on backpack trips above 8000 ft., but I think 14000 is too dangerous for an infant. Quick altitude changes often caused excruciating pain in my baby-son's ears, as sometimes he was not able to equalize air pressure; and it was mighty stressful for my wife and me seeing our son in such obvious pain. Parents have taken infants to the top of Whitney, but I don't know what they and their babies went through to do it. I think most of us on the board would not do such a thing and certainly recommend against it.

This is really a scarey idea for me... and I really hope it's not an attempt to make some type of record. There's just no reason to take a nine-month-old up to such high elevation, and if that means you don't get to hike Whitney for a couple years, well, sometimes we do have to make sacrifices. I would suggest getting a book on the effects of altitude, and reading it. Young people have a much higher tendency toward altitude related problems.

No way. It's as simple as that.

I would never consider taking a pre-verbal child that high and that far from medical attention.

Yes, I know it has been done...when Nathan (12-1/2 at the time) and I were up there in 2001, there was a German family with a (my guess) one-year-old in a baby carrier at the summit. I commented to Nathan that I thought they were nuts and really endangering the child.

As has been noted elsewhere...the mountain isn't going anywhere...wait until the child can walk it under their own power and then they'll remember it as the adventure of their young life.

I'm all for getting kids acclimated to the wilderness, but there is a limit to what is prudent and in the best interests of the child. A pre-verbal child can't tell you where it hurts and the transition between annoying altitude sickness and something that can truly be life-threatening can happen all too quickly. Stick with shorter hikes and lower altitudes until the child grows up a bit...

Aunie, this summer my husband and i are planning to hike the John Muir Trail with our son. he will be 16 months old when we start from Yosemite Valley.

from the research i have read, it seems that an infant's susceptibility to altitude sickness drops off sharply around 1 year of age. during infancy (0 to 12 months), babies are MUCH more susceptible than adults. our son has been to 8000 feet (at 3 months of age) and we will be taking him on several high-altitude training trips here in S. California before "the big trip."

if he, at any time, begins to exhibit any symptoms of altitude sickness, we will retreat. he is generally a sunny, good-natured child and if his personality shifts we will also consider that a sign that it's time to go down. we will be following a very gradual acclimation schedule so as not to push him too high too quickly.

many parents have taken their young children (toddlers, to my knowledge no infants) trekking in Nepal, at altitudes higher than Whitney, with no adverse effects. Cindy Ross took her 2 small children on the CDT (read "Scraping Heaven," a fascinating book for backpacking parents). BUT, like i said, if our son even so much as LOOKS unwell, we will scrap the trip and go someplace lower. it's not about the goal, it's about having fun and being safe.

if i were you, i would shoot for lower elevation goals until your daughter is a little older. the difference between a 9-month old and an 18-month old is astounding.

http://www.rei.com/online/store/ProductD...ory_rn=10574127 was one of the few sources i could find for solid, scientific information about altitude and infants/toddlers.

if you're in S. California by any chance, drop me a line and maybe we could hike or pack together. i take my little guy on almost all of my trips as well. tarbubble at yahoo dot com. i also moderate a Yahoo list dedicated to backpacking with children. we'd love to have you join us.

Please don't do it. I agree with what most have said in repsonse to your question - it's absolutely unsafe for the baby who can't tell you where it hurts. The mountain will always be there. Wait for at least a few years.

Are you friggin crazy?????????????????????????
please take a moment to think about what you want to do.
If you run into trouble , your stuck far away from any help and as others have said your child cant say that they feel bad.
Sure you may be able to sit around and brag to your friends that you hauled your infant to the top but is it really worth it?
As to taking your infant on a back packing trip for extended time, please think about that as well.
Your a parent now and you should show some common sence. Your days for your own personel glory ought to give way to raising a healthy child.

Amen to that Throcker.Once you have a child your me-me-me days are over with.It is now and will forever be(yes even when your child is grown up)your responsibility to care for your kids and lead them in the right direction.And that includes not placing your childs eardrums and blood vessels under pressure because of your own personal glory.End of story!

As a physician I have to ask once again...what are the risks and benefits of your decision?

1. Are there ANY benefits to a 9 month old child? Unlikely- the child will have no memory of the event so what could it be?

2. Risk? Definitely- no one can guarantee a wilderness adventure without risk. Being willing to take the risk yourself and being willing to expose you very young child are two different issues.
There is a consensus statement by the International Society for Mountain Medicine. It states that while some children have been taken safely to altitude, some have also suffered severe effects like pulmonary edema, sun-related damage, amputation of , death etc. The bottom line is that there are no large scale studies verifying the safety of such endeavors. Even if the risk is just 1 in a million (probably much more likely than that) IS IT WORTH IT TO YOUR CHILD? You can read this statement by the top experts in the field at www.ismmed.org under the
mountain medicine information center tab. There is a section devoted to children at altitude. Believe me there is a lot of debate on the subject even amongst the world's top experts. Are you willing to take a risk that they can't pinpoint?
It seems to me that the only benefit is for the parent and all the risk is for the child.

Also, you stated that you would turn around if the baby cried... there are more signs and symptoms of problems than just crying. Below is just a small excerpt of the ISMM consensus report. Please if you find it NECESSARY to do this, talk to a physician (or email them on the ISMM site (www.ismmed.org) for advice.
It is selfish to just assume that everything will be okay and arrogant to think that you will know every sign of something being wrong (I certainly don't).
From the ISMM...
""Under 3 years of age, travel to any new environment may result in alterations of sleep, appetite, activity, and mood. Differentiating behavioral changes caused by travel alone from changes caused by altitude illness can be difficult. Because of variability in the developmental level of perception and expression in young children, they are not reliable reporters of symptoms of altitude illness even when they can talk. Symptoms may appear as nonspecific behavioral changes, rather than specific complaints of headache or nausea. The typical symptoms of acute mountain sickness in very young children include increased fussiness, decreased appetite and possibly vomiting, decreased playfulness, and difficulty sleeping. These symptoms usually begin 4 to 12 hours after ascent to altitude.""

I can't imagine that the perceived benefits outweigh the risks here.
Since there are no large scale studies, you are relying on anecdotal evidence (individual stories) that children will be fine. Believe me there are also anecdotal heartbreaking stories of when things were not so fine.

I do not want to see any news stories on TV about an infant carried back from the summit DEAD.

Well, you've had plenty of negative replies haven't you? To me, the biggest issue is that problems like AMS are not predictable. Even the experts can't always say who will or won't get it and when or at what altitude. There are plenty of cases in which seasoned high altitude climbers had problems at relatively low elevation, and vice versa. You just don't know - and is that a chance you are willing to take with a young life, someone who can't tell you what is bothering them?

I would suspect, although I don't have proof of this, that small kids would see symptoms and various problems arise and worsen faster than adults. What happens if your kid gets AMS up high, you decide to turn around, and it turns into HAPE before you can get low enough? Are you willing to risk serious injury, death, or a really expensive rescue just to do this?

My advice, either find someone to watch the kid and go up yourself, or wait a few years until she can at least tell you if she doesn't feel good. It will be more of a challenge to you in a few years, because you will be carrying a 30-40 pound 3 or 4 year old up the mountain as opposed to a 15 pound infant - think of how cool it would be to say you summitted carrying a person. . .

One more thing to add
AND ANY PARENT ON THIS BOARD WILL AGREE WITH THIS!
What exactly do you have planned when the child has one of those down the legs up the backs blowouts? or maybe two or three of em in 5 or 6 hours?
the kind where you go thru half a box of handi wipes with?
Do you have 4 sets of cloths for that hike?
and will we all find the remnats of several disposeable diapers over the next 15 to 20 years as they breakdown under that rock where you stashed them?

Throcker... you make me smile. You are so blunt; there is no "beating around the bush" or innuendoes with you! I do enjoy reading your posts.

I am sure Aunie got the message. As a parent I know she would never do anything intentional to harm her child. That is why she asked. The comments sure made me think about the risk we take with our children to follow our dreams.

utah,
without going on another rant, our dreams may not be the childs dreams.
I watched in horror this season at mammoth mountain as a parent with a child in a snuggly face planted and left the baby with some facial trauma, sure they most likely said that they would be real carefull, and now ?
With children sometimes you have to look at the worst possible scenero and work backwards

Exactly....Whitney is a rough and sometimes dangerous place. The safest place for our children is home when they are young. How easy it to would be to trip or slip, thus falling on the infant child we have on shoulders. There are way too many dangers in a place like that. I have seen parents carrying small children before up on the trail. It gives me real worry.