High altitude weight loss clinic

[Bug]

OK. I'm a fat bug. I can lose weight no problem-eat less climb more. This happens every summer. But the fat cells only shrink. I need to get up to altitude to burn those suckers out of existance.

Does anyone know a good reference on the effects of altitude on physiology? I know a lot about altitude sickness. I want to find out more about the 19000' threshold where the body starts eating fat cells.

My real question is, can I go up on Orizaba and still realize the effects? Orizaba is 18900'.

[RobBob]

do the cells really get eaten up at high altitudes? If so, what's the science behind this?

[Figger_Eight]

Liposuction is easier.

[Bug]

RobBob said:

do the cells really get eaten up at high altitudes? If so, what's the science behind this?

I read an article in some mag many years ago. It showed pics of climbers before and after some Himilayan ascent. It talked about 19000 effects - Fatcells are eaten.

22000 effects- muscle cells are eaten.

26000 effects- brain cells are eaten.

These are all from my feeble memory. I cannot find the article nor find a good source of information to confirm or deny my memories.

The science was not clearly understood at the time I read the article. I am hoping for better info from somebody here.

[Winter]

RobBob said:

 

26000 effects- brain cells are eaten.

 

Brain cells regenrate!! WOO HOO!!

 

[mr.radon]

You want to loose weight? We lost about 15% body mass in 18 days on Denali last year. We were at 14K, at that latitude its about the same as 16K near the equator.

I think any expedition where you burn more then you eat will do the trick.

We lost about the same body mass while in Peru for 3 weeks. They called us the Peruvian cancer patients when we got back.

There was some lunatic who camped on Aconcagua for like two months. He was pretty well emaciated when he got down.

I'm sure if you spent two or three weeks on top of Rainier you could burn off a few cells.

[Dru]

We were at 14K, at that latitude its about the same as 16K near the equator.

 

I have heard this is a bogus statistic

 

Can anyone comment?

[iain]

treelines drop at higher lats... not sure what is meant by this

[Attitude]

Dru said:

We were at 14K, at that latitude its about the same as 16K near the equator.

 

I have heard this is a bogus statistic

 

Can anyone comment?

The atmosphere is thinner as you go up in latitude, so the partial pressure of oxygen is less at a given elevation.

 

[Dru]

yeah, treeline near 5000m at equator (given rainfall) and sea level in the arctic, so sealevel in the arctic must be the same as 5000m at the equator right

 

seriously though, earth is an oblate spheroid, atmosphere is a spheroid, so atm. is a tiny bit thinner over the some lattiudes... cold air tends to higher pressure thus increasaing av. air pressure at poles... all these effects are synergistic but the claims I have read by some that Denali without 02s is harder than Everest without 02s, are so much

 

not saying anyone here is claiming this but claims about elevational differences with latitude tend to be about as reliable as Squamish Chamber of Commerce statistics about the Chief "second largest granite monolith in the world!!!!"

[RobBob]

wait a minute...I thought that since the earth was an oblate spheroid, that put the peaks near the equator farthest away from the center of earth...but would that have any effect on 02...or metabolism?

 

also, treeline height differs with weather also, doesn't it??

[Dru]

RobBob said:

wait a minute...I thought that since the earth was an oblate spheroid, that put the peaks near the equator farthest away from the center of earth...but would that have any effect on 02...or metabolism?

 

also, treeline height differs with weather also, doesn't it??

 

yeah it exactly counterbalances attitude's point above

 

dont tell the West Butt crew though

 

they need something to brag about

[iain]

all peaks should be measured from the center of the geoid! msl is aid!

[Dru]

i hear you can lose bone mass from a prolonged stay at orbital elevations. must be the lack of oxygen.

[Figger_Eight]

I think the claim is that Denali is far enough away from the equator that standing at 20,000 feet there is the equivalent to standing at 24,000 feet at the equator.

 

Altitude and fat metabolism article

[iain]

Figger_Eight said:

I think the claim is that Denali is far enough away from the equator that standing at 20,000 feet there is the equivalent to standing at 24,000 feet at the equator.

 

I still don't get this.

[ryland_moore]

As for bug's question, I have lost weight on Aconcagua where you spend more time above 16k than below, but on Orizaba, this is not the case, as you go from 14 k to the summit typically.. An expedition climb you could expect to lose weight (mass). Whether that translates into fat cells, I don't know. I do not have much fat cells (i think) and I still lost ~15lbs. of mass (muscle and fat?) anyways, it came right back on after a few days of eating and celebrating!

 

As for Dru's question: I have heard this is a bogus statistic

 

Can anyone comment?

 

I had it expalined to me by a doctor who is steeped in altitude related illness and this is generally what he told me:

 

There are roughly the same amount of oxygen molecules at 20k as at sea level, but due to profusion pressure, your body can not readily absorb the oxygen, hence the feeling of receiving less Oxygen into the blood stream as you go higher in elevation.

 

He explained that the weight of air above you pushes the Oxygen molecules into the blood stream, absorbed in the lungs. The less pressure (ie. the higher in elevation you are b/c of less weight above you), the harder it is to take in O2 into the lungs. As you go up in elevation there is less pressure (less atmosphere pushing down on the body (similar to diving with atmospheres but air weighs less, so it takes considerable more air mass to notice a difference, whereas in water an atmosphere is every 33 ft.)

 

So, the shape of the Earth also dictates the thickness of the atmosphere. The atmosphere is thickest at the equator and thinner at the poles. So, at 20k at the equator, there is more atmosphere above you than at 20k on Denali hence less profusion pressure on a climber at 20k on Denali than at 20k in the Himalayas or N. Andes, hence the feeling of Denali feeling like a "24k ft mountain in the Himalayas" (ie. the amount of air (hence pressure) on a climber at 20k on Denali is equivelent to the amount of air/pressure on a climber at 24k in the Himalayas or near the equator.

 

The doctor could have been bullshitting me, but he seems credible. He studied altitude for his dissertation and has been a climber for 25 years. Anyone have anything to add. Did my rambling make any sense?

[Winter]

1. Losing weight is not the same as burning fat cells. You can shrink those cells, burn muscle or other tissues. I've hard its darn near impossible to actually burn cells as opposed to shinking them, which was the point of the original post.

 

2. As for this whole air "pressure" thing, Ryaln is right, in that it is the atmosphere on top getting pulled to the surface by gravity which creates the "pressure" at a lower altitude and a corresponding incrase in the density of the air. I guess, if the atmosphere is really shaped differenlty than the surface of the earth, that 20,000 ft. could feel differently at different places on the earth's surface. So much for that altimeter.

 

[Bug]

Winter said:

1. Losing weight is not the same as burning fat cells. You can shrink those cells, burn muscle or other tissues. I've hard its darn near impossible to actually burn cells as opposed to shinking them, which was the point of the original post.

 

2. As for this whole air "pressure" thing, Ryaln is right, in that it is the atmosphere on top getting pulled to the surface by gravity which creates the "pressure" at a lower altitude and a corresponding incrase in the density of the air. I guess, if the atmosphere is really shaped differenlty than the surface of the earth, that 20,000 ft. could feel differently at different places on the earth's surface. So much for that altimeter.

 

 

Bingo. Ditto.

In one of the many things I read last year before going to Denali, I remember reading that carefully calibrated equipment was used to compare the barometric pressure on Denali to similar altitudes in lower latitudes (measured by GPS). Barometric pressure was less on Denali by quite a bit.

[Dru]

I remember reading something in Science which debunked the whole myth.

 

Although I did read somewhere that Messner waited for highest high pressure system before his solo oxgenless ascent of Everest... more pressure more oxygen available...

[Winter]

 

Did he really wait for the high pressure system for the Os or was it because he wouldn't get blown off the mountain in raging low pressure system?

 

Pray for high pressure for the next Hood to Coast.

[ryland_moore]

Thankfully, weather is good during a high pressure system and not the other way around. It would suck at high altitude for good weather to occur during a low.

[Dru]

ya but he waited for a real "high" high... like the week when the high is statistically highest over the year or something.

probably when he saw the Yeti too.

[Winter]

dude it was a bear ... climbing M2

 

 

 

[Figger_Eight]

Ryland, your doctor was right.

 

Oxygen gets transported into your bloodstream as a result of the pressure gradients between the atmosphere and your bloodstream. As the pressure in the air decreases, the "push" of oxygen into the bloodstream decreases. The percentage of oxygen in the air at upper elevations is the same as sea level, but the pressure is less.