SoCalGirl wrote:
I gave birth to my BoyChild while I lived in Colorado. I had wanted to go up Pikes Peak (14,110 I believe)and was warned by doctors that it was inadvisable to take either of my children to the summit because their bodies weren't equipped to deal with the thin oxygen.CMC2 wrote:
When we lived at almost 7,500' in 1971 our family did alot of hiking with minor elevations up to maybe 10,000'. My youngest, daughter aged 5, climbed Pikes Peak with my wife, son, age 8 and myself.And BobPickering writes in the
Diamox thread:
I live at 5,000 feet. I think that helps a little, but it's not a big deal.Anyone living at elevation has a significant advantage over sea-level people when they hike at altitude. I think SoCalGirl might have been ok taking her children to Pikes Peak. If she was living at 5k, taking the children to Pikes Peak would be like people in Calif driving up to Tioga Pass in Yosemite.
...interestingly, I had some friends who took their 2-Y-O son years ago on a camping trip to Virginia Lakes, at 9,500 ft. The poor kid spent the night tossing cookies. He was fine when they got back down. And today, he's a ranger in Kings Canyon N.P. :-)
