K, your 62.5 might sound to some people like splitting hairs but it is not
Diamox is a favorite topic here. Here are some tidbits
It is rarely used for glaucoma any more
It has a "narrow therapeutic window" meaning a little too much gives side effects, and a small amount too little gives no benefit . For altitude usage , the dose often requires individualization
WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) lists it as a PED (performance enhancing drug) . However, it's benefit is for those affected by altitude, not everyone .
There are studies that show benefit for only the altered sleep of altitude as mentioned by K, others that show other benefits for helping acclimatization , and other studies showing no benefit to performance up high. Meta-analysis, meaning combining multiple similar studies show it is not a slam dunk drug. As I said earlier, it is not a panacea. If it helps an individual , then only he or she can find that out , not some textbook, internet source, or MDs to whose group I belong.
Whitney, and Everest, get climbed all the time without Diamox.
Some people have a "ceiling" and no amount of drug will change that. More time and natural acclimatization will help, but even then there is a finite limit. We all have one.
Just for fun, cattle are far more sensitive than humans . Even an altitude of just 1500m can kill sensitive individuals. In one five yr study from Colorado, altitude effect on the right side of the heart was the second leading cause of death. Now isn't that a cheery way to end this epistle?
