Originally Posted By: Yury
Originally Posted By: Steve C
... if you include the number of hours people are in a car, and use the number of hours people are hiking, and then compare the death rates, I don't think the automobile death rate is orders of magnitude greater. I am sure it is higher than death by hiking, but deaths per hour of hiking, when you bring in the incidence of death by heart attacks, HAPE/HACE, hypothermia, etc, it does get up there.
thanks
I assume that climbing and mountaineering are more dangerous than driving.
I do not have numbers to prove this but this claim is consistent with my own experience.

It all comes down to the framework used to compare risks. I had a long explanation but it really comes down to how people want to look at it. Personally, I care about how I'm most likely to die over a lifetime, not per hour in the wilderness. I look at the statistics and know I'm much more likely to die driving over a lifetime than from hiking down a trail in the wilderness. Climbing 14ers brings added risk for sure, but for the average person who does a Whitney trip June - August once or a few times in a lifetime, I'd bet heavy on the car crash.

I just hope I die peacefully in my sleep like Grandpa, not screaming like his passengers.