Shit happens, but most of the time it does not. In Catherine Palmer’s article, “Shit Happens, The Selling of Risk in Extreme Sport”, she paints an oversimplified context of extreme sports and the risk takers who endeavor on them. Palmer creates an argument that would have you believe that these sports exist in only her certain contexts. That means you are either an expert dirtbag or guide, or you are the cliental. She would also have you believe that 1 in 5 to 1 in 10 mountaineering adventures end in death- a blatant lie. Of the 658 people who summited Everest in 2013, there were 8 deaths, nowhere near Palmer’s statistics, maybe unless she was looking at K2 or Annapurna alone. Palmer is correct in her assumption that the business of extreme sports are rising, and as a result guiding companies are working harder than ever to absorb clients, and that sometimes safety is put on the back-burner. Where Palmer is incorrect in her assumptions, is applying the case-studies of the Everest and Interlaken accidents to the whole of extreme sports. As people volunteer themselves to go on a paid ‘adventure’, they put themselves, often ill-preparedly (as Palmer states) into dangerous situations. The guides skills are assumed to be all that is needed to end the adventure safely, as it should be, because that is why you are there in the first place. As increasingly white collared and inexperienced people undertake these adventures, it is a wonder that there haven’t been more accidents on a whole.

The fact of the matter is these adventure trips are adherent to economics. If the guiding companies frequently loose paying costumers over the side of the boat and over a waterfall, far less people will be keep doing them. As people consistently make it back alive, and with a valuable experience to tell, the incentive for others to follow only increases. As it is, the exact right amount of people undertake these paid adventures, utilizing their knowledge of statistics and subjective risk management. Every year more people summit Everest, my personal feelings about the commodification of something so personal and valuable aside, these people pay large amounts of money in return for a high probability of making it to the top of Everest and back down in one piece. The case studies she provides are very rare examples, but they do provide some insight. For one, money should pay for safety, and also it is an example of something wrong with the Everest expeditions in particular, because Everest is slightly unique. The few extremely lucrative guide companies that service Everest needs to be regulated by some governing agency, because there are many issues circulating around Everest that are coercive, the way they deal with the Sherpas being the largest one.

As an increasing amount of people undertake these paid activities every year, there will be deaths that go along with them, but for the most part, by and large activities like this undergo a risk management system that usually works. As I mentioned before, these activities would not be lucrative without a risk management system.Unless you are BASE jumping (something that is extremely controlled if you are being serviced for it) or climbing K2, these activities will be done in the least risky way as possible. The guide is always at fault, but it is the duty of the employer to know the guides capabilities.