8 Skiers dead after accidental Avalanche in California!

[Anonymous]

I'm not a skiier, but I know one thing- As a mother, if I knew of avalanche warnings, I would stay far, far away.

Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But people keep insisting climate change isn’t real. Despite the avalanche of evidence. Pun intended.

All I know is we never had avalanches like this 20 years ago.

Absolutely not true. You're obviously not someone that skis out west much less does helicopter back country skiing.

Grew up skiing out west. Know people killed in their car from an avalanche 20+ years ago. Daily avalanche control is a thing that's been done for decades. Choosing not to ski during HIGH avalanche warnings is also a thing.

Avalanches were basically unheard of until the early 2000’s. And when I say unheard of, I literally mean “no one had ever seen one, ever”. Now they’re commonplace.

Nope, you're wrong. I grew up in Washington State in the 90s. We talked about avalanche danger regularly (we skied, my dad climbed Rainier and other local to Washington mountains) and there were warnings then.

Not only do I remember talking about them, there was a Lake Tahoe Avalanche that killed 7 people in 1982. Which has been in the news this week because it was close to where this weeks Lake Tahoe avalanche was.

I grew up literally in the shadow of Mt Hood in the 70’s-80’s. We had never heard of an avalanche until about 2004. We didn’t even know what the word meant. This is climate change.

You didn’t know what the word avalanche meant until 2004? You must be super dumb and the schools you went to failed you.

I guess that PP must have been super confused about the 1978 movie "Avalanche" with Rock Hudson. Their tiny little hamlet, cut off from the rest of the US, didn't know about this word until 2004 for some reason.

The protagonist in that flick was some guy named A. Valanche. Italian actor as I recall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nature is harsh. You can prepare and have all the experience and training and equipment in the world but when it becomes man against natural forces - be it fire, water, cold, snow - nature is stronger.

But there is also an incredible amount of reward for spending time in nature and reaping the benefits of the beauty and adventure. Is there a risk - of course. But life has risk and you only live one life. We can all die tomorrow. For those of us who aren't risk adverse, you accept the risk of nature and adventure just like you do every time you get in your car.

Growing up without your mom because she wasn't risk adverse and loved nature? I doubt most kids think that's worth the cost.

Its a fluke accident. That is why it made the news. Women and yes mothers (and fathers) go into the backcountry and the ocean and other places that have risk - all the time and 99.999% of the time, it all goes well. Driving a car is still more dangerous.

Not a fluke accident at all.

Will wait to hear from the survivors about their decision making. I don't believe that the guides, the tour company, and the women were completely indifferent to all the warnings, intentionally ignored all protocols, and deliberately put themselves directly into harms way.

They set out on a ski trip on Sunday with warnings of extreme weather approaching. That was a stupid decision.

New poster here. I can imagine they felt pressure to participate. Group think is the most dangerous dynamic when assessing risk. They booked this 9 months ago apparently. I imagine they were excited, spent much energy and time planning it out, and I assume a few of them were pushing harder for it, and the others fell in line and agreed. This happens in all groups.

The biggest lesson is if you feel there’s a risk, bow out - even if it means disappointing your group or losing big money.

I guarantee that time-driven anxiety played a huge role in this poor decision making.

These are wealthy women who are executives, busy moms, and advanced outdoorsmen. They planned this long in advance and likely couldn’t accommodate rescheduling. Then they decide to leave (rather than wait it out an extra day or two) likely because people have to get back to their real life responsibilities.

From everything I read, the guide took them on an alternative route back to the parking lot that was less avalanche prone than the normal route. But they still had to pass at the bottom of a few couloirs and were too close to the run out. With the poor weather, they may not have seen how close they were to the couloir run out. It was just dumb bad luck - the couloir avalanched as they were passing by it. 10 minutes before or later they would’ve been fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nature is harsh. You can prepare and have all the experience and training and equipment in the world but when it becomes man against natural forces - be it fire, water, cold, snow - nature is stronger.

But there is also an incredible amount of reward for spending time in nature and reaping the benefits of the beauty and adventure. Is there a risk - of course. But life has risk and you only live one life. We can all die tomorrow. For those of us who aren't risk adverse, you accept the risk of nature and adventure just like you do every time you get in your car.

Growing up without your mom because she wasn't risk adverse and loved nature? I doubt most kids think that's worth the cost.

Its a fluke accident. That is why it made the news. Women and yes mothers (and fathers) go into the backcountry and the ocean and other places that have risk - all the time and 99.999% of the time, it all goes well. Driving a car is still more dangerous.

Not a fluke accident at all.

Will wait to hear from the survivors about their decision making. I don't believe that the guides, the tour company, and the women were completely indifferent to all the warnings, intentionally ignored all protocols, and deliberately put themselves directly into harms way.

They set out on a ski trip on Sunday with warnings of extreme weather approaching. That was a stupid decision.

New poster here. I can imagine they felt pressure to participate. Group think is the most dangerous dynamic when assessing risk. They booked this 9 months ago apparently. I imagine they were excited, spent much energy and time planning it out, and I assume a few of them were pushing harder for it, and the others fell in line and agreed. This happens in all groups.

The biggest lesson is if you feel there’s a risk, bow out - even if it means disappointing your group or losing big money.

I guarantee that time-driven anxiety played a huge role in this poor decision making.

These are wealthy women who are executives, busy moms, and advanced outdoorsmen. They planned this long in advance and likely couldn’t accommodate rescheduling. Then they decide to leave (rather than wait it out an extra day or two) likely because people have to get back to their real life responsibilities.

From everything I read, the guide took them on an alternative route back to the parking lot that was less avalanche prone than the normal route. But they still had to pass at the bottom of a few couloirs and were too close to the run out. With the poor weather, they may not have seen how close they were to the couloir run out. It was just dumb bad luck - the couloir avalanched as they were passing by it. 10 minutes before or later they would’ve been fine.

I highly doubt this was just some bad coincidence. They absolutely could have triggered the avalanche

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone is comfortable with different risks depending on their experience and skill level. A pool is a terrifying risk to a non swimmer, a dog is a terrifying risk to someone who has never been around dogs, skiing is a terrifying risk to someone who doesn't ski etc. But if you are comfortable and familiar and have skills then you don't feel that it is as risky.

This WAS risky. Again, if you've grown up on the east coast you literally have no concept of avalanches. They just don't exist here. The west coast spends $$$$ to mitigate the risk. It's every where. It's also VERY predictable. They know when it's bad in advance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But people keep insisting climate change isn’t real. Despite the avalanche of evidence. Pun intended.

All I know is we never had avalanches like this 20 years ago.

Absolutely not true. You're obviously not someone that skis out west much less does helicopter back country skiing.

Grew up skiing out west. Know people killed in their car from an avalanche 20+ years ago. Daily avalanche control is a thing that's been done for decades. Choosing not to ski during HIGH avalanche warnings is also a thing.

Avalanches were basically unheard of until the early 2000’s. And when I say unheard of, I literally mean “no one had ever seen one, ever”. Now they’re commonplace.

Nope, you're wrong. I grew up in Washington State in the 90s. We talked about avalanche danger regularly (we skied, my dad climbed Rainier and other local to Washington mountains) and there were warnings then.

Not only do I remember talking about them, there was a Lake Tahoe Avalanche that killed 7 people in 1982. Which has been in the news this week because it was close to where this weeks Lake Tahoe avalanche was.

I grew up literally in the shadow of Mt Hood in the 70’s-80’s. We had never heard of an avalanche until about 2004. We didn’t even know what the word meant. This is climate change.

You didn’t know what the word avalanche meant until 2004? You must be super dumb and the schools you went to failed you.

I guess that PP must have been super confused about the 1978 movie "Avalanche" with Rock Hudson. Their tiny little hamlet, cut off from the rest of the US, didn't know about this word until 2004 for some reason.

DP


The point is that there were never avalanches before the 2000’s, and they’re happening all the time now because of climate change.


Are you dense, or just a maga climate denier? Which is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But people keep insisting climate change isn’t real. Despite the avalanche of evidence. Pun intended.

All I know is we never had avalanches like this 20 years ago.

Absolutely not true. You're obviously not someone that skis out west much less does helicopter back country skiing.

Grew up skiing out west. Know people killed in their car from an avalanche 20+ years ago. Daily avalanche control is a thing that's been done for decades. Choosing not to ski during HIGH avalanche warnings is also a thing.

Avalanches were basically unheard of until the early 2000’s. And when I say unheard of, I literally mean “no one had ever seen one, ever”. Now they’re commonplace.

Nope, you're wrong. I grew up in Washington State in the 90s. We talked about avalanche danger regularly (we skied, my dad climbed Rainier and other local to Washington mountains) and there were warnings then.

Not only do I remember talking about them, there was a Lake Tahoe Avalanche that killed 7 people in 1982. Which has been in the news this week because it was close to where this weeks Lake Tahoe avalanche was.

I grew up literally in the shadow of Mt Hood in the 70’s-80’s. We had never heard of an avalanche until about 2004. We didn’t even know what the word meant. This is climate change.

You didn’t know what the word avalanche meant until 2004? You must be super dumb and the schools you went to failed you.

I guess that PP must have been super confused about the 1978 movie "Avalanche" with Rock Hudson. Their tiny little hamlet, cut off from the rest of the US, didn't know about this word until 2004 for some reason.

DP


The point is that there were never avalanches before the 2000’s, and they’re happening all the time now because of climate change.


Are you dense, or just a maga climate denier? Which is it?

NP. Neither MAGA nor a climate denier but old enough to know there were avalanches pre 2000s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But people keep insisting climate change isn’t real. Despite the avalanche of evidence. Pun intended.

All I know is we never had avalanches like this 20 years ago.

Absolutely not true. You're obviously not someone that skis out west much less does helicopter back country skiing.

Grew up skiing out west. Know people killed in their car from an avalanche 20+ years ago. Daily avalanche control is a thing that's been done for decades. Choosing not to ski during HIGH avalanche warnings is also a thing.

Avalanches were basically unheard of until the early 2000’s. And when I say unheard of, I literally mean “no one had ever seen one, ever”. Now they’re commonplace.

Nope, you're wrong. I grew up in Washington State in the 90s. We talked about avalanche danger regularly (we skied, my dad climbed Rainier and other local to Washington mountains) and there were warnings then.

Not only do I remember talking about them, there was a Lake Tahoe Avalanche that killed 7 people in 1982. Which has been in the news this week because it was close to where this weeks Lake Tahoe avalanche was.

I grew up literally in the shadow of Mt Hood in the 70’s-80’s. We had never heard of an avalanche until about 2004. We didn’t even know what the word meant. This is climate change.

You didn’t know what the word avalanche meant until 2004? You must be super dumb and the schools you went to failed you.

I guess that PP must have been super confused about the 1978 movie "Avalanche" with Rock Hudson. Their tiny little hamlet, cut off from the rest of the US, didn't know about this word until 2004 for some reason.

DP


The point is that there were never avalanches before the 2000’s, and they’re happening all the time now because of climate change.


Are you dense, or just a maga climate denier? Which is it?

NP. Neither MAGA nor a climate denier but old enough to know there were avalanches pre 2000s.

Don't you have a LFL you need to vandalize?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But people keep insisting climate change isn’t real. Despite the avalanche of evidence. Pun intended.

All I know is we never had avalanches like this 20 years ago.

Absolutely not true. You're obviously not someone that skis out west much less does helicopter back country skiing.

Grew up skiing out west. Know people killed in their car from an avalanche 20+ years ago. Daily avalanche control is a thing that's been done for decades. Choosing not to ski during HIGH avalanche warnings is also a thing.

Avalanches were basically unheard of until the early 2000’s. And when I say unheard of, I literally mean “no one had ever seen one, ever”. Now they’re commonplace.

Nope, you're wrong. I grew up in Washington State in the 90s. We talked about avalanche danger regularly (we skied, my dad climbed Rainier and other local to Washington mountains) and there were warnings then.

Not only do I remember talking about them, there was a Lake Tahoe Avalanche that killed 7 people in 1982. Which has been in the news this week because it was close to where this weeks Lake Tahoe avalanche was.

I grew up literally in the shadow of Mt Hood in the 70’s-80’s. We had never heard of an avalanche until about 2004. We didn’t even know what the word meant. This is climate change.

You didn’t know what the word avalanche meant until 2004? You must be super dumb and the schools you went to failed you.

I guess that PP must have been super confused about the 1978 movie "Avalanche" with Rock Hudson. Their tiny little hamlet, cut off from the rest of the US, didn't know about this word until 2004 for some reason.

DP


The point is that there were never avalanches before the 2000’s, and they’re happening all the time now because of climate change.


Are you dense, or just a maga climate denier? Which is it?

Are you a moron? Never avalanches? Get outta here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But people keep insisting climate change isn’t real. Despite the avalanche of evidence. Pun intended.

All I know is we never had avalanches like this 20 years ago.

Absolutely not true. You're obviously not someone that skis out west much less does helicopter back country skiing.

Grew up skiing out west. Know people killed in their car from an avalanche 20+ years ago. Daily avalanche control is a thing that's been done for decades. Choosing not to ski during HIGH avalanche warnings is also a thing.

Avalanches were basically unheard of until the early 2000’s. And when I say unheard of, I literally mean “no one had ever seen one, ever”. Now they’re commonplace.

Nope, you're wrong. I grew up in Washington State in the 90s. We talked about avalanche danger regularly (we skied, my dad climbed Rainier and other local to Washington mountains) and there were warnings then.

Not only do I remember talking about them, there was a Lake Tahoe Avalanche that killed 7 people in 1982. Which has been in the news this week because it was close to where this weeks Lake Tahoe avalanche was.

I grew up literally in the shadow of Mt Hood in the 70’s-80’s. We had never heard of an avalanche until about 2004. We didn’t even know what the word meant. This is climate change.

You didn’t know what the word avalanche meant until 2004? You must be super dumb and the schools you went to failed you.

I guess that PP must have been super confused about the 1978 movie "Avalanche" with Rock Hudson. Their tiny little hamlet, cut off from the rest of the US, didn't know about this word until 2004 for some reason.

DP


The point is that there were never avalanches before the 2000’s, and they’re happening all the time now because of climate change.


Are you dense, or just a maga climate denier? Which is it?

NP. Neither MAGA nor a climate denier but old enough to know there were avalanches pre 2000s.

Don't you have a LFL you need to vandalize?

What else do you think is brand new since 2000? Were you born in 1999 and think nothing happened before then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But people keep insisting climate change isn’t real. Despite the avalanche of evidence. Pun intended.

All I know is we never had avalanches like this 20 years ago.

Absolutely not true. You're obviously not someone that skis out west much less does helicopter back country skiing.

Grew up skiing out west. Know people killed in their car from an avalanche 20+ years ago. Daily avalanche control is a thing that's been done for decades. Choosing not to ski during HIGH avalanche warnings is also a thing.

Avalanches were basically unheard of until the early 2000’s. And when I say unheard of, I literally mean “no one had ever seen one, ever”. Now they’re commonplace.

Nope, you're wrong. I grew up in Washington State in the 90s. We talked about avalanche danger regularly (we skied, my dad climbed Rainier and other local to Washington mountains) and there were warnings then.

Not only do I remember talking about them, there was a Lake Tahoe Avalanche that killed 7 people in 1982. Which has been in the news this week because it was close to where this weeks Lake Tahoe avalanche was.

I grew up literally in the shadow of Mt Hood in the 70’s-80’s. We had never heard of an avalanche until about 2004. We didn’t even know what the word meant. This is climate change.

You didn’t know what the word avalanche meant until 2004? You must be super dumb and the schools you went to failed you.

I guess that PP must have been super confused about the 1978 movie "Avalanche" with Rock Hudson. Their tiny little hamlet, cut off from the rest of the US, didn't know about this word until 2004 for some reason.

DP


The point is that there were never avalanches before the 2000’s, and they’re happening all the time now because of climate change.


Are you dense, or just a maga climate denier? Which is it?

What do you call what happened here in 1910?

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/1910-stevens-pass-avalanche-still-deadliest-in-us-history/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But people keep insisting climate change isn’t real. Despite the avalanche of evidence. Pun intended.

All I know is we never had avalanches like this 20 years ago.

Absolutely not true. You're obviously not someone that skis out west much less does helicopter back country skiing.

Grew up skiing out west. Know people killed in their car from an avalanche 20+ years ago. Daily avalanche control is a thing that's been done for decades. Choosing not to ski during HIGH avalanche warnings is also a thing.

Avalanches were basically unheard of until the early 2000’s. And when I say unheard of, I literally mean “no one had ever seen one, ever”. Now they’re commonplace.

Nope, you're wrong. I grew up in Washington State in the 90s. We talked about avalanche danger regularly (we skied, my dad climbed Rainier and other local to Washington mountains) and there were warnings then.

Not only do I remember talking about them, there was a Lake Tahoe Avalanche that killed 7 people in 1982. Which has been in the news this week because it was close to where this weeks Lake Tahoe avalanche was.

I grew up literally in the shadow of Mt Hood in the 70’s-80’s. We had never heard of an avalanche until about 2004. We didn’t even know what the word meant. This is climate change.

You didn’t know what the word avalanche meant until 2004? You must be super dumb and the schools you went to failed you.

I guess that PP must have been super confused about the 1978 movie "Avalanche" with Rock Hudson. Their tiny little hamlet, cut off from the rest of the US, didn't know about this word until 2004 for some reason.

DP


The point is that there were never avalanches before the 2000’s, and they’re happening all the time now because of climate change.


Are you dense, or just a maga climate denier? Which is it?

NP. Neither MAGA nor a climate denier but old enough to know there were avalanches pre 2000s.

Don't you have a LFL you need to vandalize?

Think really, really hard and maybe you'll understand the concept that 1982 predates 2000.
https://www.skiutah.com/members/alta/events/buried-the-1982-alpine-meadows

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But people keep insisting climate change isn’t real. Despite the avalanche of evidence. Pun intended.

All I know is we never had avalanches like this 20 years ago.

Absolutely not true. You're obviously not someone that skis out west much less does helicopter back country skiing.

Grew up skiing out west. Know people killed in their car from an avalanche 20+ years ago. Daily avalanche control is a thing that's been done for decades. Choosing not to ski during HIGH avalanche warnings is also a thing.

Avalanches were basically unheard of until the early 2000’s. And when I say unheard of, I literally mean “no one had ever seen one, ever”. Now they’re commonplace.

Nope, you're wrong. I grew up in Washington State in the 90s. We talked about avalanche danger regularly (we skied, my dad climbed Rainier and other local to Washington mountains) and there were warnings then.

Not only do I remember talking about them, there was a Lake Tahoe Avalanche that killed 7 people in 1982. Which has been in the news this week because it was close to where this weeks Lake Tahoe avalanche was.

I grew up literally in the shadow of Mt Hood in the 70’s-80’s. We had never heard of an avalanche until about 2004. We didn’t even know what the word meant. This is climate change.

You didn’t know what the word avalanche meant until 2004? You must be super dumb and the schools you went to failed you.

I guess that PP must have been super confused about the 1978 movie "Avalanche" with Rock Hudson. Their tiny little hamlet, cut off from the rest of the US, didn't know about this word until 2004 for some reason.

DP


The point is that there were never avalanches before the 2000’s, and they’re happening all the time now because of climate change.


Are you dense, or just a maga climate denier? Which is it?

What do you call what happened here in 1910?

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/1910-stevens-pass-avalanche-still-deadliest-in-us-history/

It says it was a wall of snow. Which is a completely different phenomenon. Duh. Or something. But there was NEVER an avalanche before 2000. Never I tell you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But people keep insisting climate change isn’t real. Despite the avalanche of evidence. Pun intended.

All I know is we never had avalanches like this 20 years ago.

Absolutely not true. You're obviously not someone that skis out west much less does helicopter back country skiing.

Grew up skiing out west. Know people killed in their car from an avalanche 20+ years ago. Daily avalanche control is a thing that's been done for decades. Choosing not to ski during HIGH avalanche warnings is also a thing.

Avalanches were basically unheard of until the early 2000’s. And when I say unheard of, I literally mean “no one had ever seen one, ever”. Now they’re commonplace.

Nope, you're wrong. I grew up in Washington State in the 90s. We talked about avalanche danger regularly (we skied, my dad climbed Rainier and other local to Washington mountains) and there were warnings then.

Not only do I remember talking about them, there was a Lake Tahoe Avalanche that killed 7 people in 1982. Which has been in the news this week because it was close to where this weeks Lake Tahoe avalanche was.

I grew up literally in the shadow of Mt Hood in the 70’s-80’s. We had never heard of an avalanche until about 2004. We didn’t even know what the word meant. This is climate change.

You didn’t know what the word avalanche meant until 2004? You must be super dumb and the schools you went to failed you.

I guess that PP must have been super confused about the 1978 movie "Avalanche" with Rock Hudson. Their tiny little hamlet, cut off from the rest of the US, didn't know about this word until 2004 for some reason.

DP


The point is that there were never avalanches before the 2000’s, and they’re happening all the time now because of climate change.


Are you dense, or just a maga climate denier? Which is it?

What do you call what happened here in 1910?

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/1910-stevens-pass-avalanche-still-deadliest-in-us-history/

It says it was a wall of snow. Which is a completely different phenomenon. Duh. Or something. But there was NEVER an avalanche before 2000. Never I tell you!

Read the title. Learn descriptive English.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who has a pool or a dog or a gun or a car is more of a risk taker than these women.

That might sound nice in your head but it's not remotely true. Are we supposed to feel sorry for these people? I guess I feel vaguely sorry for their kids, but these were stupid women doing a stupid thing.

The same amount of sorry I would feel for someone whose kid drowns in a pool or who gets eaten by a dog.

I feel sorry for all of them. Life has risks and is meant to be enjoyed despite those risks. Very few people die in backcountry avalanches - it isn't very risky at all compared to many other things people do.

NP. This reasoning is illogical. Very few people die in back country avalanches because very few people spend any time at all skiing in back country areas, not because doing so isn't dangerous. This is akin to saying that sky diving isn't dangerous because very few people die sky diving.... both are niche activities limited to a relatively wealthy subset of the population.