Comments
Note that these all of these Xenon-Everest stories come back to the same person: Lukas Furtenbach
Why? Because he’s launching a business that sells Xenon-assisted Everest tours: https://www.furtenbachadventures.com/
These stories are never about uncovering an underground world of Xenon performance enhancement or discussing the science (which is much less optimistic about Xenon’s benefits). They’re always lazily relaying the PR information that Lukas Furtenbach gives them.
So while it’s true that Xenon appears to have some possible performance enhancing properties, all of these news pieces about how climbers are using Xenon always come back to this one same guy who is, coincidentally, trying really hard to sell people on expensive Xenon-assisted Everest tours.
By mattmaroon 2025-05-2914:274 reply That’s some really solid PR work on his part if true, but if he is scaling (pun intended) tours that actually do manage to summit Everest in significantly decreased time, I would say that it’s strong evidence that Xenon actually works and the science just hasn’t caught up to it yet. Unless he has found some other clever way that he is for some reason pretending is Xenon.
> Unless he has found some other clever way that he is for some reason pretending is Xenon.
Meth. It's meth.
By Hilift 2025-05-2918:16 In the 1991 film K2, Michael Biehn's character used an epinephrine (adrenaline) auto-injector (in his neck), which had recently been marketed and was seen by some wealthy as a booster. This actually increases risk for arrhythmia and makes pulmonary edema worse, so ironically meth would be a preferred booster.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K2_(film)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epinephrine_autoinjector
https://www.outsideonline.com/health/training-performance/co...
> I would say that it’s strong evidence that Xenon actually works
The only evidence is the claims from the person selling the expensive five-figure Everest packages. It’s the very definition of a conflict of interest.
They also use multiple treatments, not just Xenon. The hikers sleep in hypobaric chambers. Another comment said they used supplemental oxygen but were hiding details about how much.
There is no evidence or even head-to-head testing here. It’s all claims that come from one person, who is also trying to sell the treatment.
By mattmaroon 2025-05-2922:41 But are people repeatedly getting up the mountain in much less time? If so, it really doesn’t matter if it’s because of one particular substance or another, and if not, it would be pretty easy to determine it is fake, right?
If something normally takes two weeks and some guy claims his novel method gets you up there in one, it’s at least easy to verify whether his novel method actually does do it.
He is primarily selling the Placebo Effect.
All kinds of fancy "research" and "reasons" it will work, and the marks\\\\customers put in a financial and emotional investment in it working, so expect it to work.
Seems just about how placebos work best
By mattmaroon 2025-05-2922:44 This is more of a Dumbo’s feather than a placebo effect, but in either case, it’s hard to imagine he is getting people up the mountain in significantly the last time with it.
Boss Lowe wrote about doping with xenon gas more than a decade ago: https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/another-use-xenon
Also, and quite interestingly, xenon isn't the only element that does this. Cobalt does something very similar: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6157393/
Athletic use is probably more common than people think. And I'd be absolutely shocked if Xe gas weren't already being used in racehorses. (You wouldn't believe the state of chemical warfare in that sport.)
There's also potential military use -- especially in combat divers. They're very limited by the amount of breathing gas they can carry. Anything to meaningfully cut oxygen use could be a game changer.
Military divers who need to be underwater for long periods are almost certainly using rebreathers, both for the longevity and for the lack of visible & audible bubbles.
By devilbunny 2025-05-2913:55 Rebreathers may feature slightly elevated oxygen levels vis-a-vis standard air (you need a lot of knowledge to use one safely, so presumably anyone diving a rebreather has done the far simpler courses for nitrox or trimix, both of which are used for limiting nitrogen narcosis), but for military divers it's much more about the lack of bubbles and noise.
By formerly_proven 2025-05-2911:402 reply It’s kinda curious that xenon can be used both for performance enhancement _and_ as a general anaesthetic.
By Scaevolus 2025-05-2913:47 Anesthetics are very weird. One of the leading theories is that they basically get wedged in lipid bilayers and interfere with neural signaling: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_general_anaestheti...
By zehaeva 2025-05-2913:35 No, It's a FLOOR WAX!
I always wondered if the allied forces were giving their elite troops EPO or similar when tracking the Taliban up and down mountains in Afghanistan. If they weren't, I think they should have been.
I don't know about EPO, it probably wouldn't have been that useful. But it was an open secret that a lot of the elite ground troops used illegally purchased performance enhancing steroids to build muscle and accelerate recovery. Long patrols through rough terrain while carrying a heavy load are extremely grueling and a little enhancement was tremendously helpful. Use of those drugs was technically a violation of military regulations. But officers often looked the other way because they didn't want to endanger the mission, and regular urine tests didn't check for steroids.
Now that the GWOT is over, the peacetime military has been cracking down on steroid use.
By gadders 2025-05-2914:41 You'd think they'd have a proper programme for it for the elite troops.
Unless you're doing completely stupid doses it can be managed safely, and it's not like the soldiers are not already doing something inherently risky.
Xenon isn’t a new magic. Russian athletes were rumored to use it in the 2014 Sochi Olympic, and WADA banned it shortly thereafter: https://www.aip.org/inside-science/catching-some-xes-has-str...
It spikes HIF-1α → EPO for a day or two, but meta-analyses still doesn't show a real performance bump, let alone safety at 8 km. Feels less like innovation and more like mountaineering’s own carbon-plate shoes, except the failure mode here is cerebral edema, not a slow marathon time.
> but meta-analyses still doesn't show a real performance bump
I wish all of these news articles would discuss the actual studies instead of lazily parroting the claims of the one guy who is trying to sell expensive Xenon-assisted Everest hikes.
These articles are always PR pieces for Lukas Furtenbach’s expensive Everest tours. Every single time I see the words “Xenon” and “Everest” in a headline, his name is in the article as the source.
> I wish all of these news articles would discuss the actual studies
They do, if you read them.
> While some doctors have used the gas in the past to “precondition” patients to low oxygen levels — for example, before major heart surgery — the practice hasn’t really caught on because “it hasn’t been as protective as one would hope,” he said.
> Mike Shattock, a professor of cellular cardiology at King’s College London, said “xenon probably does very little and there is virtually no reputable scientific evidence that it makes any difference.”
> Some research has shown that xenon can quickly acclimatize people to high altitudes, even as some experts say the benefits, if any, are negligible and the side effects of its use remain unclear.
All the quotes you posted basically say the same thing; There is no evidence for the efficacy of xenon. That's scientist speak for: "Xenon doesn't work".
By rtkwe 2025-05-2915:09 Depends, it can also mean "this hasn't really been studied well" if there just hasn't been much research into it. I just pulled all the times it talked about studies or another expert talking about it being ineffective.
By mannyv 2025-05-2914:46 It depends. It might mean that there are no studies that show efficacy or the lack thereof.
A lack of evidence doesn't mean it doesn't work. It depends on what you mean by 'evidence.'
Take one or two reports.
A scientist would say, 'that's an anecdote.'
A lawyer would day, 'I can send you to jail with those two reports.'
> They do, if you read them.
I did read the article, which is how I knew Lukas Furtenbach was involved. Please don’t accuse people of not reading the article when they’re specifically talking about content of the article.
Anyway, my point was that if these articles wanted to be serious about the science, they’d lead with the studies and science.
Instead, they tack on weasel words (literally “some experts say” and “some research” as in your quotes ) in an attempt to make it feel like a both-sides style journalism while leaving Furtenbach’s claims as the headline and the main story.
By rtkwe 2025-05-2915:20 It's not a scientific publication though... it's the NYTimes. The main story is that the guys managed a summit in 3 days. For all the controversy around Xenon and it's effects as a PED in sport the combo of hypoxia tents and Xenon provably worked at least this time to enable the rapid summit.
By cratermoon 2025-05-2914:00 Elite runners can knock about 2 minutes off their marathon time. Studies show about a 2% improvement in times, the downside is increased injury.
By germinalphrase 2025-05-2913:56 They return energy (like a spring) providing mechanical assistance to the runner.
