But if you're looking to do something dangerous, wouldn't you expect the probability of death to be above 0? And if you aren't looking for danger, why are you climbing everest?

I am not climbing Mount Everest. Honestly, I was hoping the article would provide insights on why people try to do it. Death wish? I suspect people just don't believe the 3% number, they probably think their own number is much lower. Maybe they think the number only applies to other climbers who are not as fit and well prepared.

Sure there are some risky activities that would interest me, but at the end of the day, there are more than enough interesting alternatives that are a lot less risky.

Not a death wish, but a survival wish. There are people who do stuff far more dangerous, like the first people to climb the everest and there are other even more dangerous mountains out there.

People who take those sort of risks don't think they will be in the n% of people that die doing it, but that they'll be able to survive despite it being hard and dangerous. Some don't survive, but those who do get their kicks for beating the odds, that sort of stuff. Of course, that's not for everyone. Most people want the most safety possible, that's why we live in cities and try to make the environment the most controlled possible.

If you are 36, and have a reasonable chance of living till 70+, a 3% chance of death is basically the same as dieing one year sooner. Is climbing mount Everest worth a year of your life? And I am not talking about extreme old age but reasonably healthy middle years?

Now it might not seem like much, but as I get older I am more willing to take risks because of this stuff. My risk threshold is basically one in 50,000. If it's more risky than that it's just not worth it IMO. At 70 I will probably have a lower threshold but for now I am happy, healthy, and hopefully have many more years ahead so taking 1% death risk seems stupid.