I'm sure this is true, but would you have any references in this area,
particularly with regard to ppN2 level vs. exposure
times, preferably correlated with observed tissue damage, degree
and localization of inflammation,  and repetetive exposure?  If the 
effect is significant under realistic operating conditions, we'd all like to 
factor this into our models, after all.

-Will

On Fri, 30 May 1997, Jim Cobb wrote:

> I think you guys are missing a main point of Georges- high pp's nitrogen 
> cause the blood cells to become rigid, this creates microcirculatory 
> damage. This in turn triggers the immune system, causing inflammation, 
> cutting off the circulation needed for off gassing.
> 
> Sure we might be able to function narced, but what about the permanent 
> physical damage you accumulate on deep air? Have you determined that the 
> resulting nerve damage and bone necrosis is nothing to fret about?
> 
>    Jim 
> 
> On 5/30/97 11:45 AM Ocean Diving Inc. wrote:
> 
> >To George and all under his spell,
> >	TYPICAL cave dives involve a greater deal of overhead to contend with 
> >during the ascent phase which lessens the PN2 of any given mix. Some caves 
> >however do not limit your vertical ability to ascend and most ocean dives 
> >do not  either. I haven't been in a wreck yet that I couldn't go up from 
> >within 15 seconds. Remember that most of the Deep Air dives that you made 
> >with me were less than 30 minutes at a depth that averaged 20' shallower 
> >than planned. Despite the conservative approach to planning and the EAD of 
> >130' within 30 seconds of ascent  do you really feel that divers should 
> >not exceed a 130' EAD when going to 180' or 190'  because they may not 
> >poses the adaptive abilities that we acquired from continuous exposures to 
> >the same?  I would love for every diver that wants to poke his nose a 
> >little deeper than 130' to take TRIMIX lessons, but for most the expenses 
> >would rule them out. The ratio of dives made on air in the OCEANS (from 
> >130' to 190') to dives made in caves on air(from 130' to 190') are 
> >probably 10,000 : 1.... (IMHO) ...OK maybe 5,000 :1 Still using your 
> >accident report stats I'll bet that makes Ocean diving appear safer than 
> >Cave diving. I'll bet it will remain that way till were dead and gone. 
> >Seems all the funerals are for those who took air beyond our recommend 
> >limits. Lighten up on the issue and let's get incompetent on a mix at the 
> >bar. See you in the deco zone.     
> >Sempre Deep,
> >Capt. Jim 
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From:	gmirvine@sa*.ne* [SMTP:gmirvine@sa*.ne*]
> >Sent:	Wednesday, May 28, 1997 2:22 PM
> >To:	TOM.MOUNT@wo*.at*.ne*
> >Cc:	cavers@ge*.co*; techdiver@aquanaut.com
> >Subject:	Standards, Deep Air, Narcotic Mixes - Three Wedings and a few 
> >Funerals
> >
> >> 
> >> ---Tom Mount <TOM.MOUNT@wo*.at*.ne*> wrote:
> >> >
> >>  
> >> This
> >> > has produced a great safety record. >
> >> > Shaun you should stay witin your limits and if they are less than
> >> those
> >> > we advocate for trimix then by all means do not attempt to become a
> >> mix
> >> > diver with IANTD
> >> > Tom
> >> >
> >-------
> >
> >         Tom, I am incompetent on air at 160, so are you saying that I
> >could not get an IANTD "trimix" "certification"?  Also, why not just
> >recommend 160 aed instead of 130? Why do you recommend less aed in cave
> >than ocean if you do not feel there is impairment?
> >
> >         If this is so safe, then why are a disproportionate number of
> >cave divng accidents amoung trained divers below 130 , and why are a
> >disproportionate number of ocean diving accidents below 130?  
> >
> >         PADI long ago spotted the correllation without knowing why,
> >just like the Surgeon General spotted the link bewteen cirgaette smoking
> >and cancer, without knowing why. In 1997 the absolute reason was
> >established, and some day soon the absolute reason for narcosis will be
> >established. In the meantime, obvious is obvious, and the dichotomy in
> >your standards alone imply an awareness of this and a denial at the same
> >time.
> >
> >         The concept that there is such a thing as "ability to handle
> >impairment" is fundamentallly flawed. Your "standards" need changing, in
> >my opinion. - G
> >--
> >Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> >Send list subscription requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
> >
> >--
> >Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> >Send list subscription requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
> Send list subscription requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.
> 
--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send list subscription requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'.

Navigate by Author: [Previous] [Next] [Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject: [Previous] [Next] [Subject Search Index]

[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]

[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]