Roger,

I received a reply from Daniel A. Nord to the inquiry I sent to DAN. =
I'm
somewhat relieved at the lack of enough statistically significant
information to make a definitive determination about effectiveness of
technical diving educational programs and practices. The cost of
obtaining this information is obviously high and measured in units that
are usually reserved for times of war in most societies.=20

I am not a technical diver, however I have formed some opinions based =
on
the information and experience I have gained as a recreational nitrox
diver. It is my opinion that technical diving requires a set of =
rigorous
practices and organization that are beyond the typical weekend warrior.
Selling the activity as something to be casually undertaken is simply a
mistake that could have nothing but bad consequences for the diving
community as a whole. I know that I am impaired by the effects of
moderate PN2 and feel no need to experiment with higher END than 100'. =
I
know that I don't want to be alone on a line hanging in an ocean =
without
a full set of contingency plans and the equipment, training, support
equipment and people to make these plans work. I know I never want to =
go
diving with less than the best buddy I have available.=20

Any person or organization that opposes these basic precepts is not
acting in my best interest. The requirements to pass the TDI deep air
certification are in stark violation of several of these precepts. I
won't be taking the course, I would in fact discourage others from
taking it. I am personally amazed at the lack of contingency planning
training and experience required for all technical certifications.=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	nord0001@mc*.du*.ed* [SMTP:nord0001@mc*.du*.ed*]
> Sent:	Friday, January 23, 1998 3:08 PM
> To:	Adam Fritz
> Subject:	Re: FW: Re: DeepTech
>=20
>=20
> Thank you for your recent inquiry to the DAN Medical Department.
>=20
> Divers Alert Network collects data on dive accidents resulting in
> fatality on=20
> both certified and uncertified divers.  Although the certifying =
agency
> for the=20
> highest level of certification is indicated on the Diving Fatality
> Reporting=20
> Form, from an epidemiological perspective, it lacks statistical
> significance for=20
> a number of reasons and is ignored in the analytical process.  For
> example, one=20
> cannot conclude that because the largest numbers of diving fatalities
> occur to=20
> divers certified by one particular agency, that the agency is
> necessarily=20
> unsafe.  Statistically, the data lacks the common denominators
> indicating the=20
> numbers of certified divers by that agency, their activity and the
> numbers of=20
> dives completed for the time period. Also, the numbers are not
> sufficiently=20
> large for statistical importance.   Similarly, one cannot conclude
> that because=20
> the state of Florida is home to the majority of diving fatalities,
> that Florida=20
> is less safe to than any other state.
>=20
> Statistical analysis of "technical divers" to "recreational divers" =
is
> reviewed=20
> in the DAN data in two areas.  We first review the numbers based on:
> (1996=20
> data)
>     =F9  Certified (69)
>     =F9  Recreational/Technical - unqualified (10)
>     =F9  Technical (3)
>     =F9  Uncertified (3)
>=20
> Annually, the numbers of recreational divers attempting to make a =
dive
> they were=20
> unqualified for ranges 5-15, 1996 =3D 10 (see above).  This =
information
> is based=20
> on the certification level and any advanced training information we
> receive in=20
> our fact-findings.  They were considered to be performing technical
> dives that=20
> required special training and equipment they did not possess.
>=20
> "Technical diving/diver" lacks a universally accepted definition and
> for=20
> analytical purposes, we defined technical dives as:
>     =F9  Diving >130;
>     =F9  Using a breathing mixture other than compressed air;
>     =F9  Decompression or overhead diving (wreck, cave, virtual etc);
>     =F9  Special training or equipment were used;
>=20
> Of the 13 "Technical" deaths:
>     =F9  Cave=3D5 (1-qualified/4-unqualified)
>     =F9  Wreck=3D6=20
>     =F9  >130 ft=3D2 (1-qualified/1-unqualified)
>=20
> Please bear in mind, this data represents 1996 recreational diving
> fatalities=20
> that met the inclusion criteria.  Factors used to exclude a case:
>     =F9  Free-diver or snorkeler;
>     =F9  Foreign national outside U.S. waters;
>     =F9  Commercial, scientific, public safety or occupational diver;
>     =F9  Non-diving related; eg. boat accident, etc.
>=20
> I hope the above information has answered your question.  I would =
also
> invite=20
> you to contact our office directly if you have any further questions
> or=20
> concerns.
>=20
> Daniel A. Nord, EMT-P, CHT
> DAN Medical Staff
> Duke University Medical Center
> (919) 684-2948 ext 222
>=20
> =
______________________________________________________________________
> _________
> Subject: FW: Re: DeepTech
> From:    AdamF@st*.co* at internet
> Date:    1/21/98  17:07
>=20
> Is DAN tracking fatalities based on most recent certification agency?
> Is
> this information available?
>=20
> I appologize for my lack of reasearch in the DAN materials, but what
> are
> the statistical comparisions between "technical divers" and
> "recreational divers" where technical diving is defined as diving
> activity that occurs in an overhead environment. An overhead
> environment
> is defined as any situation where the diver will be unable to =
surface,
> i.e. Cave, Wreck, Deco Liability.
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> RFC-822-headers:
> Received: from bighorn.terra.net by mc.duke.edu (PMDF V5.1-10 #23776)
>  with ESMTP id <0EN500E6MUBLIQ@mc*.du*.ed*> for
>  nord0001%siren-po@cc*.du*.ed*; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 19:50:09 -0500
> (EST)
> Received: (mail@lo*) by bighorn.terra.net (8.8.6/jr3.8)
>  for id TAA20434; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 19:03:39 -0500
> Received: from bighorn.terra.net (root@lo*)
>  by bighorn.terra.net (8.8.6/jr3.8) with EXEC for techdiver id
> RAA13105; Wed,
>  21 Jan 1998 17:07:10 -0500
> Received: from helios.starwave.com (helios.starwave.com
> [192.147.170.1])
>  by bighorn.terra.net (8.8.6/jr3.8) with ESMTP for
> <techdiver@aquanaut.com> id
>  RAA13097; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:07:09 -0500
> Received: from singsing.starwave.com (singsing.starwave.com
> [192.147.170.52])
>  by helios.starwave.com (8.8.8/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA21935 for
>  <techdiver@aquanaut.com>; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 14:13:26 -0800 (PST)
> Received: by singsing.starwave.com with Internet Mail Service
> (5.0.1458.49)
>  id <ZPW0YY5V>; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 14:12:00 -0800
> Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 14:07:41 -0800
> From: Adam Fritz <AdamF@st*.co*>
> Subject: FW: Re: DeepTech
> To: "'dan@da*.yc*.or*'" <dan@da*.yc*.or*>
> Cc: "'techdiver@aquanaut.com'" <techdiver@aquanaut.com>,
>  "'rogersteele@ho*.co*'" <rogersteele@ho*.co*>
> Errors-to: owner-techdiver@aquanaut.com
> Message-id: <FB05681BC14CD1119B3500A0C9713B244C58FA@LO*>
> MIME-version: 1.0
> X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49)
> Content-type: text/plain; charset=3D"iso-8859-1"
> Precedence: bulk
> X-Priority: 3
--
Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'.
Send subscribe/unsubscribe 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]