Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Actually, you forgot the third point, which is "it's bullshit". There've been some studies of late that suggest O2 narcosis is valid, but that it only has significant effect above a PO2 of 1.8 or so. If you want to go beyond 1.8, then by all means, your grave is probabilistically dug. In the meantime, the same studies found that O2 at lesser partial pressures carries virtually *no* narcosis, and in fact, lowers the narcotic effects of your EANx. For what it's worth, this is borne out by personal observation using a closed-circuit rebreather - there's significantly reduced narcosis at depth vs. an air-equivalent setpoint. -Will -------------------------------------------------------- Don't pay! Drop by www.zplan.com for free Nitrox, Trimix, and Rebreather deco planning software. On Mon, 20 Jul 1998, Tom Fuhs wrote: > I just read the thread on O2 narcosis in the archives. This was never > mentioned in my nitrox course. The course stressed that a major benefit > of nitrox was a reduced level of narcosis. In fact the equivalent air > depth , based on N2 content alone, was the "only" consideration for > predicting narcosis of a nitrox breathing mixture at a given depth. > This was an "ANDI Complete SafeAir user" course, advertised to give you > everthing you need to know to use nitrox mixtures up to 50%. I took the > course a little over 4 years ago. > > Now granted, this was just a nitrox course, nothing fancy. But I feel > like maybe I was short-changed. I figure one of two things occured: > 1) they didn't know, or > 2) they didn't bother to tell me in the interests of promoting nitrox > and selling me more gas. > > I'm beginnig to understand the frustrations some seem to have with the > tech agency infrastructure. This wasn't really a tech course. But what > if I do take a tech/mix course. What interesting bit of info would get > lost during the hard sell. > > Thanks > -tom > > > > Kevin Connell wrote: > > > > It is thought that PP02's in the 1.4 range have the same or greater > > narcotic potential than PPN2 of 4.0, so adding oxygen may not reduce, and > > may actually increase narcosis. > > > > I learned this in a PADI Nitrox Diver course. > > > > At 02:35 PM 7/20/98 -0400, you wrote: > > >Mike Zimmerman wrote: > > > > > >> We've had the discussions > > >> before about nitrox not being less narcotic than air. This > > >> looks like "deep air". > > >> > > > > > >Huh? > > >Could someone please explain this? This is the second time I've heard > > >reference to air being less narcotic than nitrox. (George Irvine made > > >mention of it saying that air was less narcotic than 30% at 130') This > > >goes against everything I learned and goes against what seems to me to > > >be intutitivly obvious; ie: less PP N2 = less narcotic effect. I must > > >have missed the thread discussing this, or maybe I'm missing something > > >real basic. Anyway, being an average NE wreck diver (70 - 130 FSW) and > > >generally breathing Nitrox on these dives, I'm curious as to what the > > >thinking is here. Just trying to learn. > > > > > > -tom > > >-- > > >Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. > > >Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'. > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > Kevin Connell <kevin@nw*.co*> > > > > Northwest Labor Systems > > http://www.nwls.com > > Lake Stevens, WA > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > -- > Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. > Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'. > -- 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]