Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
Mat- You know this argument of yours sounds vaguely familiar... Hmmmm... Oh Yeah! Just replace the word "Helium" with "Nitrox"! Say, you don't work for Skin Diver magazine, do you? Jim Sender: Mat Bloedorn Date: 9/21/98 12:59 AM >Come on George! > >Let's start by saying that I agree in principle with the point you and >your group are trying to make. Dive safely, use the right equipemnt >and the right gases. > >BUT! >--- > >You are making Helium based gas diving sound like a simple >undertaking. It is not when compared to diving on air! There are many >extra risks associated with helium based mixtured that are not >incurred diving on air. In most RECREATIONAL situation there is no >risk reduction from diving helium. And there are some increased risks >from helium based gases. For starters: > >1. Helium based gases must be selected, mixed, analysed and labelled. >There are risks associated with incorrect selection, mixing, analyzing >and labelling techniqes. > >2. There are no standard tables available for helium based gases. >Sure there are plenty of specific tables and software out there, but >nothing as comprehensive and simple as what is available for air. > >3. Cost (gas and mixing) puts these gases out of reach for most >recreational divers. Because of the cost even many "technical divers" >who should use these gases don't, how can we expect recreational >divers to. > >Let's face it. Diving helium based mixtures is the right thing to do >for MOST technical diving activities, but trying to push this into the >recreational domain adds additional risk factors that are NOT offset >by the reduced narcotic effect of the gas. Especially in the >relatively shallow depth ranges below 80-100 ft. > >This is the point people have been trying to make to Dan and company >as well as yourself (now). Perhaps if your group were not so single >minded and religous in your pursuits this thread would not have gone >on so long. It is always easy to take the "high" road and proclaim >that "we are trying to save lives". However you are not going to save >lives by forcing your views upon, and introducing additional risks and >complications for shallow water recreational divers to. > >Later, > Mat. > >P.S. Your groups attitude is not gaining you any extra "listener >points". Of course you must already know that. Everyone is not >necessarily "farm animal stupid". > >------------------------------------------------------- >Katherine V. Irvine (alias George) wrote: > >Garret, John, et al - this is too important a topic for me to waste >time dwelling on the fact that you dive shop primates remind me of the >movie "Planet of the Apes" when it comes to discussions of tech diving. > > The real subject here is the identification and minimization of risk >in a dive plan. You two need to try learning that before you spout out >all of the situations where the 50 million flies argument appears to be >true. You two may enjoy a good meal of feces like so many flies, but >the rest of us prefer the filet - learn to find the filet, and skip the >shit. > > First, there is no dive situation where taking on the risk of oxygen >toxicity either in the form of a seizure or in the form of lung damage >justifies using a hot mix. There is no dive situation where assuming the >risks associated with using a narcotic mix make any sense at all. > > Second, there is no benefit to using a hot mix, and there is no >situation where the math of mix allows this. For instance, on a short >dive , the perceived shortening of deco is in no way worth the risks of >the hot mix, and in a situation where the depth can vary greatly below >the planned mix, this is an invitation to disaster. If you can minimize >this risk , then do so. If the dive were longer, then you really can not >use a hot mix as the accumulated lung damage and cumulative effect of >the high ppo2 for tox purposes prohibits this in any coherent dive plan. > > Teaching situations should never include extreme exposures as they >become unmanageable for obvious reasons. Open ocean exposures should be >managed by splitting them into multiple dives, not one long dive for >obvious logistic and risk management reasons. Dive where the skill of >the players is in question should not be provocative at all, and they >should be screened for gear that functions effectively in an emergency ( >in other words, no built in weight systems, or other crap). > > Decompression has been labeled the big boogie man in most diving >circles - not the real risk. Lean deco and learn physiology, screen out >the obvious , manage the rest of the risk. Option Number One says, >"Don't Dive", and ONO should be used when there is any doubt as to the >outcome. ONO has a 100% track record of no bends, do accidents, no >death: learn when to apply it. > > We all have now learned that helium is the preferred diving gas, as it >is not only non-narcotic, it is easier to breath and easier to >decompress from. Many of my team divers , like Jarrod Jablonski and >Brent Scarabin, true real life tough guys, use helium in all of their >deco gases other than the 100% oxygen, and there they break to >helium-based gases. I use helium up to 120 feet at deco, and below 60 >feet for diving ( when decompressing at those depths I obviosuly have a >helium-based gas on my back). > > People who are into diving are into learning about diving. Creating >bullshit myths and phonie phobias is counterproductive. NOAA is largely >resposible for the farm animal stupidity in nitrox information, and the >training agencies are responsible for the rest. The fact is that >identification of the true risks requires real knowledge and real >experience - citing examples of other people's long term ignorance is >not the answer, finding out the truth is. Give it a try. > > What we are saying in response to Capt Jim is very simple : "tech" >means doing it right , whatever the situation, not making it more >complex, convoluted, or risky. Diving is a lot more fun when everyone >comes back. Given where I come back from every time, one would think >maybe some of you dive instructors would take notice and stop trying to >make a fun sport into a bungee jumping subsitute. > > Try being part of the solution , rather than backing into a corner >with your bullshit agency standards and recommendations . Luckily , we >have our own training agency, Global Underwater Esxplorers, and our own >platform , The Woodville Karst Plain Project, so we can do everything >right without regard for the Planet of the Apes that has held diving >hostage for the last five years. Things are changing fast, and there is >now a real alternative out there - we represent that in every way. > > "Do It Right", or don't do it at all. > > > > > >_________________________________________________________ >DO YOU YAHOO!? >Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > >-- >Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@aquanaut.com'. >Send subscribe/unsubscribe requests to `techdiver-request@aquanaut.com'. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- Learn About Trimix at http://www.cisatlantic.com/trimix/trimix.html -- 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]