Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Banner Advert

Message Display

To: David
To: Doolette <ddoolett@me*.ad*.ed*.au*>
Subject: Re: Re[3]: Australian O2 protcol.
From: Richard Pyle <deepreef@bi*.bi*.Ha*.Or*>
Cc: techdiver@opal.com
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 1994 10:54:40 +22305714 (HST)
On Fri, 23 Dec 1994, David Doolette wrote:

> Compression on air, as in 
> Richard's anecdotes, will have two beneficial effects.  Firstly, it will 
> compress any bubbles, although, as I have posted numerous times, this effect 
> will be small V=4/3 (pi r^3). 

This brings up a question I've always had...does anyone have any insight
on whether it is the diameter, surface area, or volume of a bubble that
has the most impact on symptom severity?  I know there is no easy answer,
and I suspect all three parameters have an effect (difficult to tease
appart with case studies & experiments, but it might seem surface area
should have the greatest impact with regard to complement effects).


> between tissue bubbles and alveolar/venous gas.  With increasing gas phase 
> separation,  the oxygen window tends to drive off-gassing and bubble 
> shrinkage.  For more information, buy my book.

Wait now... YOU have a book too?  What's the title, how much, and can I
send a single bank draft for both yours & Rat's?

> Thus, the hydrostatic pressure does matter.  Compression of bubbles may 
> reduce mechanical distortion of tissues and rheological changes.  
> Compression even on air will be better than surface air breathing for bubble 
> resolution, but not better than NBO or HBO which provides a bigger oxygen 
> window.   

By "NBO" (new to me), I assume you mean breathing O2 on surface?  I
recognize the theoretical advantage of surface O2 over air under pressure.
My question to Rat (and anyone else who wants to chime in), was whether
all the apparent success cases of air-only IWR would have been better-off
breathing O2 on the surface?  Theory says yes (oxygen window), but I'm not so
sure... Again, this is NOT a pointed question. It is also a rather
rhetorical one, since, of course, nobody can say whether these people
would have been better-off one way or the other.  I'm looking forward to
receiving my copy of the current "Alert Diver" issue, to see how DAN
suggests a controlled study would need to be structured.

Aloha,
Rich

deepreef@bi*.bi*.ha*.or*

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]