Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
At 02:51 25/11/99 , David Reinhard wrote: > I am sure there are some of you who are now starting to find this debate a >little "long winded". So far no has been able to refute any of my >objections to the use of a regulator for resuscitation, I don't want to 'refute' anything. I want to understand the mechanics of what happens when you inflate a non-breathing diver's lungs with oxygen via a second stage. >Dr John Lippmann writes: > >(Quote) >It's interesting to hear that this debate has emerged yet again. It does so >every so often! > >The major arguments against using a scuba demand valve for resuscitation >are: > >1. The flowrates are far too high. Currently recommended flowrates for >ventilation are 40-60 lpm. Scuba demand valves provide flowrates nearer to >100 lpm. Is that flowrate lowered by partially covering the exhaust valve? ANd/or intermittently presing the purge valve. I would have thought this would be obvious since I wouldn't even try to purge a reg into my lungs with the exhaust ports covered. > (eg. Poseidon regs range from 1000-1800 lpm). The potential for >regurgitation and lung unjury is tremednous. No poseidon. >2. All ventilators have at least one pressure relief valve set at around 50 >cmH2O to prevent lung injury in an adult. There is no pressure relief on a >scuba valve. How about the non-breathing diver's nostrils? regards billyw >3. There is too little control of flow from the purge button. > >There are other arguments against it but the above must be more than >adequate to convince people not to attempt it, above or below water. > >Rrgds, >John > >(unquote) > >I have also had a preliminary reply (more detailed comment to follow >aparently) from one of the doctors at Diving Medicine Online": > >(Quote) >Only one device allows for the delivering of artificial ventilation in the >field. This is the pocket mask with an oxygen inlet valve. This also allows >for the use of mouth-to mouth assistance without the unpleasant (and >possibly dangerous) aspects of direct oral contact. Regulators would also >have difficulty in controlling the inspiratory volume and can lead to >overpressure injuries. >(unquote) > >I would like to think that I have provided more than enough evidence to >support my case, and that the debate could stop here. However I have a >sneaking suspicion that there are some who will simply choose not to listen >and will continue to advocate this dangerous and unproven practice. > > I hope you all will think carefully on this issue, and if you haven't >already done so get some proper training from DAN (or similar organisation) >so that you WILL know what to do if the need arises. Thanks also to those >of you who have emailed me privately with your support. > >Safe Diving, David. > >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >Ocean Internet - "The Quality ISP" >http://www.ocean.com.au/info.html > >-- >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]