Mailing List Archive

Mailing List: techdiver

Banner Advert

Message Display

Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2000 01:29:21 -0400
From: Guy Morin <xnet@vi*.ca*>
Subject: Re: WKPP + DECO
To: Trey <trey@ne*.co*>
Cc: Tech Diver <techdiver@aquanaut.com>
Trey,

Thank you very much for the information. It is very
insightful.

In regard to issues relating to what I may feel toward
your, or any other organization, let's all wake up to
the fact that this is irrelevant. I have certainly not sought
any form of gratification in entering this debate, and
had no illusions in regard to the impact on my popularity.
It was a worthwhile sacrifice, and a very small one at
that, to finally come to some form of consensus, and
to debunk what were flagrant myths on this list as to
the very practices of the organization. While the myths
in question were raised by proponents of the organization,
these folks didn't receive anywhere near the criticism that
I have endured. These myths we have already agreed
upon, believe it or not, as is evident in reading through
the noise.

Yes, it is a fact that people will be sensitized to the
choices pertaining to their deco, especially with the information
provided over a number of interesting posts. Also, it
seems that everyone who is relevant to the discussion
has indeed elucidated that using oxygen requires careful
consideration; it provides a lot of benefit, and there are
many factors to consider that relate to it's safe use. On
the practical side to the use of O2 at high PO2's a habitat
for oxygen decompression that provides protection for O2
tox, is something one cannot carry on the dive boat, that is
also a reality.

Across several posts from the organization's proponents,
it seems that I can find statements confirming that breaks
are not accounted for in the software. The organization
uses empirical data that is difficult to adapt for the diver
that is outside of the organization, best to consult said
organization to gain a deeper understanding, and a valid
application of the empirical data. It would be foolish to
attempt to do what the organization does without first
getting trained. This was the essence of my original post.

Trey himself has confirmed the 12/6 spread I mentioned
in one of my posts. Other details I leave to the reader, who
can't see that oxygen requires no blending, and is always
accurate, duh? The oxygen window concept does not try
to invoke anything beyond the use of hyperoxic mixes. Using
oxygen is a tricky affair providing both benefit, and penalties,
that must be carefully managed. Taking breaks aims to restore
lung efficiency, not magically increase it. It increases it from
it's reduced state, thus restoring. The other minor ones
are also evident.

The organization does a very specialized type of dive,
and using some very specialized techniques, and in a single
environment; these are factors when considering applying
these techniques outside that envelope.

As you say, the reader is left to figure out whether the type
of specialization your organization exercises for it's dives
even applies in other environments. Now, more than before
this debate, it is possible for people to do just that. While
these things are spelled out on some of the web sites,
proponents of the organization did offer some questionable
insights, I refer simply to the residual tissue loading using
O2 that are the root of my contribution to the thread. Yet
the organization didn't so much as blink about those falsehoods.

The points I raised were vigorously debated, and I
am satisfied with the outcome, again, it wasn't, and isn't,
personal. In the face of ridicule and derision, I succeeded
in keeping the dialog as courteous as possible, without placidly
enduring what was, at times, inappropriate behavior devoid
of social grace. As far as what is expressed by me, we
still hold freedom of expression as a fundamental right,
and at no time did I suggest a practice that might be construed
in any way as being dangerous, nor did I ever express that
I was an expert on any subject of my posts. I merely highlighted
some obvious oversights, and contradictions that I found
in the various posts.

Finally several people have expressed similar concerns as
I did, and were served by the discussion. It is also too bad
for those who might have something to contribute, but didn't
in the face of poor social graces.

It is too bad you are bitter about the result of the debate.
You claim victory, but have no satisfaction at that affirmation...

My position was not one of win/lose; in this exchange, I think
everyone came out winning. Too bad some people are still angry;
time will heal your wounds. Realize that I am not here for your
liking, as you are not here for mine. I prefer to think that something
came out of this, if nothing more than getting people thinking,
without placing value on a particular organization, or person.

Sincerely yours,

Guy

--
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]