Don't waste my time with your bullshit. You have utterly no clue what you
are talking about, and I am entirely sick of "demands" out of neophytes
reciting dive class baloney.

 Conversation with me is over. You do it your way, and then show me YOUR
track record and YOUR references, and YOUR information, your function tests,
your vital capacity tests, your time in the game paying for real, and your
"references" ( which are fucking none at all) .

You have none and I am not going to give you any or argue with you. Go take
another dive class.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Stenton" <jacs@gn*.co*.uk*>
To: "Trey" <trey@ne*.co*>
Cc: <cobber@ci*.co*>; "Chris Stenton" <jacs@gn*.co*.uk*>; "dmdalton"
<dmdalton@qu*.ne*>; <dwiden@ho*.co*>; <donburke56@ne*.ne*>; "'Paul
Braunbehrens'" <Bakalite@ba*.co*>; <techdiver@aquanaut.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 7:07 AM
Subject: Re: rec trimix


>
> George,
>
> I don't think we disagree, as you have just stated and others have
consistently
> stated the max working ppO2 for a dive should be 1.4. Therfore, there is a
> depth time matrix where this is an acceptable max ppO2. This may or
may-not be
> within the recreational "no stops dive" limits but I have not heard of any
> studies showing lung damage due to recreational divers using a max ppO2 of
1.4
> within these limits. If you have I would be interested in the references.
>
> Ok a 6 minute mile may be a bit harsh but my concern is the large amount
of
> blubber that gets attached to the tanks. A fitness test doesn't seem to be
a
> fitness test anymore. Don't tell me you are siding with the beached whale
> fraternity now? They are not exactly an endangered species!
>
>
> Chris
>
>
> >
> >
> > 1.4 is the max working ( as opposed to decompressing) ppo2. The longer
the
> > dive, the lower the ppo2 needs to be. Commercial diving figured this out
a
> > long time ago, and they are using helmets. Cobb is correct . Your
"panties
> > in a wad" comment about 6 minute miles is typical - dive instructor ,
eh?
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Chris Stenton" <jacs@gn*.co*.uk*>
> > To: <cobber@ci*.co*>
> > Cc: "dmdalton" <dmdalton@qu*.ne*>; <dwiden@ho*.co*>;
> > <donburke56@ne*.ne*>; "'Paul Braunbehrens'" <Bakalite@ba*.co*>;
> > <techdiver@aquanaut.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 2:26 PM
> > Subject: Re: rec trimix
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > I know this is going to piss off a lot of rec divers but I believe
that
> > > >increasing your bottom PP02's for the purpose of avoiding a deco
> > obligation is
> > > >a really stupid idea. It is typical of our sport that this principle
is
> > > >embraced by almost everybody. Even to the point of calling
potentially
> > deadly
> > > >hyperoxic mixes "safeair".
> > >
> > > >I think there should be an industry-wide ban of bottom or working
PP02's
> > of
> > > >anything over 1.2.
> > >
> > > Jim,
> > >
> > > Give us some statistics or physiology  to back this up. I haven't seen
one
> > > report of a recreational "no stop dives" diving  death or oxtox hit
> > attributed
> > > to using Nitrox at a ppO2 of 1.4 or below here in the UK.
> > >
> > > Far more important surely is getting the people "at risk" out to do
some
> > more
> > > exercise. How about removing people cert cards who can't run a 6min
mile;
> > far
> > > more likely to reduce the work load of the emergency services than
some
> > > arbitrary ppO2 limit of 1.2.
> > >
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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]