Interesting article Joel, thanks for sharing it.  Perhaps instead of a solo
diving certification, divers should learn to be better/attentive buddies.

Allyson


-----Original Message-----
From: Joel Markwell [mailto:joeldm@mi*.co*]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 11:52 AM
To: Capt JT; Joe; allysonclagett@ea*.ne*;
kevin.obrien03@us*.cg*.co*; 'Manos Manoli'
Cc: techdiver@aquanaut.com
Subject: Re: Solo cash classes


The following is from an Undercurrent article on Dive Safety:

Twenty years ago, even talking about diving alone was heresy. Today, it's
common practice. Liveaboard boats are filled with solo divers, and many
land-based dive operations allow divers to venture off on their own.
Furthermore, divers in groups frequently get separated from one another,
with those who lag behind losing sight of the group. Buddy diving is less
commonplace because many divers believe they can't depend upon a buddy for
rescue. Rather than buddybreathe, they believe they're better off heading to
the surface alone. Perhaps, but the ultimate cause of death in 80 percent of
diving fatalities is drowning. And three Australian researchers have found
that divers who are alone are, obviously, much less likely to be rescued
than those who have buddies nearby. This is the second of a two-part article
summarizing the work of researchers Drs. Carl Edmonds, Douglas Walker, and
Brian Scott, who reviewed 100 drowning deaths and forty-eight accidents of
divers who survived.

Scuba Drowning Deaths and Those Who Survive:
Going it alone or with a buddy

In the first part, we commented on the role of water conditions, air supply,
buoyancy compensators, and weights. In this issue, we look at what happens
when a buddy is present ‹ and when no buddy is present. The work of Drs.
Edmonds, Walker, and Scott originally appeared in the Journal of the South
Pacific Underwater Medicine Society.

For a diver in trouble and drowning, rescue depends on rapid action by
either the victim or the buddy. Once a diver is unable to carry out safety
actions by himself, he becomes dependent upon other divers. A solo diver
doesn't have that help.

Fatalities

In eighty of 100 fatal cases, the victim was not with another diver. In
twenty-one fatalities, the dive was deliberately solo. In another fifty
cases, the victim had separated voluntarily from his buddy or the group. (In
thirty-one of these cases, the victim aborted the dive ‹ usually due to air
shortage ‹ and attempted to return to the surface alone.) And in another
nine, the deceased divers were swimming behind and invisible to others at
the time of the incident. This de facto solo diving made early rescue and
resuscitation improbable. In only eight of 100 deaths was there continued
contact with the buddy or group during and following the incident. The
victims disregarded the buddy system, and group diving conferred little
value because the leader often had insufficient contact with individual
divers to be classified as a buddy. The responsibility of other divers was
unclear, especially toward the last of the followers. In 31 percent of the
cases, no attempt was made to rescue the victim. In the next 24 percent, an
attempt failed, often because no one knew where the victim was. In 17
percent of the cases, rescuers found the victim and attempted a rescue, with
some initial response by the victim. In a quarter of the cases there was no
search for the victim until after the planned dive had been completed and it
was realized that the victim had not returned.

Resuscitation

In only 20 percent of the cases was the diver rescued within five minutes of
the incident. In another 12 percent, the diver was recovered within 5-15
minutes, theoretically giving a slight chance of recovery for these divers
had the rescue facilities been ideal and had fortune smiled brightly.

However, in ninety-one of 100 cases, resuscitation was not feasible; the
victims were obviously dead or showed no response to the rescuer. There was
an initial response to resuscitation in 7 percent and ineffectual
resuscitation was applied to 2 percent.
Near-Drowning Incidents

Most people who survived did so because they were rescued by their
companion, who was of considerable value when he reached the victim. For
surviving divers, the buddy was immediately available in 71 percent of the
cases. He assisted in 58 percent, and in 52 percent of the cases controlled
the diver's ascent. The buddy inflated the survivor's BC in 25 percent of
the cases, ditched the weight belt in 25 percent, supplied an independent
air source in 15 percent, and attempted buddybreathing in 4 percent. On the
surface, some form of artificial respiration or CPR was required in 29
percent of the cases. Oxygen was used in 52 percent of cases, which suggests
a sophisticated and organized diving activity.

Drowning Prevention

Drowning prevention required prefixed plans and action when an incident
occurs.

Before the Dive

Medical and physical fitness decreases the likelihood of physical impairment
or loss of consciousness or difficulty in handling unexpected conditions.
Adequate experience in the dive conditions increases the likelihood of a
successful dive. Use extreme caution with tidal currents, rough water, poor
visibility, enclosed areas, and excessive depths. To ensure neutral
buoyancy, avoiding being overweighted so as not to be too dependent on the
buoyancy compensator. Insufficient air may convert a problematical situation
into a dangerous one. It also forces the diver to experience surface
situations that are conducive to anxiety, fatigue, and saltwater aspiration.

Use traditional buddy diving practice: two divers swimming together. Solo
diving, even for part of the dive, is more likely to result in an
unsatisfactory outcome if there are diving problems. Divers who are
committed to the traditional buddy-diving practices are likely to survive
the more serious of the drowning syndromes.

If a problem develops, become positively buoyant. Drop weights and inflate
the BC. Buoyancy compensators cause problems in some emergencies and will
sometimes fail to provide the buoyancy required. Failure to remove the
weight belt during a diving incident continues to be the major omission and
must reflect on training standards. Inform your buddy before ascent. A good
buddy will automatically accompany an injured or vulnerable diver.

Rescue, first aid, and evacuation need to be planned before the dive.

A researcher at Brigham Young University asked 282 men and 162 women to rate
the perceived risk of several "high risk" sports and indicate the likelihood
of their participation in the sports. With zero being no risk and 10 being
extreme risk, men and women generally rated the risk the same. Rankings were
as follows:
Scuba diving ......................................... 4.0
Skiing ................................................... 4.5
Bungee jumping ................................... 6.1
Rock climbing ...................................... 6.6
Motorcycle racing ................................ 7.2
Hang gliding ........................................ 7.4
Cliff jumping ....................................... 7.8
Sky diving ............................................. 7.9

For the most part, the students said that the lower the risk of the sport,
the greater the likelihood they would participate in it. But in the real
world of diving, that finding doesn't translate into reality. You see, far
more people ski than dive, a fact that constantly bugs the honchos of the
Diving Equipment and Marketing Association. Could it be that the skiing
industry promotes their sport better than the diving industry? You bet. More
about that in the next issue. From Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1997, 85,
756-758, Author: Dr. Darhl M. Pedersen, Department of Psychology, Brigham
Young University, 1090 SWKT Provo, UT 84602

How Risky Is It?
What Does It All Mean?

This study raises several interesting questions about how both land-based
and live-aboard dive operations handle the buddy system. A solo diver on a
trip may not only question the value of an assigned dive buddy with little
dive experience; he may resent the additional responsibility that has been
assigned him as well. This in turn raises the issue of mixing novice divers
and experienced divers on the same boat as well as how to predetermine a
diver's skill level, all of which are complex issues. Proponents of solo
diving could argue that most drownings occur on the surface, where there may
be additional support available, and that the statistical incidents of
double drowning (when one diver attempts to help another and neither
survives) should have been reflected in this study as well. While denying or
repudiating buddy diving has become fashionable and innovative, implying
diving expertise, the data shown here definitely indicate that, in a
drowning situation, the value of a buddy is hard to deny. The truth is that
most of us are solo divers in the strictest sense of the term, lagging far
enough behind or engaging in an activity like photography where we're in
sight of our buddy only intermittently at best. In light of this research,
however, we may want to reconsider our solo diving habits in situations of
low visibility, high currents, deep dives, or other extreme conditions.


--
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]