Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
I did not keep the message refferring to the study, so this is only from my memory: Wasn't it said that Bennett _reported_ on the study ? So , if correct, he would not even need be directly related to this investigation, which seems, to my view, a bit obsolete. When a diver shows symptoms, and his history of decompression is known, then next steps/ measures are obvious. No need to treat someone with no symptoms. So , if this study even was on the right track, to what purpose I may question. If a diver showed symptoms, _then_ look into his liquids for bubbles, and, to decide _what exactly_, which would not have to be decided to begin with . Get a Heli _or not_ ? Throttle lLever down the dashboard _or not_ ? Report to the chamber _or not_ ? The mere idea gives me some chills, and a distinct notion to beware of quickshot medical reviews. Matthias Simon Naunton schrieb: > > >From: John.Brett@qu*.co* > >To: snaunton@ho*.co* > >Subject: RE: RE: detecting bends > >Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 04:42:19 -0500 > > > > > Because this is an forum for the discussion of technical > > > diving and another > > > diver made a statement I happened to disagree with on the > > > basis of the facts presented. > > > >I'm still struggling to work out what basis you have on > >which to express your disagreement. Do you have more > >knowledge than the WKPP about decompression? > > Errmm... no, and I haven't claimed to have. > > >Do you know > >Dr Bennett? > > Not personnally. How, apart from being a leader for you to name drop, is > this relevant? > > > > > > Strictly speaking, we are not talking about > > > decompression, we are > > > talking about the possibility of a simple method of > > > determining whether a diver has DCI or not. > > > >Ugh! It seems that you haven't understood G's comments. > >Detecting *venous* bubbles isn't the same as detecting > >a bend - a PFO makes a *big* difference to their significance. > >There's also far more going on at the sub-clinical level > >before you get visible symptoms, by which time the damage > >is done. > > So are you saying that once someone is bent then there is no point in > attempting treatment? > > I have sent this in a mail that has yet to appear on the list, but are these > venous bubbles? Could they not have been formed directly from gas in the > divers mask? > > > > > > > > Regardless of > > > > > the achievements you have made with the WKPP, which are > > > > > truly impressive, I > > > > > am more inclined to believe a doctor who specialises in > > > > > hyperbaric medicine than yourself. > > > > > > > >Your loss. > > > > > > Subjective. It could be considered you loss as well. > > > >I know how to deco, thanks to G. > > I too have learned from him. I reiterate that I am in no way challenging his > deco procedures. > > > > > > Not so sure. A prostitute would probably be able to give a > > > trick or two on > > > avoiding the clap, but a doctor would be far more likely to > > > be able to tell > > > you what is going on in the body with some degree of > > > accuracy. Similarly, > > > George and the WKPP are a wealth of information on deco > > > practice, however, > > > AFAIK none of them have spent enough time at med school, if > > > >Bill Mee is a doctor of microbiology (WKPP project engineer) > > Did he attended medical school? BTW I am not trying not to be provocative. > > > > > > any time at all, > > > to go up to a hyperbaric doctor and tell him he is wrong, > > > particularly with > > > the minute amount of information presented in the email. > > > >Dr Hamilton goes to the WKPP for advice... > > I thought the WKPP acted as test-ish subjects-ish? > > > > > > I read somewhere that George was a stock broker. I believe > > > that Dr Bennett > > > is very active in his field, both treating patients and > > > conducting research, so could hardly be called a theoretician. > > > >So just how much do you know about Dr Michael Bennett? > >Does he actually dive? > > Not much. I don't know. What is the relevence of whether he dives or not? > > > > > > By the same token though, I do not > > > believe that any of the WKPP have ever sold their bodies for > > > the sexual > > > gratification of another party, but I also have never met any > > > of them so > > > that is pure speculation. > > > >Speculation appears to form the basis of your arguments. > >Not the best basis on which to work. > >I've tested G's decompression strategy to the best of > >my ability, so I have a little more basis than speculation > >on which to rate G's opinions over a doctor of whom I've > >never heard. > > As I have already said, I am not challenging G's decompression strategy - I > am not in the position to do that, just his rubbishing of Dr Bennetts study > based on the information contained in one paragraph written by a newspaper > journalist. > > > > > > >Personally, I'd rather listen to someone who bets his > > > >life on the outcome, rather than one who bets a published > > > >paper. > > > > > > True, but this is not really relevant in this context. > > > > > > With apparently 0 incidents of DCI amongst WKPP members, how > > > much experience > > > does the WKPP have with DCI compared with a hyperbaric > > > doctor? > > > >Sigh. You obviously have *no* idea about the WKPP. > >The US Navy come to the WKPP for decompression advice, and > >have sent their hyperbaric doctors to examine WKPP divers > >after diving. > > Your point being? They have loads of experience at DCI avoidence. > > > > > > Bottom line: > > > Have the WKPP studied the formation of bubbles in the tear > > > film of the human > > > eye due to changes in ambient pressure? Probably not. Has Dr > > > Bennett? Yes. > > > >The relevance being...? > > The relevence being that Dr Bennett has studied it and concluded that > subjects with 20-30 bubbles in the tear film of their eyes also had DCI and > those with 2-3 did not. G & the WKPP, AFAIK, have not studied this, so how > can G justify his statement that it is bullshit - but I guess that you > cannot answer that John. > > > > >The issue is not so much whether additional bubbles appear in > >the tear film after diving, but the interpretation & relevance > >of the findings. Just finding bubbles isn't the same as DCI, > >which isn't the same as needing treatment. > > I think that you are looking at this from the wrong angle. I don't believe > that Dr Bennett even implies that these bubbles are the cause or part of the > damaging part of DCI, there are simply 20-30 bubbles with subjects with DCI > and 2-3 with subjects without, therefore, the possiblity exists for an easy > test. > > > > >John > > _________________________________________________________________ > Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. > http://www.hotmail.com > > -- > 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]