Mailing List Archive Mailing List Archive
George, why don't you read the entire post. The study was real we did score what we did and if you read the conclusions it states that the threat of narcosis is real. It states one cannot respond to multitask functioning, it then gives a comparision to booze just to drive the point home. It seems 90% of the peopole who reads this get the message that it is stating you do not develop a tolerance. What I refer to ad adaption is that you become used to the feeling of being imparied. AND yes on a single function performance most anyone I know who dives deep can do it. They are still at high risk because they do not have a tolerance they have some limted behavioural modification. You know this from your own experience. I thought that using the example of people who were actively diving deep who really beleived they were tolerannt anf then showing the results that proved we could not respond to multitask problem solving really drove the point home that there is no true tolerance to narcosis. I went on to say that this study was the first to make me become respectful of narcosis. George, I'm showing real life data old or not it was factual and measurable and proved beyond the shadow of a doubt there is no tolerance to narcosis. Ther is an adaptation to feeling imparied and the ability to single focus ones mind on a specific objective. The data reflected clearly that when the s-- hits the fan the ability to respond is quite doubtful. I even used the if you arte in a cave or wreck it would be quite challenging if at all possible to reason your way out when imparied with narcosis. WHAT is the problem you have with what I wrote if anything it supports your position. I use this in classes and all students digest it as showing the real problem and threat narcosis reflects towards a divers safety. You are the first I 'v seen that took it to mean one can handle narcosis. Tom Mount You wrote: > > > There is an article on one of the other lists >that tells the real story on inert gas narcosis, >written by David Doolitte. This completely refutes >what Tom Mount just put out. I suggest you persuade >Doolitte to put it on here. The half-baked 35 year >old study to which Tom refers has long since been >supplanted by hard fact. > Based on my college board scores, I should be >able to beat most people in math skills at 500 feet >on air, but it would not be my best. When my life is >on the line, I want my best. When my life is on the >line , I want my buddy's best, not what he "thinks" he >can "handle". > This is one of the reasons we only let certain >people cave dive at Wakulla. We have no helium analyzer, >and will not deal with the possiblity that someone >may think they are "good deep on air". The last guy >who argued narcosis depth with me will never dive the >cave. > Get over it , Tom, and everyone else - it ain't so. > - George Irvine >-- >Send mail for the `techdiver' mailing list to `techdiver@terra.net'. >Send subscription/archive requests to `techdiver-request@terra.net'. >
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]