Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
rec.scuba.fighting.ultimatefighting.mineisbiggerthanyours.goodolddays
rec.scuba.fighting.ultimatefighting.mineisbiggerthanyours.goodolddays
Agree.
This thread turns out be another BS. WKPP and GUE... Who cares on this subject?
I've know Bill for over twenty years, we've worked together on any number of programs and I've yet to hear of (or read of) his "major role in the US Navy table." I know that the WKPP dives presented him (and the snake eater types) with a testing ground that they couldn't pass up and would never have been able to push through a Human Subjects Committee.Bob,
The tens of thousands of man hours involved in the development of WKPP tables, represents considerably more than you are crediting it...this and the population of over 100 divers....
And as Dr Bill Hamilton had a major role in the US Navy table, he also had a major role in the developement of the WKPP tables...
I agreeIf you want to get on a high horse about safety--the "shame on you" stuff you just pushed on me in the last post..then start screaming at PADI, NAUI and the other major agencies, along with all the "agents of safety" such as yourself--for the shameful disregard for safety that ignoring PFO's in the general population of divers, represents.
Push the concept all you want, divers in good shape are likely at lower risk for any number of reasons, but please be intellectually honest and point out that there is no data to support any relationship between high VO2 max and "better" offgassing. In point of fact, there is a good theoretical argument that divers with a high VO2 max may take up more nitrogen.For all practical purposes, you can figure about a quarter of all the people your preferred agencies take in each month, have PFO's...this far more irresponsible, than my discussing tables which were created in a population which was selected for no PFO and for reasonably high VO2 max...
Oh, and good job getting me interested in helping you in your continueing interest related to the topic you just highlighted.....I'll be in a huge rush to help
Dan
I would not rest easy on that withered and dried laurel. Regardless of your belief system, intellectual honesty, once again, requires that it be pointed out that there is no data to support the concept.And....don't forget a huge part of the WKPP contribution in dive tables and deco, has to do with the method of ascending in a horizontal posture....I think Bill Mee wrote a good article on the reason hydrostatic lung loading made vertical posture ascending highly ineffective, for the lungs to filter out bubbles....this is a major contribution to all divers regardless of whether they are tech or recreational.
An excellent way for any us to spend our spare time.George , Bill and I did a DIR 3 video, aimed squarely at recreational divers, and the GUE Fundies type classes are also related to showing how better skills can make recreational diving safer and more fun.
It makes theoretical sense that a high VO2max might be indicative of faster offgassing (and uptake to that matter). I'll have to read Carturan's paper to see what it actually says. Several items in the abstract give me pause (e.g., I'd have preferred to have had a non-diving control group and to be sure that the Doppler operator was blind with respect to the which of the then three groups were being looked at).
VO 2 max and DCS
That's the $64K question for me ... we've all know big, beer-belly types that were seemingly unbendable. Why?Bubble Formation Tendency
Why some individuals are bubble formation resistant and others are formation prone is unknown. It is my feeling that bubble formation tendency is the biggest factor in DCS [after gas loading] and unfortunately we know little about it.
This is fascinating, could you expand on it? Also what difference would the slight pressure head difference in the pulmonary cavity when rotated from vertical to horizontal make? Do you buy the alveolar collapse explanation?WKPP Decompression
I have mentioned several times over the years that I believe the effective decompression with WKPP is the result of buoyancy in the water for the whole of the decompression. This is similar to decompression on orbit and the lack of musculoskeletal stress decreases tissue microbubble formation and a drop in DCS incidence. In space, this is about a five-fold to ten-fold reduction [depending on the analysis method].