DiverGuard looks for skeptics bloggers/reporters

Please register or login

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

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

All I know is that if I have to listen to one of these things while diving, AGE from an unintended, uncontrolled ascent will be the last of that diver's worries.
 
All I know is that if I have to listen to one of these things while diving, AGE from an unintended, uncontrolled ascent will be the last of that diver's worries.



I wonder how many chickens they had to strangle to find "the one."
 
Not to mention...the typical failure of the new diver, will be OOA.... My guess is that OOA will cause this Diverguard to fail as well.
The percentage of divers going in to resperatory distress on a scuba dive has to be incredibly low.

And is the other message from Diverguard, that it is OK to be diving with a serious respiratory condition? And that this person should also be diving solo??
 
No preconceived ideas about "something that auto inflates" - I run a blog, but count me out. In 22 years of diving, I've seen just about every possible bit of scuba kit fail at one time or another. I have very firm ideas about "something that auto inflates" and the inherent risk it poses.

Also, my high-end hearing is quite damaged. I don't hear computer alarms etc. If I tested this, I'd probably get myself hurt badly - especially given that I use alternative breathing sources frequently (gizmo would think I stopped breathing and unilaterally eject me from depth) and occasionally perform tasks under-water that are strenous (gizmo would 'launch me' for such behavior).

I wouldn't hear the device either, if a student/customer were wearing it. That undermines my duty-of-care. For that reason, I wouldn't allow one to be used on any training courses. It'd be a liability.

My other causes for concern with this equipment premise:

1. Diver stopped breathing for 30 seconds:

a. DiverGuard alerts the diver and his buddy for 20 seconds using visual and audible alarms

b. If the diver or his buddy does not press the reset button to cancel the alarm:

- DiverGuard inflates the buoyancy compensator and brings the diver to the surface

Diver runs OOA. They share air (device registers 'not breathing'). Diver is stressed and overloaded with immediate concerns. Begins air-sharing ascent. Having risen a few meters... POOOFFF! Device auto-inflates and carries diver rapidly to the surface, risking DCI. In doing so, the rapidly ascending diver is torn away from air-donor buddy. Diver drowns en-route to the surface.

2. Diver’s breathing exhibits signs of overexertion (rapid and shallow):

a. DiverGuard alerts the diver and his buddy for 2 minutes, The main purpose of the alarm is to get the diver’s and their buddy’s attention that there is a lapse in normal breathing.

b. If the diver does not press on the reset button to cancel the alarm:

- DiverGuard inflates the buoyancy compensator and brings the diver to the surface

1) Diver gets into distress inside a wreck. He is breathing heavily. In low visibility and high task-loading he cannot swiftly find the reset button. POOOOFFF! Diver is auto-inflated and trapped against an overhead ceiling. He drowns.

2) Diver is working hard in current. Due to bubble noise he fails to here the alarm, or doesn't immediately recognize it's significance. POOOOOFFFF! Off to the chamber...

3) Diver is effecting a rescue of an incapacitated buddy. Stress causes an increase in his respiration. POOOFFFF! Diver is torn away to the surface. His buddy, now without aid, drowns..



I could go on.... there's an unfathomable number of reasons this is a very flawed concept.
 
Hi


I Will try to answer the questions above:
1. The battery is replaceable. we are using 9V lithium battery but every 9V battery will be fine for the device.
2. We prefer that just diving clubs and shops will replace the battery because not every diver knows how to seal the device with the o-rings. But any handy man can do it himself.
3. We have several videos in the web... the real alert period is 20 seconds.
4. There are scenarios that the DiverGuard will not help you like air sharing, but we developed it for the common scenarios.
5. the underwater sound doesn’t sound like a goose… that’s the underwater recording limitation.
6. In case that diver has hearing problems - he can still see the visual alert, but I agree that he should consider again if he should dive with the DiverGuard.
7. In case that the diver breathe heavily the DiverGuard will probably not alert because its not like overexertion breathing. BUT even if he will breath heavily and the DiverGuard will start to alert - the diver has 2 MINUTES before the inflation will start so it is not POOFFF!​

Thank you all for your comments.
DiverGuard
 
Let's get this clear... your proposed device, the "DiverGuard" implements an UNCONTROLLED (HIGHLY) BUOYANT ASCENT, exceeding maximum safe ascent rates, as a response to several emergency scenarios.

Such a response is neither taught, nor recommended, by any scuba training agency or body.

In addition, your proposed device automatically initiates that uncontrolled buoyant ascent without demanding any user input. It removes the decision making process from the diver. It is not their action/input that implements the dangerous ascent - it is your device.

A lack of user input to abort the device in sufficient time does not signify their acceptance to conduct an uncontrolled buoyant ascent, nor to exceed safe ascent speeds.

Your device, hence your company, should thus retain entire liability for any consequences resulting from divers being subject to uncontrolled buoyant ascents which exceed mandated safe ascent rates...and, in doing so, failing to follow any training or direction given by scuba training agencies or bodies.

... the real alert period is 20 seconds.

In short, when the diver faces a time of crisis, elevated stress and high task loading, the device further adds to that crisis by creating the need to prioritize a time-critical response (de-activate auto-inflate) in addition to/in preference to the existing emergency protocols they are already having to implement.

If, for some reason, they fail to prioritize that time critical response to nullify the device, they will be carried to the surface at full buoyancy - exceeding all safe ascent rates and presenting significant risk of DCI.

4. There are scenarios that the DiverGuard will not help you like air sharing, but we developed it for the common scenarios.

The scenarios listed on your website include: (1) The diver not breathing; and (2) Elevated respiration rates. Neither of these are "common" scenarios.

- No common or reasonable scenarios would dictate a fully-buoyant uncontrolled ascent to the surface.

- No agency or WRSTC approved training approves a fully buoyant uncontrolled ascent as response to any underwater emergency.

- No agency recommends/approves exceeding a safe ascent rate (9-18m/per minute) under any circumstances (including controlled buoyant emergency ascents).

6. In case that diver has hearing problems - he can still see the visual alert, but I agree that he should consider again if he should dive with the DiverGuard.

Does that include temporary hearing problems? (bubble noise)

Does that include potential to confuse 'Diverguard' alarm with other alarms (dive computers) that may be functioning in the course of an emergency?

7. In case that the diver breathe heavily the DiverGuard will probably not alert because its not like overexertion breathing. BUT even if he will breath heavily and the DiverGuard will start to alert - the diver has 2 MINUTES before the inflation will start

What is your calculation of overexertion breathing? Litre or Bar per minute from tank? Is that depth/ata compensated?

Why would overexertion require response by uncontrolled buoyant ascent? To what industry/agency/body approved/consensus emergency protocol are you referring?

SERIOUS QUESTIONS:

Will your company require purchasers to sign any declaration of understanding and/or liability consent regarding uncontrolled buoyant ascents and exceeding safe ascent speeds at time of purchase and/or prior to use?

Will your company provide further liabilities/declarations with the device for subsequent completion by users other than the initial purchaser?

Will your company be holding liability insurance to defer risk of any legal actions raised by users, or other persons, should the device cause them, or contribute to, injury?

Has your company sought, or received, the approval of any scuba training, governance or research body for the conduct of uncontrolled fully-buoyant ascents and/or the resulting ascent speeds to which the diver will be subjected?

Does your device provide the diver with the option to abort the uncontrolled ascent once it has been initiated?

Does your company provide any user training, or require any such training, prior to the device being used? If so, does is that training approved by any scuba training agency?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for your very detailed response. Its clear that DiverGuard very interest you so i will try to answer a detailed answers as well.


... the "DiverGuard" implements an UNCONTROLLED (HIGHLY) BUOYANT ASCENT, exceeding maximum safe ascent rates, as a response to several emergency scenarios.


Such a response is neither taught, nor recommended, by any scuba training agency or body.


Rapid ascent is very recommended in case that the diver isn't breathing and unconscious underwater.


In addition, your proposed device automatically initiates that uncontrolled buoyant ascent without demanding any user input. It removes the decision making process from the diver. It is not their action/input that implements the dangerous ascent - it is your device.


My assumption is still that unconscious diver should be brought to the surface without any input from his side. till today it was just his buddy to do it, but the buddy not always aware to the diver condition.


A lack of user input to abort the device in sufficient time does not signify their acceptance to conduct an uncontrolled buoyant ascent, nor to exceed safe ascent speeds.


We did many tests and 20 seconds is sufficient time to abort the device.


Your device, hence your company, should thus retain entire liability for any consequences resulting from divers being subject to uncontrolled buoyant ascents which exceed mandated safe ascent rates...and, in doing so , failing to follow any training or direction given by scuba training agencies or bodies.


The DiverGuard does not replace any standard diving instruction. It is like the airbags in car, it doesn't mean that you can drive in a dangerous way.




In short, when the diver faces a time of crisis, elevated stress and high task loading, the device further adds to that crisis by creating the need to prioritize a time-critical response (de-activate auto-inflate) in addition to/in preference to the existing emergency protocols they are already having to implement.


In case that the diver is in stress and the DiverGuard alert him, it probably in case that he is in overexertion situation. in this case the diver has 2 minutes to cancel the alarm before surfacing .






The scenarios listed on your website include: (1) The diver not breathing; and (2) Elevated respiration rates. Neither of these are "common" scenarios.


when i wrote a common scenario i refer to the situation when the DiverGuard should detect an emergency, not to the situation that it should monitor.


- No common or reasonable scenarios would dictate a fully-buoyant uncontrolled ascent to the surface.


- No agency or WRSTC approved training approves a fully buoyant uncontrolled ascent as response to any underwater emergency.


- No agency recommends/approves exceeding a safe ascent rate (9-18m/per minute) under any circumstances (including controlled buoyant emergency ascents).


Today any (or almost any) Medical Doctor (and we are working with several) will tell you to surface unconscious diver to the surface immediately and continue the care on surface.




Does that include temporary hearing problems? (bubble noise)


The bubble noise and the bubbles themselves just help to attract the diver.


Does that include potential to confuse 'Diverguard' alarm with other alarms (dive computers) that may be functioning in the course of an emergency?


The DiverGuard sound is very different and much loud than other electronic alarm.






What is your calculation of overexertion breathing? Litre or Bar per minute from tank? Is that depth/ata compensated?


Please take a look at: DiverGuard » Product




Why would overexertion require response by uncontrolled buoyant ascent? To what industry/agency/body approved/consensus emergency protocol are you referring?


As i wrote above, in overexertion situation the ascent started just after 2 minutes. during this long time his buddy should help him.


SERIOUS QUESTIONS:


Will your company require purchasers to sign any declaration of understanding and/or liability consent regarding uncontrolled buoyant ascents and exceeding safe ascent speeds at time of purchase and/or prior to use?


We ask all the users to read the manual before the use. in addition the most important point will be printed on the box.


Will your company provide further liabilities/declarations with the device for subsequent completion by users other than the initial purchaser?


We cant control who will pass the DiverGuard and to whom... i hope that any user will read the manual. The manual will be soon also in our website.


Will your company be holding liability insurance to defer risk of any legal actions raised by users, or other persons, should the device cause them, or contribute to, injury?


YES, we do have liability insurance.


Has your company sought, or received, the approval of any scuba training, governance or research body for the conduct of uncontrolled fully-buoyant ascents and/or the resulting ascent speeds to which the diver will be subjected?


We are in contact with several bodies... It will take time till one of them will change their instructions for using DiverGuard.


Does your device provide the diver with the option to abort the uncontrolled ascent once it has been initiated?


Pressing the reset button aborting the ascent also after it has been initiated.


Does your company provide any user training, or require any such training, prior to the device being used? If so, does is that training approved by any scuba training agency?


We will not provide user training like regulators manufacturers does not provide training. We will encourage any instructor to use and teach about the DiverGuard also. The bottom line is that it is not different than any BC inflator... and if it malfunction the response should be also like to any inflator's malfunctioning.
 
Rapid ascent is very recommended in case that the diver isn't breathing and unconscious underwater.

Incorrect. I am an instructor with 4 different scuba agencies. I have received high-level training for a further 2 agencies. I have detailed knowledge of several other agencies instructor and teaching procedures. None of those agencies advocates a "rapid ascent" for any diving emergency. Neither do DAN, nor any other diving or medical research body.

I would be interested to know where you are citing your 'recommendations' from? Which agency or body?

My assumption is still that unconscious diver should be brought to the surface without any input from his side. till today it was just his buddy to do it, but the buddy not always aware to the diver condition.

Divers are adequately trained in appropriate rescue and recovery techniques. Most novice divers are also routinely accompanied and/or supervised by professional dive staff.

The scuba training agencies teach appropriate techniques for Out-Of-Gas emergencies, panic and exertion. These have resulted in very high safety levels for recreational/sport diving.

Your device does not bring up an 'unconscious' diver. It brings up any diver who over-breathes and/or is not breathing from their primary gas source.

We did many tests and 20 seconds is sufficient time to abort the device.

Then your tests were flawed and unrealistic. Most importantly, they were unrepresentative of the victim divers' psychological stressors, task-loading and ability to respond to stimulus.

Have you had any independent tests conducted in realistic scenarios?

The DiverGuard does not replace any standard diving instruction. It is like the airbags in car, it doesn't mean that you can drive in a dangerous way.

They aren't like airbags in a car - because airbags in a car cannot initiate before the vehicle is already arrested/impacted. Neither do airbags over-ride/interfere with the safe response of a motorist to emergencies they encounter.

If you applied your product theory to vehicle airbags, they would initiate whenever the programming felt an accident 'might' happen, based on non-specific inputs. Rather than when it actually did.

In case that the diver is in stress and the DiverGuard alert him, it probably in case that he is in overexertion situation. in this case the diver has 2 minutes to cancel the alarm before surfacing .

Being in distress, or over-ventilating, is NOT an emergency in itself. It may only be a sign of emergency.

In contrast, rapid, unwanted and uncontrolled ascent to the surface is an emergency and is likely to cause harm.

when i wrote a common scenario i refer to the situation when the DiverGuard should detect an emergency, not to the situation that it should monitor.

It does not detect an emergency. It detects that the diver has stopped breathing from the monitored air-source and/or has elevated respiration. Neither of those criteria are, uin themselves, emergencies and neither could only be indicative of an emergency.

Today any (or almost any) Medical Doctor (and we are working with several) will tell you to surface unconscious diver to the surface immediately and continue the care on surface.

1) Surface immediate IS NOT THE SAME as 'surface rapidly, without control and beyond safe ascent speeds'.

2) Most medical doctors have little clue about diving emergencies. I know, I married one.

3) Every scuba agency and diving medical doctor will absolutely caution against uncontrolled rapid ascent, under any circumstance.

The bubble noise and the bubbles themselves just help to attract the diver.

I have no idea what this means, but I don't think your sexual predilections have any place in this debate.

The DiverGuard sound is very different and much loud than other electronic alarm.

1) Doesn't matter if someone has hearing loss.

2) Doesn't matter if someone is too task-overloaded to recognize or respond to the alarm.

3) Doesn't matter if another diver hears the alarm and has no idea what it is.

We ask all the users to read the manual before the use. in addition the most important point will be printed on the box.

Insufficient, given your product can cause death or serious injury.

We cant control who will pass the DiverGuard and to whom... i hope that any user will read the manual. The manual will be soon also in our website.

Insufficient, given your product can cause death or serious injury.

YES, we do have liability insurance.

Keep on top of the premiums, you are likely to need them.

We are in contact with several bodies... It will take time till one of them will change their instructions for using DiverGuard.

Name those bodies.

Pressing the reset button aborting the ascent also after it has been initiated.

Your device will immediately exhaust the positive buoyancy and re-gain neutral buoyancy for the diver upon press of a button?

How?

We will not provide user training like regulators manufacturers does not provide training.

All scuba divers are trained on the use of a regulator. They are not trained on the use of your device. Your device is supplemental, not core, scuba equipment.

Regulator manufacturers clearly state "Do not use this product without appropriate training and qualification". They do so in the knowledge that such training is commonly available.

What training is commonly available for your product? On what scuba courses does it feature as skill performance requirements?

The bottom line is that it is not different than any BC inflator...

That is BS.

if it malfunction the response should be also like to any inflator's malfunctioning.

Out of interest, what do you think that response is?
 
I think the bottom line is that this is the worst idea for a scuba product so far. If the manufacturer's intentions were really to save lives, the device would need to be coupled with pressure sensors and mechanisms designed to control ascent speed, or stop it when the reset button is pressed. Of course such mechanisms would make this piece of equipment expensive and warrant its commercial failure.
It will be interesting to see how many people are silly enough to pledge any money to this endeavor...
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/teric/

Back
Top Bottom