JonnieB
Contributor
Why...8 out of 10 diver deaths I read about the person was on CCR. It's a striking correlation, no?
Pompano Beach Fatality Sunday April 16th
- Thread starter tekkydiver
- Start date
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
Uh, no. Correlation is not causation.
For example, ice cream sales and shark attacks correlate positively at a beach. As ice cream sales increase, there are more shark attacks. However, common sense tells us that ice cream sales do not cause shark attacks. Hence, it's a spurious correlation.
A growing number of technical divers use CCR because of the cost of Helium. Technical diving is inherently riskier, while CCR has gotten progressively safer in the past decade.
You may be right, but your assumption is flawed.
I see many more reports of tropical vacation diver deaths than I see reports of CCR deaths.
mderrick
Contributor
- Messages
- 112
- Reaction score
- 302
- Location
- Pompano Beach, Florida USA
- # of dives
- I just don't log dives
Quoting from ... Rebreather Training
"At Rebreather Forum 3 held in 2012, statistics were presented which suggest closed circuit rebreather diving is five to ten times higher risk than open circuit scuba. Some of the statistical increase may be due to rebreathers enabling divers to attempt extreme dive profiles which are themselves inherently higher risk than dive profiles attempted on open circuit. Many experts were of the opinion a lack of experience, along with inadequate and poor quality training, has been a widespread problem in the rebreather community.
Subsequently, The Rebreather Education & Safety Association (RESA) and the Rebreather Training Council (RTC) were formed. These organizations are not training agencies; they are consortiums of rebreather manufacturers, dive training agencies, and knowledgeable individuals who have established recommendations for a student to learn how to properly use their rebreather. RESA guidelines were published in 2018 to help address findings of inadequate training and rapid progression of training that are too often apparent in dive accidents. All major training agencies have updated their training standards and policies to align with the RESA guidelines. The Combined Rebreather Industry Standards Alignment Group (CRISAG) was formed in January 2019 to allow discussions between RESA and RTC delegates, with the aim of creating harmonized standards for the training of rebreather divers. CRISAG now works closely on the process of developing ISO Standards for rebreather diver training. While it might be too early to correlate the effect of these various efforts, data compiled by DAN and presented at RF4 held 2023 suggests there has been no statistically significant improvement in rebreather diving safety in the previous 10 years.
No rebreather is foolproof, and the fact remains that compared to open circuit there is a disproportionate number of rebreather fatalities, most of which have ultimately been attributed to diver error. "
"At Rebreather Forum 3 held in 2012, statistics were presented which suggest closed circuit rebreather diving is five to ten times higher risk than open circuit scuba. Some of the statistical increase may be due to rebreathers enabling divers to attempt extreme dive profiles which are themselves inherently higher risk than dive profiles attempted on open circuit. Many experts were of the opinion a lack of experience, along with inadequate and poor quality training, has been a widespread problem in the rebreather community.
Subsequently, The Rebreather Education & Safety Association (RESA) and the Rebreather Training Council (RTC) were formed. These organizations are not training agencies; they are consortiums of rebreather manufacturers, dive training agencies, and knowledgeable individuals who have established recommendations for a student to learn how to properly use their rebreather. RESA guidelines were published in 2018 to help address findings of inadequate training and rapid progression of training that are too often apparent in dive accidents. All major training agencies have updated their training standards and policies to align with the RESA guidelines. The Combined Rebreather Industry Standards Alignment Group (CRISAG) was formed in January 2019 to allow discussions between RESA and RTC delegates, with the aim of creating harmonized standards for the training of rebreather divers. CRISAG now works closely on the process of developing ISO Standards for rebreather diver training. While it might be too early to correlate the effect of these various efforts, data compiled by DAN and presented at RF4 held 2023 suggests there has been no statistically significant improvement in rebreather diving safety in the previous 10 years.
No rebreather is foolproof, and the fact remains that compared to open circuit there is a disproportionate number of rebreather fatalities, most of which have ultimately been attributed to diver error. "
mderrick
Contributor
- Messages
- 112
- Reaction score
- 302
- Location
- Pompano Beach, Florida USA
- # of dives
- I just don't log dives
There is little justification for doubting the qualifications and experience of Mr Citelli, but humans do make mistakes and equipment does fail. If the earlier mention that he experienced an LOC during or shortly after descent is accurate then that is consistent with hypoxia due the loop PO2 not being maintained. Given the scant information available, there is also little justification for assuming an equipment failure or diver error.
seanbarnes01
New
Who the hell cares what he was diving. He was a great diver and better friend. Questioning his skill shows a lack of respect. I would like to rember him as the New York diver with great stories.
Mistakes and equipment failures happen to everyone no matter the skill level and pretending some people are to good to fail does a disservice to everyone else.
I hope we get some details so we can know if this was preventable.
No informed and educated scuba diver - and certainly no rebreather diver - would state that CCR does not have risks far beyond those associated with open circuit. While there are a few circumstances where a rebreather is a safety advantage, I would admit that looking at the overall picture, no one dives CCR because it’s safer. And just like in cave diving, people who do this type of diving and the organizations who train people to do it have adopted far more stringent standards than seen in the “check it out, it’s fun!” world of resort discover diving, But even with these guardrails, accidents can and do happen to even the most capable and experienced divers (as seems to have been the case here).
Furthermore, it’s difficult to use statistics to compare relative risks, since the average rebreather dive is “bigger” than the average OC dive in 2023. Since rebreather divers are doing dives that are inherently more dangerous no matter what gear is used, so it’s not scientifically sound to just compare per dive fatality rates. And there are some dives that are no longer commonly done on open circuit at all, as CCR has opened up new horizons of diving. Orbital flights attempted by rocket have resulted in more casualties than orbital flights attempted by trebuchet launch, but that doesn’t mean that the trebuchet is safer.
But my response to your post wasn’t meant to argue the case that rebreathers are safer than open circuit. The point of this forum is to learn from accidents and make us all better divers by exploring known aspects of the accident as well as appropriate hypotheticals. I don't feel that your post does that.
Now there are some forms of diving that people may feel are SO unsafe that they should never be undertaken by anyone. I personally feel that way about depth records, and I have said so in these threads on many occasions. If you feel the same way about CCR, I guess it’s your right to make that claim. That CCR is SO inherently dangerous that it should never be used by anyone, and the root cause of any CCR accident is the CCR. That there is no reason to look into the specific details of the dive, since anyone choosing CCR is doomed from the beginning, and the details are irrelevant.
So if you are making that case, I guess it’s your right. Certainly not a TOS violation.
That's the long form version of “can you not”.
Similar threads
