A deceptively easy way to die

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!

Neither do I. However, if you actually look at the link, you'll see that every site description also has an English (well, Google Translate English) description.


Did you miss my point that that video was shot in exactly the same cave where four divers died quite uncomfortably back in 2012? Hard to tell how dangerous that cave is, eh?
No, I got that, it just wasn't germaine to the point I was trying to make. Cave diving CAN be dangerous, some do die, the message to be careful about cave diving (includes training) is important. To my point, the way risk is discussed on SB and in particular in the Basic forum, might also be worth considering.

On the off-chance that a diver deviates from the standards of super-safe, no one ever gets hurt, sport diving... they put their heads just inside a cave (or wreck, or coral overhang, or bit more depth that they're trained for) they can die.
To say that diving is safe or can be safe is a fallacy.
This kind of melodramatic hyperbole is why it's difficult to have productive discussions about topics like this. For the most part - and I mean a really really large part - diving is safe and in fact quite easy to make almost perfectly safe, and it's almost unheard of (sure, there are exceptions that prove the rule) for anyone to die from putting their heads just inside a cave. Or even their whole body. Even by several body lengths.

If you love to harp on the dangers, the onus should be on you to specify the dimensions under which the way YOU dive is dangerous, or what exact aspects you see to have introduced danger. "Underwater" or "overhead" just doesn't express it.

IMO the kind of click-bait FUD spamming that started this post is of limited value and may be detrimental overall.

If you could just step out of an underwater cave when things got dicey, the video in OP wouldn't seem so pertinent either. The problem is that one cannot.
But most of the time, one can indeed just leave the situation.

Let's make a quick test. Ask your *non diving* friends about seeing an underwater cave and *itemizing* potential dangers. I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that exactly zero will list stirring up silt and not being able to find the way out. That's enough to sink (no pun intended) the theory that "going into underwater caves is a self-evident risk."
That final non-sequitur aside, this is a good point that is indeed not going to be intuitive to many or most divers. It's also not going to be pertinent to all dives into an overhead environment, even cave.

To be fair, I see and partially agree with your point of view about not scaring new divers, but I think there is a better way of showing how safe OW diving is than pretending risks in certain environments don't exist.
That wasn't being done that I can recall. To the contrary it's more often presented as the risks are there, and always extreme regardless of context.
The problem is to define "under the similar conditions" when pitfalls are not obvious and where common sense *outside the water* is significantly different from what happens *inside the water.*
Someone earlier made this same odd assertion regarding walking into a cave seeming just like swimming into one. Being underwater imposes it's own sense of alien environment and danger, I just don't buy that people are not more cautious about doing things underwater. Fear of drowning is a powerful motivator, and hard to quell for many.

When I got my Private Pilot's license, it was made clear by both my instructors and by the check pilot/designated examiner that it was a "license to learn" and that exceeding my training, experience or skill level was a good way to get dead.

You'll find similar warnings in skydiving, paragliding, hang gliding, ultralight flying, or any other sport that is serious about self policing itself to avoid having the government step in with greater limitations and regulations.
And for good reason. The outcomes in those sports are obviously going to be of a more binary nature with respect to injury and death than rec scuba. This would be more akin to going on a bicycling forum and constantly being harangued about the dangers.

---------- Post added December 4th, 2015 at 10:00 AM ----------

If they recognized the inherent danger, then why did they go?

"Maybe they just trusted the pro?" Only one person is responsible for your safety and that is you! This is a maxim that I was taught in my OW class. If you weren't then your training was deficient. No ... you don't just put your trust in a "pro" ... many of those people have amazingly little experience. You DO know that you can become a divemaster with as little as 60 dives, and relatively little experience outside of a classroom ... right?

Do you REALLY just put your trust in a person with that much expertise? The DM who led those people in Italy to their deaths had zero ... ZERO ... overhead training. How much did he know about the potential dangers before he took them in there? Obviously, not enough ... or they wouldn't have died.

The irony ... or perhaps tragedy ... is that the majority of divers in the world DO put their trust in someone they never even met before they started their vacation. They know NOTHING about this person, and yet they "just trusted the pro". In scuba diving, that's a great way to end up dead.

Maybe instead you should learn to rely on your own sense of self-preservation. But that would require you to first develop one ... and that starts with the acknowledgement that you're in an environment where ignorance could kill you quick, and maybe you should do something to reduce your level of ignorance rather than relying on a total stranger to keep you safe.


In recreational endeavors where ignorance and inattention can kill you quick? Absolutely it's common. Try skydiving or rock climbing sometime. They'll certainly make you aware of how easy inattention can kill you, and why it's important to take responsibility for your own safety. Or do you suppose that a skydiving instructor will tell you that it's OK to just let a "pro" pack your chute for you?


Great example of how not understanding the dangers can lead to emphasis on the wrong things. Being within sight of daylight is all well and good until somebody kicks up the bottom to the point where you can't see the daylight anymore. Then ... which way to you go to get out?

What do you suppose killed those people?

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
I wholeheartedly agree that taking charge of your own safety is no one else's responsibility, and that as a corollary entrusting your life to a pro should be done with a great degree of informed skepticism. Yet exactly what is flogged here day in and day out is to seek out professionals, just make sure it's a good one.

If the point is that on the one hand you need more training *from a professional*, this cert and that cert *from a professional*, mentoring and guidance *from a professional* - and that is pretty much the ONLY way advancement is presented by the professionals on this board, and on the other "oh, don't forget, taking a professional's advice will get you killed", the whole concept and messaging behind this self-policing needs reworking. The professionals part I mean. Maybe the irony wasn't so obvious as I thought.

Also, skydiving and rock climbing are terrible analogies to rec scuba.
 
skydiving and rock climbing are terrible analogies to rec scuba.
They are?

While I agree that there are very few good reasons for stepping out of a perfectly functioning plane while it's in the air and that skydiving is difficult to do without a significant risk, I assume that you aren't aware that rock climbing (and mountaineering) can be performed at risk levels ranging from "about as safe as a walk in the park" to "suicidal". So I would claim that rock climbing is a pretty good safety analogy to scuba. I don't think that the fact that one is high up, the other is deep down is particularly relevant here.
 
I've always tended toward hobbies that have obvious risks, not because I like risk, but because I like fun and risk often seems to come along for the ride. Without exception, safety has always been emphasized in whatever training there's been, and is always a frequent topic of conversation among fellow enthusiasts. There can be REALLY heavy emphasis on safety and it never comes across as, "Pursue this sport and you're gonna die! Run away while you still can!" It comes across as "Here's how to make sure it keeps being fun, because getting hurt is not fun."

I'm realizing right now that it's only in diving that I keep hearing concern about scaring the newbies away. Everywhere else, it seems to be taken for granted that it's about making the newbies as well-prepared as possible so they can have the best experience and enjoy the sport for a very long time. I find it weird that we would treat diving any differently.
 
The reality is many activities can be relatively safe when performed by those with a high level of skills and training. Unfortunately, many people newer to these activities have neither and often quickly belief themselves to be much better than they are. This is when the activities quickly become very dangerous as folks find themselves in over their heads. Ignorance is bliss... til something goes wrong.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk
 
This kind of melodramatic hyperbole is why it's difficult to have productive discussions about topics like this. For the most part - and I mean a really really large part - diving is safe and in fact quite easy to make almost perfectly safe, and it's almost unheard of (sure, there are exceptions that prove the rule) for anyone to die from putting their heads just inside a cave. Or even their whole body. Even by several body lengths.
... so where's the "line" at which it's not safe anymore. There are caves ... I've been in a few ... where you can be only "several body lengths" from the entrance, and with one errant fin kick so silt up the bottom that you can't see your hand in front of you. Now what do you do? Do you know which way is out? Did you bother to run a line, or simply rely on the fact that you could see the entrance? It's incredibly easy once the silt's stirred up to get yourself so turned around you end up going deeper into the cave, thinking that's the way out ... or you end up in that side passage right near the entrance that takes you into a completely unfamiliar part of the cave. Maybe you find your way out before you drain your tank. Or maybe you get lucky ... like that gal in Florida ... and someone who knows what they're doing finds you and helps you out. But the more likely scenario is that you'll run out of air long before either of those two events occur ... and in a few hours or a couple days, somebody finds your body and risks their own lives to bring it out so your family has something to grieve over.

That's not "melodramatic hyperbole" ... it happens all too often, as several folks on here with actual cave experience can tell you (though it's obvious you're not of a mind to listen).

If you love to harp on the dangers, the onus should be on you to specify the dimensions under which the way YOU dive is dangerous, or what exact aspects you see to have introduced danger. "Underwater" or "overhead" just doesn't express it.
I solo dive. Sometimes I do solo dives in rather deep or remote places, where I incur deco obligations, and/or where help is many hours away. Occasionally I do it in places where if something bad happened, there's no one even around who would know I was missing. Some people would call those kinds of risks dangerous. And if I were not appropriately trained, experienced, and equipped (both physically and mentally), the risks would certainly be beyond what a reasonable person would call acceptable. But having been trained, having experienced the potential hazards, carrying redundancies, having maintained a physical and mental state that enables me to manage the potential hazards reduces the risks to an acceptable level. I am more cautious in terms of paying attention to what's going on around me. I'll be quicker than usual to pull the plug on the dive if something doesn't "feel" right. I'm put more effort into planning and preparation, and into mentally assessing the risks as the dive progresses. Because, at all levels, that's what a responsible diver does. That same dive, performed by someone who is unaware of the risks, hasn't been properly trained, or even by someone who has overestimated their ability to manage the risks, would amount to an interview with Darwin.

IMO the kind of click-bait FUD spamming that started this post is of limited value and may be detrimental overall.

... detrimental in what way? The value someone gets out of such information is going to depend on the individual.

But most of the time, one can indeed just leave the situation.

See above ... people have died just a few feet inside of an overhead, both in caves and wrecks. All it takes is losing your bearings. If you don't have a line running to a place that provides access to the surface, and you don't have the ability to use that line for its intended purpose, then it might surprise you at how little distance it takes to remove your option to "just leave" ....

Someone earlier made this same odd assertion regarding walking into a cave seeming just like swimming into one. Being underwater imposes it's own sense of alien environment and danger, I just don't buy that people are not more cautious about doing things underwater. Fear of drowning is a powerful motivator, and hard to quell for many.
It depends on the individual. Most folks have a reasonable sense of survival. Not all do ... I've seen people do some surprisingly stupid things underwater, even on simple open water dives. I've seen people swim inside a wreck without a light, into a cave without a line, and attempt stupidly deep dives on a single AL80, without even a thought of whether or not they had enough gas in the tank to make it. Most of the time nothing goes wrong, and they come out of it just fine ... without even a clue of the risks they were taking. But all it takes is for one single thing to go wrong and their margins are so thin that they end up dead. Then we all get to hear some grieving soul refrain that we should "wait for all the facts" before we talk about what happened, when the only pertinent fact is that they took risks without proper assessment or preparation, and it bit 'em in the arse.

And for good reason. The outcomes in those sports are obviously going to be of a more binary nature with respect to injury and death than rec scuba. This would be more akin to going on a bicycling forum and constantly being harangued about the dangers.
After seeing some of the stupid things people do on bicycles, maybe it would be useful if that happened more often.

I wholeheartedly agree that taking charge of your own safety is no one else's responsibility, and that as a corollary entrusting your life to a pro should be done with a great degree of informed skepticism. Yet exactly what is flogged here day in and day out is to seek out professionals, just make sure it's a good one.

If the point is that on the one hand you need more training *from a professional*, this cert and that cert *from a professional*, mentoring and guidance *from a professional* - and that is pretty much the ONLY way advancement is presented by the professionals on this board, and on the other "oh, don't forget, taking a professional's advice will get you killed", the whole concept and messaging behind this self-policing needs reworking. The professionals part I mean. Maybe the irony wasn't so obvious as I thought.
Taking training *from a professional* is a very different thing than blindly following a *professional* into an overhead environment and simply trusting that they know what they're doing. The former occurs under very specific, controlled circumstances, by someone who has experience in the environment they're taking you into, and precisely for the purpose of teaching you how to recognize and mitigate the risks. The latter is a tour guide, being paid to show you a good time. As was the case in Italy, they often have little more ... or in some cases less ... experience in that environment than you do. They are not being regulated by any agency in terms of what they can and cannot do. You haven't vetted them ... as you (hopefully) have with your instructor. The risks you are taking in those two circumstances are not even close to being comparable. The fact that you'd even make that argument is a clear indication that you have no clue what you're talking about.

Have you ever even taken a tech class? I'm beginning to think not.

Also, skydiving and rock climbing are terrible analogies to rec scuba.

Actually they're good analogies in this respect ... in all of them you're putting yourself into an environment which is well beyond your everyday experience, and which can kill you quick if you haven't properly prepared to manage the risks. I realize you think that simple reef dives are inherently safe ... but I know of plenty of fatalities that have occurred in relatively shallow, benign water. Many of them have been rather extensively talked about right here on ScubaBoard in our A&I forum. Some of them involved former members ... some of whom were rather well known and experienced divers when those accidents occurred. The risks are there, always ... and all it takes, regardless of your skill and experience ... is to take them too lightly ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
 
So I would claim that rock climbing is a pretty good safety analogy to scuba.

I'll second that. Some twenty years ago when I was just starting grad school a buddy and I went to Williamson Rock (not to be confused with Mt Williams) in LA National Forest and we were doing a beautiful and easy exposed multipich route. At the top, where the climbers at the bottom looked like little ants, he was about to start lowering me, we went through our "on beley, beley on" part and just before "ready to lower" I did my usual check of grabing both ends of the rope and giving it a good tug before visual. Well, it came out flying out of my buddy's harness - the rope somehow got out while he was closing/locking the carabiner and he didn't notice it. Without that last check I'd join some of my friends who've done some pretty stupid things on top of vertical walls.

Safety in many of these sports is based on layers and discipline. Skip some and you might die. Temporary lack of judgment and you might die. It's always a combination of factors, so it's always a particular and different safety layer that (hopefully) catches the problem. That's also why *knowledge* is so important and why *knowing* what hidden dangers might lurk in unsuspecting areas is highly beneficial to safety.

---------- Post added December 4th, 2015 at 11:23 AM ----------

...enables me to manage the potential hazards reduces the risks to an acceptable level.

Bolded is the key - risk is a continuous function so understanding and mitigating risk factors will reduce risk, not eliminate it.

Pretending that diving can be risk free and avoiding, um, "unpleasant topics" doesn't do anyone any favors.
 
(...) As well as much more willing to invest the 6-8 weeks of training the OW class I teach requires.

That's the OW course I would've liked to have, and that's my point. Guess I'm not that off the mark: it will be training and proper guidance that will make you dive safely.

If people fail, sometimes numerous times, before getting their driver licenses, I don't see how can virtually 100% of candidates get approved in their first OW courses.
 
Because the idea in some OW classes is not to fail the student. Under the guise of passing them because they "mastered" the skills, the goal is to make a profit.
 
Because the idea in some OW classes is not to fail the student. Under the guise of passing them because they "mastered" the skills, the goal is to make a profit.

You are reading too much into "profit motive." It's clearly there, but the CYA approach comes from the potential for litigation, not greed. Same as any other industry where people could be at risk (auto, medical, pharmaceutical, etc.) - just because there is balance between safety and profit doesn't mean the industry is corrupt and doesn't care.

For proof, look at the numbers of safe OW divers who don't need more advanced training because they are not doing more advanced dives. What's the safety record of OW divers staying in OW conditions?

The discussion in this thread is about helping/informing/ensuring OW divers understand the risks of an activity that is *outside* OW and doesn't look too dangerous at a glance.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom