Article on Death In Ginnie Springs

[CptTightPants21]

They seem more than perfectly competent as first respondents for a rescue, but quite frankly to investigate after the fact you need facts, and without the Police securing the equipment and having it tested by a professional Lab., you do not get facts.

So just to be clear, the totally insane procedures, that only exist in the void wonderland between your ears, have never been followed in scuba so therefore we have no facts from any Scuba accident?

5 pages in I didn't agree with you, 15 pages in I began to discount every single comment you have ever posted...... at 30, I am not entirely sure I would give you air if you had an OOA emergency.

 

[tursiops]

Gianammeri is convinced if he repeats something enough times, no matter how much it is demonstrably false, it will somehow turn into truth.

 

[MMM]

---

---

A ScubaBoard Staff Message...

more off topic posts have been deleted. Please stay on topic, avoid personal attacks, or risk more aggressive moderation. Marg, SB Senior Moderator

---

 

[Lorenzoid]

I wonder if such a lab, staffed with the kind of people who do police forensic testing, would choose to use a different instrument or technique? A good technician uses the appropriate tools and techniques for the job at hand--not necessarily tools and techniques that the technician might believe to be overkill--and for all I know if a lab had received the tank the technicians would have used the same kind of analyzer, calibrated per the same procedure, etc., as was reported to have been done on the scene. If a cave diver who is highly experienced in just this kind of testing tests the tank on the scene, that's no good according to gian. But it's better if some lab monkey who perhaps doesn't do this kind of testing very often tests the tank, because he did it in a lab, maybe while wearing a white coat?

 

[hroark2112]

You need a Certified Lab...to look for what? What comprises the <2% of the gas in the cylinder that wasn't Oxygen?

Why? What lab even has the capability to do it?

I think you watch too many "True Crime" shows on TV or in the movies.

 

[Abdullah]

I wonder if such a lab, staffed with the kind of people who do police forensic testing, would choose to use a different instrument or technique? A good technician uses the appropriate tools and techniques for the job at hand--not necessarily tools and techniques that the technician might believe to be overkill--and for all I know if a lab had received the tank the technicians would have used the same kind of analyzer, calibrated per the same procedure, etc., as was reported to have been done on the scene. If a cave diver who is highly experienced in just this kind of testing tests the tank on the scene, that's no good according to gian. But it's better if some lab monkey who perhaps doesn't do this kind of testing very often tests the tank, because he did it in a lab, maybe while wearing a white coat?

I'm not sure that the 98% oxygen is in dispute. But, there are much more precise instrument methods for measuring oxygen than the equipment we use in diving. Greater reproducibility is obtained with bench top equipment in a controlled environment than we can get with our field testers. The question would be - why bother?

The difference in time it takes to tox out at 96% or 99% as opposed to 98% at the depth he dove it to won't be significant in context of the time he was breathing the gas. Anything in the vicinity of 98% oxygen would be toxic in the circumstances of this incident. And the Analox testers in the hands of a skilled user will measure reproducibly enough to be in the vicinity of 98%.

 

[Lorenzoid]

I'm not sure that the 98% oxygen is in dispute. But, there are much more precise instrument methods for measuring oxygen than the equipment we use in diving. Greater reproducibility is obtained with bench top equipment in a controlled environment than we can get with our field testers. The question would be - why bother?

The difference in time it takes to tox out at 96% or 99% as opposed to 98% at the depth he dove it to won't be significant in context of the time he was breathing the gas. Anything in the vicinity of 98% oxygen would be toxic in the circumstances of this incident. And the Analox testers in the hands of a skilled user will measure reproducibly enough to be in the vicinity of 98%.

Exactly. To state my question another way, even if a tank were sent to a lab that had access to substance analysis equipment calibrated to extreme precision and with the capability of searching for trace gases, would personnel who are trained to do police forensic analysis actually in their professional opinions choose use that equipment instead of a simple and reliable consumer-grade scuba tank analyzer? Or maybe gian would want to dictate not only the procedures that police must follow in dive accidents instead of using their professional judgment but also the procedures that forensics lab personnel must follow instead of using their professional judgment. So nobody in the entire (criminal?) investigative system would be allowed to exercise the kind of judgment that they are supposedly paid to exercise?

 

[CptTightPants21]

Guys,

Don't let him off the hook here by diluting the question with lab technician specifications and analysis tools. I just want a simple answer to a simple question.

Can he cite any example where the tanks and equipment were analyzed by a forensic lab in the manner in which he has been spewing all over this thread?

 

[Abdullah]

Guys,

Don't let him off the hook here by diluting the question with lab technician specifications and analysis tools. I just want a simple answer to a simple question.

Can he cite any example where the tanks and equipment were analyzed by a forensic lab in the manner in which he has been spewing all over this thread?

I don't think he can. I think gian has a perception of what the thinks happens to scuba equipment when police seize it that doesn't align with any factual evidence of what is actually analyzed. A police department can say they had the tank analyzed, but that might actually mean they checked to make sure the valve worked properly and there were no indications the mechanical set up failed. Which, is totally different than having the gas analyzed in a lab.

A lab technician has some flexibility, but a lab is certified to perform a specific analysis in a specific manner that guarantees uniformity and reproducibility across all labs, not just that one. That manner is called a Method. Methods are standardized and they are certified by a credentialing body to meet specific quality criteria so that two different labs will provide the same answers. Only the certified Method would be useful (meaning defensible) in a judicial proceeding. For gian's opinion to have any merit whatsoever he should be able to cite the analytical Method used if not the actual analysis from a particular case. Otherwise, myth busted, no such animal, time to quit talking about analyzing tanks.

 

[gianaameri]

Exactly. To state my question another way, even if a tank were sent to a lab that had access to substance analysis equipment calibrated to extreme precision and with the capability of searching for trace gases, would personnel who are trained to do police forensic analysis actually in their professional opinions choose use that equipment instead of a simple and reliable consumer-grade scuba tank analyzer? Or maybe gian would want to dictate not only the procedures that police must follow in dive accidents instead of using their professional judgment but also the procedures that forensics lab personnel must follow instead of using their professional judgment. So nobody in the entire (criminal?) investigative system would be allowed to exercise the kind of judgment that they are supposedly paid to exercise?

I can't remember if I said this before... maybe if I did it got lost in the noise of the internet forum diving experts.

If there is a dive fatality, the gas content, amongst other things, has to be properly analysed. This is something only an independent and certified professional Lab can do (or maybe NEDU, if you entirely trust the military...).

Granted that I am 100% sure (my opinion, not fact) that in this case it was human/team error and Carlos unintentionally exposed himself to O2 too deep, we can't know that there was not a small amount of cyanide in his tank (just an example, but if you want to take somebody out a few guys could get together, agree a story, and kill another guy with a cyanide laced tank).

Cyanide would show in an autopsy and this is just a crazy example which comes to mind and not applicable here specifically, but it is for the purpose of making a point which maybe, just maybe, some, but not all, can understand.