To take this illustration a step further, what if, in the example above, the diver gave a very precise description of the numbness fitting a very clear dermatomal, say C5, distribution? Would that be an observation that all dive med specialists find just as easy to dismiss?
Not at all. But there is still no requirement to call I vs II; you'd describe it as DCS (or DCI) with subjective neuro findings alone said dermatome, or with decreased sensation/strength, whatever if there are objective findings. Even if you come up from a dive paralyzed from the waist down, crystal clear traditional II, these days odds are it'd be "severe neurologic DCS with *describe loss of motor/sensory* at the x spinal level, bladder retention, blah blah."
Now, in a very clear example sure, you can say II. But it doesn't really add anything to the diagnosis, it doesn't guide treatment, etc. The description is clearer than calling a type, and you treat based on symptoms and response to treatment, not what type you called it. And with the majority of bends being not quite so cut&dry about what system is/isn't affected, the divide between traditional I and II gets mucked up and becomes completely useless.
And I agree with scorpio, sometimes you just get bent. Bent a guy on a certain profile recently, in the chamber - he's done this same profile before multiple times, multiple other divers have done it. Chamber so there was no difference in rates of ascent, no bouncing up and down; but one dive, boom, dude gets a hit.
Luck of the draw, sometimes; nobody understands how the hyperbaric environment affects our bodies exactly, at the immune and genetic level. We know it activates a whole bunch or transcription factors, but what do they all do? And if you're not 100% at the time of your dive for whatever reason, how does that affect you - we have associations for what increases risk, like dehydration, but not the exact mechanism for why.