Certification Agencies and DCI

[kraken]

Dr. Deco and All -

I've been on this board for some time but don't believe I"ve ever seen any discussions around incorporating some of the extremely valuable knowledge you have to share into standard training programs with organizations such as PADI, NAUI.. etc.

The exercise before and after seems like it would definately be something they could work into the program, as well as a lot of other topics. Has anyone pursued them regarding adding a little more depth to the DCI discussions?

Just a thought

 

[ArcticDiver]

Dr. Deco and All -

I've been on this board for some time but don't believe I"ve ever seen any discussions around incorporating some of the extremely valuable knowledge you have to share into standard training programs with organizations such as PADI, NAUI.. etc.

The exercise before and after seems like it would definately be something they could work into the program, as well as a lot of other topics. Has anyone pursued them regarding adding a little more depth to the DCI discussions?

Just a thought

Can't speak for everyone, obviously, but the principles espoused in this and other web sites varies very little from what I was taught in my original Open Water course with NAUI. Then my more advanced courses from SSI and TDI applied that knowledge to more advanced diving. Same knowledge, but more precise application for a less forgiving environment.

So, I think the basic knowledge is already in the curriculum. How well it is taught and learned may be another matter. But, I submit that if almost almost all divers weren't learning this information the death/injury rate would be so high there would be an irresistable move for direct government intervention.

What we often see on this and other web sites are the ponderings of people who are interested in what might be called Deep Background, or who are, like me, anal analyzers. That information goes way beyond what is necessary for safe diving. But folks like me would enjoy our sport less if we didn't explore it.

 

[Dive-aholic]

Too much information in too little time is my guess. Agencies are focused on bringing in more divers. They do that by teaching people how to dive. When you start to incorporate information about the dangers of diving, you need a lot of time to adequately cover it, otherwise you end up scaring some of those people away from diving. All they hear is the bends, the chamber, nerve damage, blown lung, etc. They don't hear how infrequently it occurs. It's unfortunate that it's this way. I've seen and heard of too many divers coming into the ER with DCI symptoms that were never put on oxygen, get assigned to be cared by staff that knows nothing about dive injuries, so never get put on oxygen, the chamber doc never gets called (yes, there's a chamber at the hospital), and the diver leaves AMA (against medical advice) because he thinks he's okay. A little education, not only for divers but also for medical staff, would go a long way. Maybe the agencies should include a little pamphlet with the C card, but then again, who reads those things!?

 

[Dr Deco]

Hello kraken:

Readers of this FORUM will notice that I emphasize that GAS LOADS (AND TABLES) are far from the complete story. The training agencies emphasize the “cookbook” approach where following the tables is all that is necessary. It is a very simple approach and works quite well in the vast majority of cases.

Whenever personal judgment enters, there is a degree of nebulousness that will muddy the water. Traditionally, it was simply said, “decompression is a very inexact science, and we simply do not know enough about it.” That is not exactly true anymore.

No doubt, if I worked for a training agency, concepts such as “nuclei control” would be in their training manual today. This is not the case.

In a large part, there is probably what we call in science the “NIH” principle. That is “Not Invented Here.” People are reluctant to push forward what possibly they should have seen in the first place.

Last, if Arctic Diver received all of this information from his instructors, he had a very good class! [To my knowledge, the NAUI program does not emphasis this “exercise” concept since it definitely does not fit in with the NAUI RGBM tables.]

Dr Deco :doctor:

 

[ArcticDiver]

A thread like this can go on forever I suppose. Just defining the various concepts, data and interpretations so we have a common base for discussion can be lengthy. But maybe we can get on common ground by using a couple of examples.

First of all I don't think an ordinary diver needs the extensive knowledge depth that we often discuss here. The knowledge is nice, but not necessary for safe and effective operation. This is smilar to the situation of a pilot flying an airplane or a medical type using a defibrillator. Both need an action checklist that can be referred to without a lot of thought. Both need enough knowledge of underlying physics to understand what they are doing and to solve some problems. They don't need to be scientists in their respective fields.

On the other hand if a diver is going to explore diving regimes where there is relatively little experience that individual is eqivalent to a test pilot. For that person it is extremely important that they have a much deeper level of knowledge than those who are not exploring those regimes.

As to which algorithm is "better", or "safer" than another there is much discussion and disagreement. No company that markets computers, dive tables, or anything else that impacts life safety wants its' products blamed for injury or death. So, the fact that there doesn't seem to be difference in documented injury or death between the various marketed algorithms tells the impartial observer that all are equally effective in providing guidance for safe dives. Of course some people will say that they "feel better", or "feel worse" when using certain algorithms, or products. There are many factors that go into such feelings that have nothing to do with the algorithm used.

Does this mean I endorse the training I've seen? No, not in all cases. Too often training operations take the short term shotgun approach. That is they teach a lot of people the absolute minimum necessary. Then they hope that enough will continue to dive thus providing long term income. This fails because the new divers don't have the confidence needed to overcome natural fears. Sooner or later the new diver decides having to overcome fears every time they dive is just not fun any more.

I submit that a more in depth program, like I received, builds knowledgeable, confident divers who will go on to safely dive for as many years as health and finances allow. Thus, the dive industry becomes a much healthier and financially viable entity.

 

[Dr Deco]

Knowledge and training are good. That is why I have my Decompression Physiology class.