Children die playing with scuba gear left in pool - Jensen Beach, Florida

[Angelo Farina]

These kids were described by the parent as "proficient divers." Proficient scuba divers? at 7 and 9 years old?

Not even discussing how this could even be possible, but it may show a bad mindset.

Im sorry, but I would not trust a 9 year old to be proficient at anything requiring specific guidelines, where breaking them could be hazardous.

My sons were good divers at the age of 8. They both started using an air tank in the pool around 2.5 years old. At 5 years they were doing their first real dives in the sea, at depth of no more than 5-6 meters. But at 8 years they were really good, with perfect buoyancy and breathing control, excellent kicking technique, and they were able to do any kind of exercise, such as removing all the equipment (including tank, fins and mask) and then wearing it again. Or buddy breathing with a single reg while swimming horizontally or up to the surface.
We did teach them very slowly, it did take years to arrive at a decent level and we never made steps too big for them.
Our main concert was to avoid lung over-expansion, we did train them for avoiding this risk since their first usage of a tank in the pool (which had a max depth of one meter). Only three years later we did bring them in the sea, when we were absolutely sure that even in case of an emergency ascent, their conditioning had caused them to exhale and to avoid lung over expansion.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

My sons were good divers at the age of 8. They both started using an air tank in the pool around 2.5 years old. At 5 years they were doing their first real dives in the sea, at depth of no more than 5-6 meters. But at 8 years they were really good, with perfect buoyancy and breathing control, excellent kicking technique, and they were able to do any kind of exercise, such as removing all the equipment (including tank, fins and mask) and then wearing it again. Or buddy breathing with a single reg while swimming horizontally or up to the surface.
We did teach them very slowly, it did take years to arrive at a decent level and we never made steps too big for them.
Our main concert was to avoid lung over-expansion, we did train them for avoiding this risk since their first usage of a tank in the pool (which had a max depth of one meter). Only three years later we did bring them in the sea, when we were absolutely sure that even in case of an emergency ascent, their conditioning had caused them to exhale and to avoid lung over expansion.

Jacques did teach Fabien to scuba dive when he was four.

 

[Angelo Farina]

Jacques did teach Fabien to scuba dive when he was four.

I know...
But it was a bit too early for my sons for diving in the sea at 4 y.o..
Every human has is own pace, so we did wait one year more. At 5 they were ready, having got enough skills working in the pool for surviving in the raw sea.
In Sardinia, water is not very warm, there are often waves and wind, and you must be already a good surface swimmer before diving there. Probably in a tropical environment, inside a lagoon, we had allowed them to dive in the sea earlier.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

I know...
But it was a bit too early for my sons for diving in the sea at 4 y.o..
Every human has is own pace, so we did wait one year more. At 5 they were ready, having got enough skills working in the pool for surviving in the raw sea.
In Sardinia, water is not very warm, there are often waves and wind, and you must be already a good surface swimmer before diving there. Probably in a tropical environment, inside a lagoon, we had allowed them to dive in the sea earlier.

Yeah I have no idea when I’ll get my daughter started. Probably free diving at first

 

[Angelo Farina]

Yeah I have no idea when I’ll get my daughter started. Probably free diving at first

Free diving is much more dangerous than scuba diving. Both my sons were allowed to free dive only at 16.
And the older one never appreciated it (he is not really a sportive guy). The younger, instead, did love free diving, but mostly in the pool.
He did understand that free diving in the sea is really too dangerous.
In the pool he started practising underwater hockey, and he did became a very good player of that sport, ending up in the the Italian National Team for two years. Then, at 20, he did realise that even in the pool all that time with low oxygen in his brain was not very healthy, so he gave up and went back to the safer and easier scuba diving.

 

[wetb4igetinthewater]

Ok snorkeling!

 

[John the Pom]

I'm not sure of your point.

As you saying that because labels often get ignored or misunderstood, the tank owner shouldn't have labeled the the tank?

What should he have done instead of labeling that would have kept him from putting a regulator on that tank and tossing it in the pool?

I think the labels Steve Lewis recommends are intended to be seen only by the tank owners and other divers who know what hypoxic gas means. In any event, DO NOT BREATHE is a pretty good indicator that whatever HYPOXIC means, it doesn't mean something you want to breathe.

I'm saying that the study of many years of incidents by experts teaches us that warning signs and labels by themselves are not a very robust protection against hazards. Sure, you and I both understand "DO NOT BREATHE". What if the tank said, "呼吸しないでください"?

If you have an electricity sub-station with hazardous voltages, you put warning signs around it. But you also have a whopping big fence and a very robust lock. And a sign that says, "If you lose something over the fence, call this number and we'll come and get it for you at no charge."

Warning signs are important, but they sit at the bottom of the hierarchy of robustness where safety is concerned. You should use them, but don't rely on them. We should always try to work on the principle of "As low as reasonably possible" when it comes to risk. But nothing is 100% safe. Whatever we do, accidents will happen, which is why our response to individual tragedies like this should be to show kindness and understanding, not to seek to blame people.

 

[dmaziuk]

Wouldn't the standard "take 3 breaths while watching the spg before diving" have prevented this?

I've never descended with air off when I did this. In case(s) when I didn't take 3 breaths, well, I plead the 5th....

Even one breath of He would give you the tell-tale voice.

Dunno about you, I tend to not speak when I do the "couple of breath while watching the SPG needle move" thing. I don't think 3 breaths is enough to pass out either, unfortunately.

 

[Seaweed Doc]

Dunno about you, I tend to not speak when I do the "couple of breath while watching the SPG needle move" thing. I don't think 3 breaths is enough to pass out either, unfortunately.

Well, I suppose you can't shut me up.

Seriously, I notice a weird feeling in my throat when I've inhaled from a balloon to entertain my kids. Maybe it's a YMMV situation.

 

[Scraps]

I'm saying that the study of many years of incidents by experts teaches us that warning signs and labels by themselves are not a very robust protection against hazards. Sure, you and I both understand "DO NOT BREATHE". What if the tank said, "呼吸しないでください"?

If you have an electricity sub-station with hazardous voltages, you put warning signs around it. But you also have a whopping big fence and a very robust lock. And a sign that says, "If you lose something over the fence, call this number and we'll come and get it for you at no charge."

Warning signs are important, but they sit at the bottom of the hierarchy of robustness where safety is concerned. You should use them, but don't rely on them. We should always try to work on the principle of "As low as reasonably possible" when it comes to risk. But nothing is 100% safe. Whatever we do, accidents will happen, which is why our response to individual tragedies like this should be to show kindness and understanding, not to seek to blame people.

I don't think we disagree about safety systems in general.

However, in specific instance of managing tanks with hypoxic mixes, the goal is not to protect the general public from wandering into a hazardous situation; rather, it is to help the owner of the tank avoid using the wrong tank. Warning labels, proper storage, and the discipline not to leave regulators on tanks with hypoxic mixes may be enough for this objective. Evidence that the tank in this case was labeled and stored without a regulator would likely change my opinion.

I still don't know what safeguards instead of or in addition to Steve Lewis's advice you would recommend. So I think I'm still not sure of your point.