The fight or flight response activates our reptilian brain and anything which is learned externally and cognitively that is not consistent with the basic coding in our primitive/reptilian brain we either don't do or we can't do it.
So am I correct in summarizing your point as follows? Sorry, I don't mean to put words in your mouth, but I just want to understand:
1) Fight or flight (FOF) is an inevitable reaction to a significant stressor, in this case the presumed episode of EIB.
2) FOF then caused her to lose the ability to perform procedures that she had previously been able to do.
3) This loss of ability was inevitable given the FOF, and there was nothing that could have stopped it, making her need for rescue also inevitable.
Not to put words in your mouth, it is much broader than just not being able to perform the two tasks you listed.
So it is a state much broader and complex than the one you try to reduce at minimum.
Are there not formal scientific peer reviewed studies on fight or flight response?
It reads to me like you are both actually describing the same situation, which is that FOF impairs the diver's ability to function and execute his/her trained responses required for the underwater environment. By my understanding, this is not a binary (on-off) phenomenon, but a spectrum - with at one extreme end a complete loss of ability ('paralyzed with fear'), to the other end where the diver might still be thinking the right things but has lost some dexterity.
Either way, the characteristic is a loss of ability when needed; someone who can demonstrate the ability on land or confined water, but not when 'in trouble'. But is it inevitable (unavoidable)? If you take the position that this is binary (on-off), then I can see why you would conclude 'yes'. If it is on a spectrum of responses, then surely the answer would be 'no' - not inevitable - there are thing that a diver could do to reverse the situation and regain control.
But, I did not do any kind of pre-dive check except looking at the O2 gauge.
I check my O2 frequently and knew I was good on that.
I don't want to be too picky, but am touching on it here because I did notice you posting something similar before. Just wanted to check you know that you were not checking your O2. A minor point which will be useful if you ever move to using Nitrox, something worth considering as one gets older.
***As I think about it, this is quite possible. I was so focused on getting pics and video to show off to friends and family, I know now I was not paying attention to several, more important aspects of the dive. Someone mentioned that earlier, and I smugly disregarded it. My husband and I watched for then first time two other videos I took on the dive and it is obvious that I was fighting the current, unbalanced and DETERMINED to get a pic of something. The camera really distracted me and that was bad.
I feel a bit awkward raising this again, as it is possible by your reply that you might have missed my (admittedly pedantic) point.
I noticed on the earlier posts that you referred to your breathing gas as Oxygen, and it is possible you were using this as a typing shortcut on this forum or perhaps it is a common use of language where you dive or where you were trained. It is of course compressed air, but this subtle point might make a difference if you were actually asking for Oxygen at another time.
Your reply is in itself important because it relates to bowlofpetunias later posting:
I know some mention the camera contributing to task loading. I am going to say something a little controversial here. I started using a simple point and shoot camera early on. I honestly feel it helped me relax more diving.
It took my focus off stressing about exactly how I was breathing and bouyancy etc and let it come more naturally.
As that is indeed controversial, and a good thing that task loading is mentioned in the first sentence!
There is a time in a diver's development when they start to focus less inwardly upon themselves and more on what is going on around them. I think one can recognise another stage when they start to pay attention to what potentially risky stuff other divers are doing.
The first stage can happen quite naturally and spontaneously for some divers, others might need some form of 'distraction', which 'could' come from having a camera when protected by the right circumstances. I would suggest it 'better' to start noticing marine life and marine behaviours, either spontaenously or through more formal training (e.g., underwater naturalist), or just having fun. Either way, one could argue that the diver is being 'distracted', but (depending on the complexity of the kit) I believe there is more risk of task loading with a camera. The balanced choice is dependent on how good the diver is at multitasking and how good he/she is with skills.
As before, I believe that if a diver is not naturally talented or developing the skills for underwater photography spontaneously, then formal training is helpful (my suggestion for such courses being: peak performance buoyancy, underwater naturalist and underwater photographer/videographer), before bringing a camera into the equation.
Some divers also develop the other stage spontaneously, TBH but I didn't even recognise this stage until after I started the Rescue course. It opened my awareness to what is going on everywhere around me in any particular dive. One way of testing myself with this is to pay attention to the post-dive chat. How often do I hear about an event that I had missed underwater....
