Diving Risks -- real information

[Metalman]

I have a question relating to the risks of diving...

As a new diver, it would really interest me to know if the statistics are actually correct.

As I learned from German friend of mine, "Never trust statistics that you didn't invent yourself."

So many say that (hobby) diving is a safe sport, statistically speaking, in comparison to others such as soccer (or perhaps lacrosse). On the other hand, every diving board I have ever seen has a section on accidents. This is not true of every lacrosse board I have seen...

I know it seems like a simple question, but I guess there's probably not a simple answer. I am actually kind of afraid of what you all will say, because I really like diving and don't want to quit out of fear of accidents...

Please don't let this turn into some sort of flame war! "Divers" here are defined as those who have a certification to dive in open water (PADI, SSI, WHOEVER). No nasty comments about an organization just 'cause you don't like it or think yours is better.

Thanks,
-MM

 

[Walter]

No one knows.

No one knows how many divers there are.

No one knows how many divers are made per year.

No one knows how many accidents are not reported.

No one knows how many accidents are prevented by alert divemasters/ buddies, etc.

No one knows the actual accident rate.

I suspect it's not as safe as we are led to believe, but again - No one knows.

 

[wreckchick]

I think one of the reasons divers analyze accidents where lacrosse players don't is that in diving many accidents are preventable and proper handling can lessen the impact of an accident/incident. We look at them to learn how to prevent or react better next time.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a whack in the head by a lacrosse stick may have been preventable, but analysis won't prevent a recurrance.

Rachel

 

[DocVikingo]

Walter said it eloquently.

If you'd like to see a set of estimates on dive injuries & fatalities, I recommend DAN's "Report on Decompression Illness, Diving Fatalities and Project Dive Exploration" at ---->

http://www.diversalertnetwork.org/medical/report/index.asp

Best regards.

DocVikingo

 

[pufferfish]

I think we can do better than that Walter to give an estimate of how safe our sport really is. DAN has given a figure of 1.5 DCI incidents per 10,000 dives, Bove has quoted 3.4 per 10,000.

The problem as stated above has been in determining with accuracy the number of incidents and the number of divers. In 2001 the BC Underwater Council started the Abacus project where all incidents in a finite geographic area (only few hospitals where divers would present) were recorded over a fixed time frame. The number of tank fills were recorded.

The incidence of DCI was 10 per 100,000 dives
The incidence of death was 2 per 100,000 dives

This represents rates in a cold water recreational setting. I think with the fact that the DAN, Bove, and Abacus data are all fairly similar we can safely say that the incidence of DCI is somewhere between .01 to .02 % in the recreational dive setting. What we need are similar Abacus type projects in other regional dive catchment areas were the numerator and denominator can be determined with reasonable accuracy. Bottom line, recreational diving is very safe.

 

[Metalman]

Thank you all for your responses...

In searching for more information on the subject, I found information related to the history of diving which said that diving is becoming more and more safe. The reasons given in the article were "fewer equipment failures", "better diver training", and "better preparation" for a dive.

I can believe that there are fewer equipment failures today than in the 50's / 60's. I can also believe that divers are now better trained about the risks of DCS, etc. But "better prepared"? It seems to me that (too) many divers just jump in with a high tech computer and do what they want until it tells them otherwise.

Do you all agree with the statement that diver error is a more significant cause of accidents than equipment failure or training?

If so, does being overly dependent on a computer increase those risks or is it (like a regulator) a piece of technology on which we are forced to depend?

Thanks again,
-MM

 

[Walter]

Metalman,

I was under the impression you didn't want to open that can of worms.

IMO, dive training is worse than ever. You sure you want to go there?

The most significant factor in accidents and near misses is panic. The avoidance of panic and especially skills which help to avoid panic are inadequate in the large majority of OW courses today.

Equipment has gotten better, unfortunately, divers are more and more equipment dependent.

DCS rates will drop as more divers slow their ascent rates.

pufferfish,

The Abacus project is certainly a step in the right direction if we want real numbers instead of what we have now. If you want an idea of how safe diving is in BC, it's a start.

I suspect the average diver who dives in BC is better trained and practices more than the average diver. For this reason, I'd suspect the accident rate to be much lower than in an area that gets more "people who dive" as opposed to "divers."

 

[DocVikingo]

I agree that the Abacus Project generates figures from an improved methodology for estimating the incidence of DCI.

Nonetheless, even with confining the inquiry to the area of DCI a number of points, some raised by Walter, remain problematic, such as: (1) how do we account for the number of DCI accidents that are misdiagnosed/untreated/treated outside of the relevant catchment area/unreported, etc., and how many DCI accidents are prevented by alert instructors/divemasters/ buddies, etc?

In addition, Metalman's inquiry appears rather more broad than just DCI. He seems to be asking, "is scuba a safe sport?"

Answering this must include far more than just DCI-related events and address such issues as numbers of divers injured by boats & other water craft, by potentially dangerous marine life, during boat exit & entry, through being lost, etc. Also, what about the as yet uncertain very long-term effects on lung, bone & brain of breathing compressed at gas at depth?

Finally, I cannot agree that DAN, Bove, and Abacus data regarding DCI are all fairly similar. Yes, they are all relatively reassuring, but they in fact range from 1 per 10,000 dives to 3.4 per 10,000 dives, a difference of over 300%.

Interesting topic.

DocVikingo

PS: I see that SARS is back in Toronto. No matter, I'm still coming in August.

 

[Rick Murchison]

Y'all sound like you're trying to make a case that diving is actually more dangerous than the stats show because there are lots of saves by other divers... this is a very curious position to take.
As prevention by alert divemasters/instructors/other divers is part of diving, and the accidents prevented didn't happen, that makes diving safer than it would otherwise be, n'est-çe pas?
When a team member blocks the opponent's potentially injuring move in a sport we don't try to assign additional danger to the sport, do we? Why should we do so in diving?
Carrying this logic into other venues, no one is his right mind would venture onto a public roadway in an automobile! Thousands of accidents are prevented by "other" alert drivers out there every day. Picking out a part of the whole sport and saying "if it weren't for this then that" is simply saying "if it weren't for reality then fiction."
Diving - despite our rants on its (vast, huge, small, tremendous, few, myriad... pick your own adjective to suit your point of view) imperfections - is pretty safe as recreational activities go.
There is plenty of room for improvement, but the complexion isn't so warty as to be unattractive.
Rick

 

[DocVikingo]

(nt)