Doc Deep dies during dive.

[Diver0001]

I have fallen asleep while doing deco; reg stayed in no problem.

A friend of mine fell asleep during a dive shortly after having his first child. We "lost" him in bad viz when he stopped swimming for more than 5 minutes. I surfaced with the other buddy and we were just discussing if he may have fallen asleep and if we should call the EMS to start a search when he surfaced next to us and said, "sorry guys, my baby is teething". Obviously his regulator stayed in too.

R..

 

[rickgillyon]

I have fallen asleep while doing deco; reg stayed in no problem.

A friend of mine fell asleep during a dive shortly after having his first child... Obviously his regulator stayed in too.

I suspect the addition of HPNS tremors might affect that.

 

[Ken Kurtis]

We've discussed this a bit as it applies to our dive teams and procedures at the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach. Our daily 28-foot dives may not seem to compare to a 1200-foot attempt but the mindset they may have been at play on this fatal deep attempt can affect you at whatever depth you choose. Of paticular note to us is the concept of "Normalization of Deviance" which I prefer to sum up a bit more simply: Just because nothing bad happened, it doesn't mean it was a good plan.

Apologies if this link was posted already (I confess to not having read the entire thread) but I thought this was a pretty level-headed analysis, forwarded by Andrew Solomona ta the Aquarium, from a tech instructor and writer: Technical Diving Articles | Techniques | Knowledgebase

- Ken

 

[drrich2]

Deep Diving - Jenny Lord

The Attraction to the Deep Blue

For thousands of years man has looked at the sea and wondered what was below the waves. With the invention of the aqua-lung, people started to explore the undersea world and like any new place many wanted to expand beyond what was known, pushing the limits of the human body to discover more.

The concept of deep diving was born. The improvement of the equipment and our knowledge has allowed people to dive deeper, but still many look down and wonder what there is even further below us.

Interestingly, that (expanding environmental exploration) doesn't make logical sense as a main motivator. A submarine will always be able to go deeper & find out what's there than a human body. And people on these extreme deep dives seem to require a commitment to executing the process and surviving, now whipping out cameras & camcorders with powerful strobes and looking around to see what's there.

I wonder what is being proven? Is it a notion of physiological toughness at enduring an extreme? Mental technical prowess at designing a plan & limits that one survives (e.g.: gas mixes, deco. stops, etc…)? Skill performance under duress?

When someone engages in a weight-lifting competition, a race or the like, I can understand what's being measured, put on trial, etc… Even with gymnastics & ice skating. But let's stay this guy had lived; what would be his accomplishment? I'm not saying he wouldn't have accomplished anything; I'm just wondering what central characteristic is the object of glory?

Richard.

P.S.: In some endeavors, such as weight lifting, you get feed back as you approach dangerous limits. Or you just can't go any faster however hard you try, as with a sprinter. Seems like in extreme diving your 1st clear sign it's time to back off may kill you. Makes for a dangerous realm for record setting. I recall that vulnerability to oxygen toxicity varies widely in the same person over time; wonder how much such variability exists to the problems a deep diver faces? After all, the weight lifter knows about what he can bench press. Wonder how well the deepest divers know their reliable tolerances?

 

[BRT]

Depth records are not very interesting to me, but... Somebody was the first to do all the things we do and they were pretty much all dangerous to start. Yes submarines can dive deeper and see more than people. Forklifts always win weight lifting competitions, computers now win chess tournaments, motorized vehicles win all speed contests and yet people keep pushing themselves in these contests, even at the risk of injury or death. And in the process we find people can do more than they could before. Who could have imagined recreational divers going routinely below 200 feet 50 years ago without taking their lives in their hands?

 

[drrich2]

...and yet people keep pushing themselves in these contests, even at the risk of injury or death.

Yes, and this is what I'm curious about; what does this attempt measure? Ability to tolerate/survive/overcome...

1.) HPNS?
2.) Narcotic effects of gases?
3.) Breathe really thick/dense gases?
4.) Plan out & mentally juggle the execution of using varied gas mixes at varied depth ranges?
5.) Just to say you hit a given # of feet deep & came back alive & not permanently injured?

If it's any of these things, I wonder how much is being proven? With susceptibility to oxygen toxicity, I'm told it varies in the same diver markedly over time. Even 'nitrogen' narcoses (perhaps impacted by CO2 build-up?) susceptibility can vary with conditions/different dives. A guy who bench presses 350 lbs. can probably perform at a similar level on a good day sometime soon. Does surviving a deep dive testify to your toughness, or just some fluke of luck that day?

And since it's harder to safely approach the limits of human tolerance in diving as opposed to running or weight-lifting, how do we know when we've gone far enough? How many fatalities? What percentage mortality in attempters? At least when someone tries to up his bench press, he can have others 'spot' him. How practical is it to offer such a backup to an extreme deep diver?

Richard.

 

[Akimbo]

... Who could have imagined recreational divers going routinely below 200 feet 50 years ago without taking their lives in their hands?

I was diving 50 years ago and a 200' Scuba dive on air was not a big deal. It was a serious dive, but not anything that a diver couldn't safely work up to. I made my first 200' jump at 15. Basic Scuba training was much more complete regarding the physics and physiology then and everyone knew to work up slowly to greater depths.

The Navy tried to jump to 600' on Sea Lab III (1969) from 200' on Sea Lab II. A man died before they even got in the habitat. Had it not been Barry Cannon it would have been one or more others. They weren't ready with their systems even though they thoroughly tested the physics and physiology in chambers at EDU. It appears it didn't work jumping from 800' to 1200' in open sea very well either.

 

[BRT]

Yes. That is what I am saying. It costs lives to learn. Certainly a 600' habitat wouldn't mean much today. Auto racing, outer space, football, mountain climbing and the list goes on. People do things once unthinkable because someone tried and died. Not my gig, but I'm not knocking those who do it.

 

[DevonDiver]

Pete, I probably didn't express it clearly. By "disassociate", I meant academically. I was talking about safety education.... so I was describing the relationship between reader and victim. Pinning all the blame on Garman as some sort of manic despot living a fantasy that led to suicide creates a dissociation between reader (diver) and Dr Garman.

"yeah... It happened to him and his team... But I'm not like that".

Then the "psychobabble" doesn't have to apply to the reader. It is dissociated.

What I'm saying is that Garman and his team made very understandable mistakes. Mistakes that, if understood, could have been avoided.

Even if Garman was egotistical and driving a foolish goal... If his team understood the psychological pitfalls, they may have resulted them.. acted differently.

That's why so many people have congratulated the article. They understood that we could all make the same mistakes.... whether as leader or team member.

Pete, I also agree that Garman was as you describe him. We really do agree on that. But I think his team didn't resist him. They didn't question or listen to external warnings. Warnings were given.... in person and online... by people who had more expert authority than "an ENT doctor with 48 months diving experience".

The "psychobabble" explains why the team adhered to Garman and his obviously flawed project. It doesn't blame them... it excuses them. They didn't know...so they kept concerns quiet, acted supportive... fell into a pattern of Groupthink that enabled Garman's ego-driven Destructive Goal Pursuit.

We can all learn from that.... in bigger or smaller ways.

When the big-headed divemaster says "trust me, you'll be okay to do this dive"... so you don't voice concerns and you go along with it.

When your dive buddy still wants to splash in on the day waves are smashing over the rocks... but you don't want to appear negative or weak... so you go along with it.

When your instructor says "you're great in this cave course , but you hide away all your fears, concerns and worries over your actual comfort and competency.

It may have been a world record deep dive... pushed by a foolish man... but the lessons apply to all of us... regularly...

That is why I felt it critical to write what I did.... and why I'll defend those conclusions now.

 

[Storker]

"yeah... It happened to him and his team... But I'm not like that".

Then the "psychobabble" doesn't have to apply to the reader. It is dissociated.

This is extremely important. It relates quite closely to two of the most famous psychological experiments in history, the Milgram experiment and the Stanford prison study. It's also related to one of the main criticisms of the movie "Der Untergang" when it was released, that it painted a picture of Hitler as a human being, not a monster. It wasn't possible to dissociate oneself as easily.

We all make mistakes. We are all able to do wrong things. We only need some bad luck and/or a crappy peer group to conform to. "There but for the grace of God go I".