Filmmaker Rob Stewart dies off Alligator Reef

[Storker]

>yawn<

Do your own math. And then share it.

Nope. I know chem and physics, I don't know medicine. I have no effing idea about how much CO the hemoglobin in 5L of blood can absorb. You made the claim, you provide the evidence. That's how it works. Give me the numbers - with proper documentation - for how much CO the hemoglobin in 5L of blood can absorb before it's saturated, and I can do the math.

Philosophical burden of proof - Wikipedia

If you can't provide proof for your claim, it's worth exactly nada.

 

[KathyV]

The Stewart Family is asking for donations to the World Wildlife Fund - Canada to carry on Rob's work:

http://wwf.ca/robstewartfund

 

[St John the Diver]

Nope. I know chem and physics, I don't know medicine. I have no effing idea about how much CO the hemoglobin in 5L of blood can absorb. You made the claim, you provide the evidence. That's how it works. Give me the numbers - with proper documentation - for how much CO the hemoglobin in 5L of blood can absorb before it's saturated, and I can do the math.

Philosophical burden of proof - Wikipedia

If you can't provide proof for your claim, it's worth exactly nada.

>yawn<

Someplace between zero and infinity is a PPM of CO that's important to an open circuit diver and irrelevant to a closed circuit diver. That's my point, and it's just physics.

If that fact (which it is) inspires you to further research on quantifying the number, enjoy your work. I'm not so inspired. It doesn't make my point invalid.

Physics are physics. Feel free to build upon my point with your own work.

 

[Storker]

>yawn<

I see that you throw out a claim and then repeatedly refuse to document it. In your own words: >yawn<

 

[St John the Diver]

I see that you throw out a claim and then repeatedly refuse to document it. In your own words: >yawn<

I'm satisfied with pointing out that there is a range someplace between "x" and "y" of PPM of CO where an open circuit diver is much more vulnerable to CO than a rebreather diver using the same gas as diluent. That point should be self evident. It's not something that needs, for qualitative use, more "proof". It stands on its own merit and should be a takeaway point for anyone interested.

If you want to quantify it, be my guest.

If you want *Me* to quantify it, send me a retainer for the time I'd spend crunching it. I'm happy to do the work, but not for free. ;-)

Simon Mitchell probably has the figures in his head. Ask him.

 

[Storker]

If you want to quantify it, be my guest. If you want *Me* to quantify it, send me a retainer for the time I'd spend crunching it.

You made a claim. In my world, the person making a claim has to provide documentation. It's not up to the other participants in the discussion to prove my claims; I have to document them myself. If you aren't willing to document your claim, it has exactly zero value.

And just to be clear here: I'm not arguing against you. I only ask you to provide evidence for what you're saying because it's a rather easily tested hypothesis if the numbers are available. If you have evidence, I'll check it, do the math and tell you whether or not I agree with your claim. If you won't provide evidence, you're just sprouting bovine manure.

 

[grf88]

I'm satisfied with pointing out that there is a range someplace between "x" and "y" of PPM of CO where an open circuit diver is much more vulnerable to CO than a rebreather diver using the same gas as diluent. That point should be self evident. It's not something that needs, for qualitative use, more "proof". It stands on its own merit and should be a takeaway point for anyone interested.

If you want to quantify it, be my guest.

If you want *Me* to quantify it, send me a retainer for the time I'd spend crunching it. I'm happy to do the work, but not for free. ;-)

Simon Mitchell probably has the figures in his head. Ask him.

Claudia L Roussos MD
Diplomate, American Board of Anesthesiology might disagree with you:

"Carboxyhemoglobin is even more of a consideration for closed-circuit rebreather (CCR) divers. Open circuit divers exhale the CO that dissociates from hemoglobin. Divers using CCR simply rebreathe it."

May we enquire as to your credentials so that we can determine who is the most qualified person to listen to.

 

[St John the Diver]

Claudia L Roussos MD
Diplomate, American Board of Anesthesiology might disagree with you:

"Carboxyhemoglobin is even more of a consideration for closed-circuit rebreather (CCR) divers. Open circuit divers exhale the CO that dissociates from hemoglobin. Divers using CCR simply rebreathe it."

May we enquire as to your credentials so that we can determine who is the most qualified person to listen to.

Point taken, and studied with interest. I'll go do a search for the paper and read it. I'm interested in what is right, not who is right.

It's going to be an interesting calculus of variables. His point is taken "however" there will be some PPM where all of the CO has been bonded to hemoglobin in the rebreather case (no more availability) where in the open circuit case availability is continuous. Might be an interesting curve when plotted out.


Encouraging comments from Dr Mitchell as well.

And no. You may not.

 

[St John the Diver]

You made a claim. In my world, the person making a claim has to provide documentation. It's not up to the other participants in the discussion to prove my claims; I have to document them myself. If you aren't willing to document your claim, it has exactly zero value.

And just to be clear here: I'm not arguing against you. I only ask you to provide evidence for what you're saying because it's a rather easily tested hypothesis if the numbers are available. If you have evidence, I'll check it, do the math and tell you whether or not I agree with your claim. If you won't provide evidence, you're just sprouting bovine manure.

Thanks for the mature, polite, and professional response. Insult is the lowest form of debate. I'm very happy to stand factually corrected, and always encourage beliefs to be challenged , but I will not engage in any debate incorporating insult.

The other poster, in comparison, has provided contrary citations that are being read with great interest.

 

[Storker]

May we enquire as to your credentials so that we can determine who is the most qualified person to listen to.

I'm not claiming anything and I don't ask you to listen to me. I have a training in natural sciences and like to think that I know something about chem, phys and math. I don't' however, know much about physiology or medicine, and investigating St John's claim requires data from that field. Specifically, the only data I need (with proper documentation) is how many mols of CO can an average person's blood absorb without negatively affecting the blood's ability to transport oxygen.