flying after diving

[Saturation]

James Goddard once bubbled...


Crystal clear. Thanks!



Yes, this is the important part of the puzzle that is missing.

Another study from the same site mentioned looking at a little over 1000 cases of scuba related DCI. This study showed that in 5.6% of the cases the symptoms first presented during or after flight. While it might seem sigificant, there is no data on how many of these people would have developed symptoms had they elected not to fly.

The other missing factor is, as you pointed out, what percentage of total dives do these 1000 incidents represent.

Again, I hope to see some more useful data come out of the current DAN study. Untill then we just have to guess...

James

Most welcome, James, and excellent analysis of the data as it exists today.

Dr. Vann has an ongoing study, as a previous post of mine may clarify. The preliminary data is quite encouraging, using FAD time _lower_ than 12 hours.

There is a risk associated with FAD before 12 hours, and if the diver is willling to accept these risks, a recommendation need not be made, but rather referenced to the old risk associated with recommendations for a pre-flight SIT of 12-24 hours.

A risk vs time table is most informative rather than a single time pronouncement.

The USN FAD table gives recommended times for each USN air table pressure group, alas, the vast majority of data points on that table are extrapolations on a few data points, per personal communique with Dr. Freiberger. However, it gives the diver more information concerning a risk for FAD DCI. If divers are substantially lower than the cutoff times presented in the USN table, or the plane flys lower than 10,000', can all be considered.

 

[HammerNoMore]

Saturation once bubbled...
A risk vs time table is most informative rather than a single time pronouncement.

That sums it up quite simply. So often in these threads hard and fast numbers (12, 18, 24) are thrown out. I'd much rather see the risk vs. time table approach. If we're talking about number similar to my risk of dying taking the side roads vs. the interstate home, I would proably shorten my personal 24 hour rule.

As it is, I see no reason to stand in the way of someone who's personal risk acceptance put them in the "wet hair" category.

James

 

[Saturation]

James Goddard once bubbled...


That sums it up quite simply. So often in these threads hard and fast numbers (12, 18, 24) are thrown out. I'd much rather see the risk vs. time table approach. If we're talking about number similar to my risk of dying taking the side roads vs. the interstate home, I would proably shorten my personal 24 hour rule.

As it is, I see no reason to stand in the way of someone who's personal risk acceptance put them in the "wet hair" category.

James

Yes, I concur.

In general Mr. Wet Hair's exploits have been with trimix with 02 decompression, and these practices do alter the conditions by which the original FAD recommendations were made. "Cleaner " decompression makes sense to insure enough desaturation keeps microbubbles from growth.

Instead of considering wet-hair pre-flight techniques insane, one should see exactly what is done, as it may offer another tool to allow flying soon after diving.

 

[BigJetDriver]

Saturation once bubbled...
Instead of considering wet-hair pre-flight techniques insane, one should see exactly what is done, as it may offer another tool to allow flying soon after diving. [/B]

This is, obviously, a subject of extreme interest to me, given what I do for a living. I find that I have to both agree with you gentlemen, and respectfully disagree.

I too prefer the risk versus time table or graph approach as long, of course, as the underlying bases or conditions are adequately spelled out. It makes personal judgements as to relative risk easier.

I directly, strongly, and vigorously oppose, however, the public advocacy of "wet hair pre-flight techniques". May I remind you, gentlemen, that what might be an academic discussion between ourselves, as professionals and interested researchers, can and generally WILL be taken at face value by the "diving public", so to speak. Your words will be taken as "fact" and extended to amazing, and probably unintended limits. We all have seen this happen in practice, with sometimes unfortunate consequences.

I too am waiting on tenter-hooks for the results of DAN's study when, I presume, we will know a lot more about the "real" risks involved. Until that time, however, I must publicly oppose anyone who advocates "wet-hair" procedures. Further, I believe that responsible professionals must, as well.

To paraphrase our own Dr. Deco, we know that individuals vary widely in their "resistance" to DCS. What might work for one individual might not for another. Further, individual "resistance" can vary widely with one individual on a daily basis. In reference to "wet-hair" procedures, Doc Deco basically said: "When it works, it works. When it fails, that failure will be most spectacular!"

As I said, indirectly, to MHK, if someone who is a public advocate of "wet-hair pre-flight techniques" suffers an incident of DCS on my aircraft, I will direct the effort to aid him (or her) and divert the aicraft to a location where better facilities are available. (Unfortunately, although I am a certified DMT, I am not allowed to leave the cockpit to aid in such situations due to security procedures.)

I must then aid the authorities in their investigation of the incident. I will make my knowledge of the individual's habits available to the NTSB, FAA, and company legal department. We WILL, at the very least, take such an individual to court in a civil action to recover the not-inconsiderable sum involved due to the divert. The thrust of the argument will be that this individual, by knowingly and willingly flying in the face (If you will pardon the pun!) of known, accepted, and established procedure, wilfully placed the aircraft and all aboard at increased risk due to the unknowns invoved in such non-standard operations. Further, it will be pointed out that this individual purposely took these risks, and as such, should at least be held liable for the costs involved. I believe that, given the tenor of our civil court system, we all understand what the result will be! That, gentlemen, whatever my personal beliefs might be, IS part of my job!:shout:

P.S.---I would welcome further thoughts from you both on this matter via PM.

 

[HammerNoMore]

BigJetDriver69 once bubbled...
I directly, strongly, and vigorously oppose, however, the public advocacy of "wet hair pre-flight techniques". May I remind you, gentlemen, that what might be an academic discussion between ourselves, as professionals and interested researchers, can and generally WILL be taken at face value by the "diving public", so to speak. Your words will be taken as "fact" and extended to amazing, and probably unintended limits. We all have seen this happen in practice, with sometimes unfortunate consequences.

We've been down this road before but I guess I'll once again have to explain my thoughts on this:

1. I have never seen anyone, MHK included, recomend wet hair flying. What MHK has said is that given a proper decompression, FIAD is not something that he and his compatriots consider to be dangerous. What is important here is that we are not talking about standard rec diving.

2. Anyone who blindly follows the advice of so called "internet experts" deserves whatever they get. We have as a society evloved to the point that Darwin's theories don't really apply well anymore. When the actually do I must applaud it.

I believe that, given the tenor of our civil court system, we all understand what the result will be!

Hmm, big bloated airline (granted I have no idea who you fly for) vs. indivdual. Yep, I've got a real good idea what the result wil be...

P.S.---I would welcome further thoughts from you both on this matter via PM.

Why would we want to take what has so far been an interesting and inteligent debate offline?

James

 

[BigJetDriver]

James Goddard once bubbled...


We've been down this road before but I guess I'll once again have to explain my thoughts on this:

1. I have never seen anyone, MHK included, recomend wet hair flying. What MHK has said is that given a proper decompression, FIAD is not something that he and his compatriots consider to be dangerous. What is important here is that we are not talking about standard rec diving.

2. Anyone who blindly follows the advice of so called "internet experts" deserves whatever they get. We have as a society evloved to the point that Darwin's theories don't really apply well anymore. When the actually do I must applaud it.



Hmm, big bloated airline (granted I have no idea who you fly for) vs. indivdual. Yep, I've got a real good idea what the result wil be...



Why would we want to take what has so far been an interesting and inteligent debate offline?

James

SIGH!! Yes, you are quite right. We have been down this road before. What I guess I had forgotten is that you are a friend of MHK's, and seem to feel bound to defend him. He, and others like him, have publicly said, in other forums, that FIAD is okay, despite the fact that our very own "internet expert" Doc Deco, and many others, specifically recommend against it. He, of course, bases his statements on the way he and his group do things. That we are NOT talking about standard rereational diving is something that I thought was understood from the start.

NONE of the above negates the thrust of my comments in any way. We, as professionals, have a responsibility to try to frame our discussions in such a way that it is understood that this is not something for the average diver to attempt without specialized training. (Don't try this at home, kids!)

As for the snotty comment about "big bloated airline versus the individual", you have missed the point I was trying to make. If you are in DCS distress because of accident or innnocent mistakes, I would doubt that my company would seek to do anything else than send you a get-well card, despite the time and expense it will take to help you out.

If it is a known fact that you have knowingly and willingly put yourself in this position, and thereby imposed on everyone on the airplane financially and otherwise, I see nothing wrong with asking you to pay for some of the ruckus you've caused. At that point, it's only fair that you do!

As Tom Mount of IANTD has said, any individual, once properly informed of the dangers, has the right to risk himself in any way that he (or she) sees fit. I firmly believe that!

What he does not say, but does believe, is that he or she does NOT have the right to thereby impose burdens on others who have not made that choice.

All of the experts in the field, not just the "internet experts" as you call them, and all of the recognized training agencies state publicly that flying immediately after diving, especially decompression diving , is NOT a good idea. My personal view is that, hey, if you want to do it, have at it, brother. More power to ya! Just don't tell people that it's a good idea, or even give the impression that this is a good idea, because as far as we know at this point, FIAD is NOT A SMART THING TO DO! :nono:

 

[HammerNoMore]

BigJetDriver69 once bubbled...
What I guess I had forgotten is that you are a friend of MHK's, and seem to feel bound to defend him.

Not particuarly. I've never met him and a year ago I would have sworn he was my arch enemy as a "DIR" diver. I've grown and learned that, even though I am not and probably will never be DIR, that it is not the antichrist.....

What I feel bound to defend is misrepresntation of any sort. The fact is he simply does not promote FIAD. The problem is that there are a few people, you included, who are so against the idea that they take the "if your not against it, you must be for it."

Facts are I am neither. I just belived that there is not enough proof do make a decision and therefore, if you want to be conservitve, great, me too. If you want to be risky, more power to you.

He, and others like him, have publicly said, in other forums, that FIAD is okay

Ok. Show me a cite. Because any cite you can show will actually demonstate a lot more than you are saying. i.e. It includes a proper decompresson, i.e. not what PADI teaches, and a level of physical fitess that would exclude 90+ percent of PADI divers.

Despite the fact that our very own "internet expert" Doc Deco, and many others, specifically recommend against it.

No offence to our "very own expert" Dr. Deco. I love that someone with a degree is willling to take the time to answer these questions. But the fact is: He doesnt know the answers!!!!! This is the point. Yes logical recomendation is to be conserveratve. But it is all guess work.

He, of course, bases his statements on the way he and his group do things. That we are NOT talking about standard rereational diving is something that I thought was understood from the start.


NONE of the above negates the thrust of my comments in any way. We, as professionals, have a responsibility to try to frame our discussions in such a way that it is understood that this is not something for the average diver to attempt without specialized training. (Don't try this at home, kids!)

I *try* to be carfull to explain this point whenever I post on the subect. If the "kids" don't listen, it's not my problem.

As for the snotty comment about "big bloated airline versus the individual", you have missed the point I was trying to make. If you are in DCS distress because of accident or innnocent mistakes, I would doubt that my company would seek to do anything else than send you a get-well card, despite the time and expense it will take to help you out.

I assure you there was no "snottyness" intedend and I am truely sorry you misinterprete my statement. I thought the smiley would have been enought to cover my intentions. I was stating that: Yes, in this litigous society, you are right that there are some amazing cases, but I've never really seen them go against the indivudal vs. the big company.

Take the Mc. Donalds coffee case: (for the record I agree with the outcome having actually read the facts). The "person" won. Never the "big" company. If your airline were to go after a person who had a medical problem on a flight and were to try to recover damages in court, they would loose. To me that is a fact. To your company that would be a waste of money. They just wouldn't even try.

I'm not saying it's right. Just that it is reality.

If it is a known fact that you have knowingly and willingly put yourself in this position, and thereby imposed on everyone on the airplane financially and otherwise, I see nothing wrong with asking you to pay for some of the ruckus you've caused. At that point, it's only fair that you do!

Nor do I. I think that there is not enough peronsal responsibility in the world. You are 100% correct that a person should be responsible for their own mistakes, but in the real world it just doesn't work like that.

As Tom Mout of IANTD has said, any individual, once properly informed of the dangers, has the right to risk himself in any way that he (or she) sees fit. I firmly believe that!

What he does not say, but does believe, is that he or she does NOT have the right to thereby impose burdens on others who have not made that choice.

And when MHK causes a flight to be rerouted, you have a right to ***** about it. Untill then its all theory and you are just complaining about someone who is not as conservative as you are.

All of the experts in the field, not just the "internet experts" as you call them, and all of the recognized training agencies state publicly that flying immediately after diving, especially decompression diving , is NOT a good idea. My personal view is that, hey, if you want to do it, have at it, brother. More power to ya! Just don't tell people that it's a good idea, or even give the impression that this is a good idea, because as far as we know at this point, FIAD is NOT A SMART THING TO DO! :nono:

Actually, when I when I was talking about "internet experts" I was refering to MHK. But for the record: There are no exprerts in this field.. The official answer is: "We just don't know so it's better to be safe than sorry." There is nothing expert about that. So until we have experts, why do you have to get upset about people who's opinions differ from yours?

James

P.S. BJD: I understand you are passionate about this and so am I. But you need to understand we are not on opposite sides here. You are staying that in the face of doubt, take the conservative route. I'm saying in the face of doubt, make up your own mind. What is so bad about that?

 

[BigJetDriver]

James Goddard once bubbled... (among other things...)

P.S. BJD: I understand you are passionate about this and so am I. But you need to understand we are not on opposite sides here. You are saying that in the face of doubt, take the conservative route. I'm saying in the face of doubt, make up your own mind. What is so bad about that? [/B]

I would have to say, for the record, in answer to the last question: "Absolutely nothing is wrong with that!"

 

[HammerNoMore]

BigJetDriver69 once bubbled...


I would have to say, for the record, in answer to the last question: "Absolutely nothing is wrong with that!"

Good to hear .


BTW, I'll be in your neck of the woods on the 21'st. I'm going out for a dive with http://www.fishndivers.com/. I'd love to a) meet you or b) dive with you if the opportunity arises.


PM Me,

James.

 

[nyresq]

a few questions to you guys who drive the big jets (737s, 767s, etc), not the puddle jumpers:

what does the pressue in a passenger jet cabin equal to, in terms of altitude?
I have been told its a universal pressure for standard commercial flights, I've also been told its anywhere from 4,000 to 8,00 feet above sea level depending on how the pilots set the pressure in the plane.

is it adjustable by the pilot?
could a pilot increase the pressure in the cabin if someone were to start having symtoms of DCS while in flight?
if so, could a pilot increase it to the point of nearing sea level to subside any dcs untill back on the ground?

any big plane drivers, please help me out, and also if you could mention what type of plane your talking about when you post will be helpful.
thanks