GUE Policy

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Spectre,

I'm not sure why GUE didn't require a PFO.. I know we highly recommend them, and we discuss them in class but I suspect it may be too high of an entry barrier, and it may be cost prohibitive for many.. I know as a member of the WKPP team we were required to get a PFO test..

As to the DIR-F class and any potential OW classes I know the issue is still unsettled since JJ and I just talked through some thoughts about the issue about a month ago, so I'm not sure where it will shake out..

Hope that helps..

Later
 
I think it's one of the best parts of GUE. I couldn't take any courses from GUE when I first moved to Florida because I quit smoking less than a year earlier. The first GUE instructor that I met had an obese student who was smoking directly after debrief. I guess that you can get a waiver.

Cheers,
Sherpa
 
Waiver?
 
Occup Environ Med 2002 Sep;59(9):629-33 Related Articles, Links


Lung function over six years among professional divers.

Skogstad M, Thorsen E, Haldorsen T, Kjuus H.

National Institute of Occupational Health, PO Box 8149 Dep., N-0033 Oslo, Norway. marit.skogstad@stami.no

AIMS: To analyse longitudinal changes in pulmonary function in professional divers and their relation with cumulative diving exposure. METHODS: The study included 87 men at the start of their education as professional divers. At follow up one, three, and six years later, 83, 81, and 77 divers were reexamined. The median number of compressed air dives in the 77 divers over the follow up period was 196 (range 37-2000). A group of non-smoking policemen (n = 64) were subjected to follow up examinations in parallel with the divers. Assessment of lung function included dynamic lung volumes, maximal expiratory flow rates, and transfer factor for carbon monoxide (Tl(CO)). The individual rates of change of the lung function variables were calculated by fitting linear regression lines to the data, expressed as percent change per year. RESULTS: The annual reductions in forced vital capacity (FVC) and forced expired volume in one second (FEV(1)) were 0.91 (SD 1.22) and 0.84 (SD 1.28) per cent per year in divers, which were significantly higher than the reductions in the policemen of 0.24 (SD 1.04) and 0.16 (SD 1.07) per cent per year (p < 0.001). The annual reduction in the maximal expiratory flow rates at 25% and 75% of FVC expired (FEF(25%) and FEF(75%)) were related to the log(10) transformed cumulative number of dives in a multiple regression analysis (p < 0.05). The annual reductions in Tl(CO) were 1.33 (SD 1.85) and 0.43 (SD 1.53) per cent per year in divers and policemen (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: FVC, FEV(1), maximal expiratory flow rates, and Tl(CO) were significantly reduced in divers over the follow up period when compared with policemen. The contrasts within and between groups suggest that diving has contributed to the reduction in lung function.

PMID: 12205238 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

OR

Scand J Work Environ Health 1999 Feb;25(1):67-74 Related Articles, Links


Functional and high-resolution computed tomographic studies of divers' lungs.

Reuter M, Tetzlaff K, Steffens JC, Gluer CC, Faeseke KP, Bettinghausen E, Heller M.

Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.

OBJECTIVES: Several cross-sectional studies have described a decrease in the expiratory flow rates of divers. The objective of this study was to determine whether the combined application of high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) and lung function testing supports the reported development of small airway obstruction in divers. METHODS: Thirty-two navy divers, 27 commercial divers, and 48 referents matched for age and smoking history underwent pulmonary function testing and HRCT of the lungs supplemented by a limited number of expiratory scans. The commercial divers were older and dived longer than the navy divers. Multivariate regression analysis was used to assess the relevant correlations of age, height, pack-years of cigarette smoking, and indices of diving exposure with lung function parameters. RESULTS: The inspiratory vital capacity and forced vital capacity (FVC) were greater, while the FEV% [(100 x FEV10)FVC] and maximum expiratory flow (MEF) at 25% (MEF25) of the FVC were lower for the navy divers than for the referents. The lung volumes and expiratory airflow pattern did not differ between the commercial divers and the corresponding referents. The forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV10), FEV%, MEF75, and MEF25 correlated negatively with the years of diving experience. This association was independent of age, height, and pack-years of cigarette smoking. For the majority of the divers and referents the expiratory HRCT revealed minor lobular air trapping without any difference between the groups. The HRCT did not show relevant morphologic abnormalities of small or large airways. CONCLUSIONS: The data confirm that diving may affect pulmonary function. However, there is no radiologic evidence for the development of small airway disease in these 2 subgroups of divers.

PMID: 10204673 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

OR

Clin Sci (Lond) 1994 Mar;86(3):297-303 Related Articles, Links


Role of cardiorespiratory abnormalities, smoking and dive characteristics in the manifestations of neurological decompression illness.

Wilmshurst P, Davidson C, O'Connell G, Byrne C.

Department of Cardiology, St Thomas' Hospital, London, U.K.

1. Blind analysis of contrast echocardiograms to detect intracardiac shunts, blind analysis of lung function tests for evidence of small airways disease, smoking history and dive characteristics were examined in an attempt to explain neurological symptoms that occurred within 5 min of surfacing from unprovocative dives. 2. Pulmonary abnormalities were significantly more frequent in those divers without intracardiac shunts (50%) than in those with shunts (0%). Smoking was more common in those divers without shunts (55% versus 15%), although this just failed to reach conventional significance levels. Divers without shunts experienced cerebral rather than spinal symptoms after significantly shallower dives with lower tissue nitrogen loads. Depths of dives, tissue nitrogen loads and clinical manifestations in those divers without shunts were similar to the findings in divers who had symptoms after rapid ascents. Despite conservative dive profiles, clinical manifestations in divers with shunts resembled those observed after missed decompression stops. 3. The findings suggest that occult lung disease, and probably smoking, increase the risk of neurological symptoms, even after unprovocative dives, and the similarity of the dive profiles and clinical manifestations to cases with rapid ascents suggest that pulmonary barotrauma and arterial gas embolism are responsible. In divers with intracardiac shunts the different dive profiles and clinical manifestations imply that there is another mechanism, involving different tissue and bubble nitrogen kinetics resulting in venous gas liberation and peripheral amplification in embolized tissues, rather than paradoxical embolism per se.

PMID: 8156740 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
 
MHK once bubbled...
Spectre,

I'm not sure why GUE didn't require a PFO.. I know we highly recommend them, and we discuss them in class but I suspect it may be too high of an entry barrier, and it may be cost prohibitive for many..

Certainly answers my question.

Tom
 
Starfish once bubbled...
Occup Environ Med 2002 Sep;59(9):629-33 Related Articles, Links .........

Nobody is arguing that smoking isn't bad for you, only that the policies are based on things beyond the health aspect.

Tom
 
MHK once bubbled...
It has nothing to do with any pet peeve as much as it has to do with the increased potential for DSC..

Do you think that smoking creats a higher risk than obesity, fitness, fatigue, etc.?

Is this risk not something that the diver can choose to except for themselves the same as they would say diving to certain depths or for extended periods of time?

MHK once bubbled...
Bear in mind, the classes that you cite are normally classes that involve decompression so the chances of a DCS already exist, so we don't want to take any increased risk..

So because there is a "higher" level of risk of DCS you will not certify him, lets compare say a tech 1 diver who smokes to a trimix, diver tech3, doing deep dives who does not smoke, you are willing to certify the later, yet he is exposing himself to a much higher probability of getting bent

How about if the person has quite smoking say two days before the course can they get certified. or the guy who starts smoking after certification would he loose his certification.

As an agency it seems interesting that the only social or phisical atribute that keeps someone from getting certified is smoking.
 
I am brand new and only introduced myself to this board about a week ago. I seem to be getting consumed with the idea of this sport. It is not tested as I haven't even been in the pool with gear yet. From that standpoint most could say that it is way to early in the game for me to have an opinion on diving related subjects. I do know myself however and know what attracts and drives me and what doesn't. So, to the point. I am a 51 yo female who does smoke and is overweight. That being said I was very athletic in younger years and seem to be in very good shape despite it all. Have a recently completed physical to back that up. I have begun working out in a local health club including lap swimming and should begin to notice the benefits. Although the time to lay down smokes is in view, I am not yet ready and won't do it until I am. During a previous 6month abstention I gained 50 lbs. which I have yet to lose. The problem is that I have been reading obsessively about the sport and am drawn toward the more technical aspects. The idea of deep wreck diving holds me captive and has opened my eyes to new venues of expression and self discovery. Do those of you who have had experience at this for a while believe that it is "too late" for me, that I have missed my window? I hate to believe that I am resigned to only reading exploits of others. This is the first time in a long while that I have felt as driven or compelled to do something. I completed "The Last Dive" about 2 a.m. Made two nights reading out of it. Rather than being deterred or frightened I am even more intriguied. I grew up on the Jersey shore and so many of the [places discussed and the ports for the dive boats are familar to me. I can remember as a child standing on the shore looking out to sea and wanting to swim as far as I could go to see what was out there. The jettys used to be my retreat. The place I would go to think and contemplate life. It appears that everyone that I read about with experience is of my approximate age group and most of those experienced divers are retired, dead or considering retirement. Where opn earth do I get the nerve to think that as a beginner in this sport I can acquire the training and experience necessary to dive deep wrecks before the aging processs puts a lid on it? Somehow I believe that I can. Just wanted to know what others of you thought. Guess the true test will come in the water and by who is willing to dive with me. G -
 
The first I ever heard of GUE/DIR was about a year ago from a diver I met in Virginia. He went through 3 or 4 cigarettes and a few beers while telling me how crappy my PADI cert is, and other assorted B.S. too (like how anybody making more than 50 dives on air is probably gonna die). Needless to say, it wasn't much of a first impression! On the other hand, I just bought GUE's "Fundamentals" book, so what can I say.
 
....the fella I saw several years ago smoking... and who is now GUE tech 1 certified....

1. might have quit by now.
2. might have quit before the class.
2. might have been hiding the fact back then.

Anyway... something else to think about:

Isn't it great that there is at least one agency that holds the bar high? For those of you who want to persist in smoking there are all the other agencies. For those of you who want to go with GUE and have wanted to quit smoking anyway... here is the carrot for your stick.
 
https://www.shearwater.com/products/perdix-ai/

Back
Top Bottom