Half of Dead Divers on Their First 20 dives

[Crowley]

Statistics again.... if half of scuba related deaths happen to people with less than 20 dives then half of the other scuba related deaths happened to "experienced" divers. There are so many variables involved that they become relatively meaningless in the end. Is 20 dives experienced? No, not really. I would also suggest that there are vastly more divers in the world that have fewer than 20 dives than those that have hundreds, so as a statistical percentage of a broader base of divers, of course the accident numbers will be greater.

Inexperienced car drivers make up a significant number of road accidents, but experienced drivers also crash. Often this is because the experienced driver, rather like the "experienced" diver often becomes lax in their application to basic safety.

I regularly joke that there is an imaginary PADI cert after OW and AOW which is IOW - "Immortal Open Water" - an attitude amongst people with significant - but still limited experience that basic Open Water type safety protocols are no longer relevant. A little knowledge becomes a dangerous thing. Buddy checks are not conducted properly, so tanks are empty or not properly open, hoses aren't connected, depth and computer limits are pushed because people learn that recreational margins are very conservative.

I find many novice divers to be almost overly cautious. Their buoyancy is not great, they flap about a bit, but they tend to be quite safe. Yes, a significant percentage display no control whatsoever and I do have to wonder why they even want to get into the water. Yes, poor training bears a portion of that responsibility, but not all.

In my experience, the people that have had problems, have problems with their attitude towards diving as a whole, and sadly this is often coupled with poor training, or a poor understanding of good training, which amounts to the same thing.

Supervision of divers is what is required of a DM but no DM or guide is solely responsible for what people do on that dive. That responsibility falls to them (the divers), and them alone, within the plan outlined for them by the guide. Sadly, many people fail to recognise this, have accidents and then blame everybody except themselves for what went wrong.

Statistics are a good way to keep 75% of the population occupied for 13% of the latter third of their day. Otherwise, there are simply too many variables.

Dive safe, do buddy checks (ppleeeassssee!)

C.

 

[Dr Neil]

One major factor in that decision is that every time I read about a death up here it seems the diver is over 45, ....

Age, poor physical health, and lack of experience is a fatal combination.

 

[sabbath999]

Four immersions in Puget Sound's cold, green murk are not enough, I think, for most people to feel truly COMFORTABLE in that environment.

True... when I come up there to dive I plan on getting in about 12 immersions in Puget Sound's cold, green murk

 

[LeadTurn_SD]

I'd be curious if this statistic is any different than the way it has always been.

I may be remembering this incorrectly, but one of the arguements always seems to be that OW divers are being produced with less training and skills than in say the 1970's.... I am a diver certified in 1976 and a product of the old school of training, and my initial instinct is to agree. Divers were on the whole younger, fitter, had better water skills, were often "skin divers" before they learned scuba, etc.

But.... Then I seem remember that 1977 was one of those record breaking years for diver fatalities...

So, is what we are seeing with the <20 dives statistic the way it has always been? And would this same type of statistic apply to other potentially "high risk" activities?

Best wishes.

 

[DevonDiver]

I'd guess that the occurance of equipment failure contributing to fatality has decreased since the 1970's, but the occurance of human error contributing to fatality has increased.

Overall, the increase in human error has been smaller than than the decrease in equipment failure, leading to a generally downward curve in the fatality statistics over 40 years.

I'd also imagine that there were a higher percentage of 'self-taught' divers back in the 70's. The courses were more 'robust', but less divers actually took them?

 

[boulderjohn]

The DAN fatality statistics, which are part of the annual report and are included in the workshop presentations, show a dramatic decrease in the number of deaths since the 1970s. Since there are almost certainly many more divers today than in the 1970s, it would be a huge decrease on a percentage basis.

EDIT: Check these numbers.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

True... when I come up there to dive I plan on getting in about 12 immersions in Puget Sound's cold, green murk

You better make sure and let me know when you're coming ... you're up near the top of my SB People I Wanna Dive With list ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[Damselfish]

I've also read in the past that very inexperienced divers were less likely to be fatalities or serious injuries. Wherever I read that theorized it was because divers with a little more experience started to get complacent and pay less attention to what they were doing.

Statistics are wonderful things...

 

[Garrobo]

Whew!! Glag I'm beyond my 200th dive. Now I can quit worrying.

 

[boulderjohn]

I just looked at the latest DAN fatality report (2008) and saw something interesting in relation to the 20 dive statistic. According to the chart on page 63, 55% of all the deaths they investigated were to divers with at least 6 years of experience, and a total of 40% had 10 or more years of experience. Less than 20% had fewer than 2 years experience.