Info History of PADI's Enriched Air Nitrox course

[boulderjohn]

I am trying to figure out how PADI became the arch villain in opposing nitrox. I looked for the oldest ScubaBoard threads I could find reflecting on the history of Nitrox use, and I could barely find a mention of PADI in terms of opposition. Then I checked the Wikipedia site and looked through their history. When they discuss the forces opposing its recreational use in the early days, PADI doesn't merit a mention. The strongest opponents were apparently Skin Diver magazine and BSAC. PADI is credited in the history for establishing nitrox as a standard part of recreational diving.

Here are a couple of excerpts:

• In 1991, Bove, Bennett and Skindiver magazine took a stand against nitrox use for recreational diving. The annual DEMA show (held in Houston, Texas that year) banned nitrox training providers from the show. This caused a backlash, and when DEMA relented, a number of organizations took the opportunity to present nitrox workshops outside the show.[6]
• In 1992 BSAC banned its members from using nitrox during BSAC activities.[39] IAND's name was changed to the International Association of Nitrox and Technical Divers (IANTD), the T being added when the European Association of Technical Divers (EATD) merged with IAND.[citation needed] In the early 1990s, these agencies were teaching nitrox, but the main scuba agencies were not.
• In 1993 Skin Diver magazine, the leading recreational diving publication at the time, published a three-part series arguing that nitrox was unsafe for sport divers.
• n 1996, the Professional Association of Diving Instructors (PADI) announced full educational support for nitrox.[33] While other mainline scuba organizations had announced their support of nitrox earlier,[39] it was PADI's endorsement that established nitrox as a standard recreational diving option.

 

[tursiops]

1992 article in Dive Training Magazine. See especially the last few paragraphs about PADI's position on Nitrox.

 

[scubadada]

1992 article in Dive Training Magazine. See especially the last few paragraphs about PADI's position on Nitrox.

Thanks very interesting:

For example, the Maximum Operating Depths (MODS) for NOAA Nitrox I and NOAA Nitrox II are 130 and 110 feet respectively. Exceeding these depths exposes divers to the same risk of oxygen poisoning as breathing air beyond 210 feet!

So the MOD was at a ppO2 of 1.6

 

[100days-a-year]

I remember taking tanks already filled for pp blending into PADI shops in the 80s without their knowledge in some cases and with wink from one.

 

[tursiops]

Here is a major document, from 1989 (from a workshop in 1988), that was a DAN-sponsored conference on the use of Nitrox.
Several points about the articles:

• The range of PPO2 from 1.4 to 1.6 is repeatedly mentioned, with the former being "safe" and the latter only for limited durations and use.
• Much concern about how to move nitrox into the sport-diving domain....the feeling that it needed to be done with "controls" so that people learned how to and actually analyzed their gas, and they treated seriously the 1.4 (or whatever) limit on their MOD.
• The workshop summary is worth reading. It says, in part:

There was a concern expressed about letting all of this high tech information fall into the​

hands of sport divers, because they will get themselves in trouble. We just heard Dick Rutkowski summarize that situation . There seems to be no way that we can keep them from doing it . We might as well share the information and do the best we can and let them get proper training and proper mixes and so forth , so that if they are going to do it, they can do it in a safe manner. If they do not , it is going to kick back on all of us .​

There seems to be a general consensus among this group that diving with a PO2 of about 1.6 atm is acceptable. I would endorse that , although I would not dive all day at 1.6. There has to be a time limit to it . I would not advocate a higher limit in this community. Maybe commercial or military agencies might have occasion to do something different, but for the university, or the oceanographic institution like HBOI, there is no point in going much beyond that , in my opinion . That seems to be pretty much the opinion of most of the people that talked about it at this Workshop. What I mean to say is a level of 1.6 atm is okay for a few minutes, and that very short exposures to higher levels would be acceptable.​

We have heard about diver - carried decompression computers; with or without logging capability, these would make enriched air a lot easier to use , and I expect that the next time this group convenes to talk about this subject we will have something like that available.​

 

[Doc]

Like Utah found money to be had in alcohol sales…. More money.

I watched that happen, even helped it along. The tip-in was all about the Winter Olympics. You get no press coverage without booze.

what everyone wants to talk about, i.e. money ruins everything.

money RUNS everything. That is how and why this happened.

….to lobby OSHA to permit Nitrox …

Yes, spelling is part of your grade. It’s nitrox.

 

[NothingClever]

Great thread.

 

[Akimbo]

My understanding is that PADI was just one of many loud voices opposing Nitrox. Skin Diver Magazine was probably leading the charge, followed by most training agencies, and dive shops were not far behind.

Aside from FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) over relatively unproven NDL and decompression tables, there was also a major investment that dive shops had to consider. The learning curve was also a BIG jump from air diving. Even US Navy Scuba and Second Class divers were not proficient at dealing with PPO2.

 

[BoltSnap]

My understanding is that PADI was just one of many loud voices opposing Nitrox. Skin Diver Magazine was probably leading the charge

PADI, one of the biggest adervtisers on Skin Diver mag. at that time pushed Skin Diver to oppose Nitrox. PADI wasn't working alone.

 

[boulderjohn]

at that time pushed Skin Diver to oppose Nitrox.

So you are saying that when Skin Diver magazine pushed against nitrox in 1993,they did that because PADI secretly pushed them to do it, even after being openly neutral about it in Dive Training magazine the year before? (They said they don't teach it, but they don't oppose its careful use.) So you are saying PADI's public stance was a lie, and they were secretly fighting against it, is that right? Why do you think they quickly changed shortly after that and came out with a full teaching program for it?

Do you have any evidence of this other than your well known hatred of all things PADI to back it up? Nobody else in the scuba world seems to know about this secret arrangement. How did you find out about it?