i tried to fly out today and i ended up being bent

[ktomlinson]

ianr33, I agree. I just pulled up the DAN handbook and read through the exclusions. DAN Membership Handbook There are exclusions, such as if you are under the influence of alcohol or drugs while the accident occurs, and there is a depth limit with the standard policy, as you pointed out, but other than that I believe that a poorly planned dive (not speaking to this incident at all) would be covered. If you did something to get bent on purpose, it may be excluded as attempted suicide, or maybe it would just be called intentional, which would mean it wasn't an accident (as in 'covered diving accident').

 

[daniel1948]

I really think that leaving the 24 hour clock from the previous century on dive computers is there to make the lawyers happy. My Oceanic computers also show a more realistic count down clock to clear.

Considering the statistical nature of DCS, I'll use 24 hours, or my dive computer, whichever is more conservative. Then I'll add a few hours to that. There's always fun stuff to do. I don't have to spend all my time diving.

I do see how it could be confusing. The question though of could/would DAN insurance withhold benefits if you violated DAN recommendations regarding safety standards is interesting. Not being a lawyer so I am not qualified to state an opinion though.

Does anyone know of a case where DAN refused coverage to someone who failed to follow guidelines? Does DAN have a public policy on the matter? Has anyone read the fine print to see if there are exclusions?

 

[lamont]

I'm not sure I buy the PFO explanation.

Typically, when is venous bubbling in the post-dive period the greatest?
Is it 5 minutes after surfacing, 30 minutes, 1 hour, 3 hours, 12 hours, or 24 hours?
Based on published data, I'd venture a guess that venous emboli peak at some point between 30 minutes and 2 hours post-dive.
Taking this into consideration...and then superimposing the change in ambient pressure from sea level to whatever the cabin pressure was at 10,000 ft....I'm not sure if there would be enough of a bubble burden 20 hours later to elicit spinal cord DCS even in the presence of a PFO.
I'd argue that if the patient had a PFO (and PFO is a true risk factor for DCS), he would have experienced the hit shortly after the conclusion of his last dive...not almost a day later.

After a 20 hr post-dive interval, this asymptomatic individual boarded a commercial flight whereupon he experienced numbness/tingling in all of his extremities once the plane reached an altitude of 10,000 ft. Assuming that cabin pressure was kept within a range equivalent to 2000 - 8000 ft. in altitude and taking his dive profiles and pre-flight interval into consideration, this would place him on the "exceptionally prone" end of the DCS spectrum.

Rather than jump to a DCS diagnosis, I would be very careful in ruling out other causes of the patient's symptoms.
I would ask whether the patient was on any prescription/OTC/homeopathic medications.
I would ask whether the patient had a history of circulation, diabetes, or heart disease issues.
I would ask whether the patient has a history of chronic back pain or acute trauma to the vertebrae.
I would also have to consider anxiety/panic attack in the differential.

If I could rule out all of those other potential causes...and presumptive treatment for DCS (rides in the hyperbaric chamber + breathing O2) resulted in resolution of the patient's symptoms, then I would settle on a diagnosis of DCS and just say that, for whatever reason, the diver was very unfortunate to experience the hit.

For everywhere that you said "PFO" there you can substitute "DCS" in general.

If this was DCS then the diver probably threw a bubble somewhere nasty in the 30 minutes to 2 hours post dive which was subclinical to begin with -- then the depressurization on the aircraft caused the bubble to expand and compress nerves and whatever and start causing symptoms.

The idea behind a PFO (or some other shunt or some other biological susceptibility) is that we all experience bubble showers in that window of time and don't get bent like that, particularly a type 2 hit 18 hours later (which doesn't make a lot of sense off of the NOAA tables either -- a shoulder hit or other type 1 hit in slow tissues would make a lot more sense)

Agreed that I'd be very skeptical of DCS under the situations described...

 

[iztok]

DAN's 18 hour recommendation is irrelevant to this mishap as it is based on a maximum altitude of 8,000'. By going to 10,000', the mishap diver is outside the DAN parameters.
Rick

WTF? Who went up to 10k ft? Commercial airliners are pressurized to max 8k ft (most cases even lower).

 

[DandyDon]

Considering the statistical nature of DCS, I'll use 24 hours, or my dive computer, whichever is more conservative. Then I'll add a few hours to that. There's always fun stuff to do. I don't have to spend all my time diving.

I believe I had read DAN releases that they find no improvement in safety with that approach, but - sure, if you like it. It's not safer, but it's fine.

 

[iztok]

I'm not sure I buy the PFO explanation.

I would ask whether the patient was on any prescription/OTC/homeopathic medications.

You don't buy the PFO explanation but you buy homeopathic medication?!?

 

[Bubbletrubble]

You don't buy the PFO explanation but you buy homeopathic medication?!?

I suspect there's a reading comprehension issue at play here.

 

[iztok]

I suspect there's a reading comprehension issue at play here.

Don't think so. Why would you even consider homeopathic "medicine" as an issue?!? Since when does it have any proven effect? The key point I was trying to make here is that you seem to dismiss PFO but are concerned about homeopathic "medicine"?

 

[vladimir]

and there is a depth limit with the standard policy, as you pointed out, but other than that I believe that a poorly planned dive (not speaking to this incident at all) would be covered.

The OP's case is interesting and perhaps instructive, so I don't want to go too far off topic, but I have often wondered how the depth limits apply in the case of divers who plan a dive to recreational depths and get swept much deeper, as seems to have happened to the divers in THIS TRAGIC INCIDENT in Cozumel.

 

[DandyDon]

The OP's case is interesting and perhaps instructive, so I don't want to go too far off topic, but I have often wondered how the depth limits apply in the case of divers who plan a dive to recreational depths and get swept much deeper, as seems to have happened to the divers in THIS TRAGIC INCIDENT in Cozumel.

We do not know the plan for that dive, but the cheapest DAN Dive Insurance plan has covered limited to "Planned Maximum Depth" of 130 ft, so as long as you planned no deeper - if you got caught in a down current, it should still be covered.

The cheapest plan is still a dog tho, when for $10 more one can get so much more - including Extra Transportation & Accommodation expenses which could have helped in this case? I hate that DAN keeps that plan and once had the opportunity to speak with Dan Orr, the president of DAN, on another matter - and asked why they did keep it? His reply was that members said they wanted it. Ok, well, it is a membership organization.