Skin Bends

[tangfish]

Glad to hear that your wife is OK and that you have some fantastic sounding plans for sailing and diving ahead of you.

I wanted to follow up on your point about PFOs, forgive me if this is taking the topic too far off course (if it is will a Mod please split this off?). How did your wife and/or dive club members go about closing off those PFOs? From what my doc told me it is a pretty serious surgery and one that he did not recommend for me given the very tiny one they theorize that I have and my age/health history. In other words he said that the risk outweighed the benefit. This was probably 8 years ago though so I'm wondering if a more minimally invasive procedure has become available.

Thank you for sharing your wife's experience and for any info you have on the repair of a PFO.

Back in Australia she was tested and found to have a PFO. Most people (it seems) who have skin bends have a PFO. She had that closed last December and this weekend will do her first dive.

In our dive club, there are at least four members who got bent. Every one had PFO and have had it fixed. I know a couple of others who also had PFOs.

You should get yourself checked when you get home and consider getting it fixed.

 

[Rich Keller]

It appears that you're saying that the probability of DCS when diving tables (used as directed) is zero. Did I read this correctly?

Absolutely not. That is not what I intended to say or imply. I was saying that diving a square profile rather then going by the computer was safer. At the end of that statement I said "you should never have this problem again" not that he would never have the problem again. I clarified that statement later for someone else who asked the same basic question as yours. My response was "Nothing about this is 100% certain, that is the point I was trying to make. Even the most conservative tables are not 100% right all the time for everyone so when you remove the built in safety margins from those tables by using a computer you are increasing your risk."

 

[duke dive medicine]

Absolutely not. That is not what I intended to say or imply. I was saying that diving a square profile rather then going by the computer was safer. At the end of that statement I said "you should never have this problem again" not that he would never have the problem again. I clarified that statement later for someone else who asked the same basic question as yours. My response was "Nothing about this is 100% certain, that is the point I was trying to make. Even the most conservative tables are not 100% right all the time for everyone so when you remove the built in safety margins from those tables by using a computer you are increasing your risk."

Thanks for clarifying. I guess what you're saying is that tables carry a lower probability of DCS than dive computers. Can you provide data or references for this assertion?

Best regards,
DDM

 

[clownfishsydney]

My wife's PFO (and those of the others I know) was fixed with an implant inserted via a vein from the inner thigh area. The attached explains the procedure Endovascular Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO) Closure. The implant is sort of like two folded umbrellas at the end of a catheter. When the catheter is withdrawn, the umbrellas open, one either side of the hole. They stay there in place and the heart tissue grows over it.

It was day surgery, took only 30 minutes or so with a recovery of a couple of hours. The device costs AU$12,000 or so but was covered by health insurance. The surgeons here say that the risk is very low. In her case, we did not want a repeat of this when on our yacht in a location that may take us days to get to civilisation.

Hope this helps.

 

[Freewillow]

12,000 Aus $ for such a prosthesis is outrageous. I worked for such a device company. These prices are insane, when one considers the manufacturing costs.

 

[Rich Keller]

Can you provide data or references for this assertion?

I think the Navy dive tables show that the more time you spend underwater the more nitrogen your body will absorb. If the OP dove the tables he would have been out a lot sooner then he was. There are no guarantees but it seems far more likely that he would have been fine.

 

[Freewillow]

Whaw! Time to realize that we have reached the 21th century since quite awhile, for some old farts

 

[Rich Keller]

Whaw! Time to realize that we have reached the 21th century since quite awhile, for some old farts

Did the laws of physics change in the new millennium? No? So what else do you have besides name calling?

 

[Freewillow]

Well, you recognized that I was talking about you. So you may not be a lost case, after all

Your hilarious answer " I think the Navy dive tables show that the more time you spend underwater the more nitrogen your body will absorb. " had nothing to do with Duke Diving medicine's question.

Either your answer was making fun of him or was totally inapropriate and absurd. Be my guest and choose one .

 

[tangfish]

Come on now, just because we disagree about something on the internet that doesn't mean we lose our manners.

While I think Rich Keller's argument might've been stronger a dozen years or more ago, I dive both a Petrel 2 and various Oceanic computers on both rec and tech dives (Shearwater for the latter), I strongly believe they are not only more accurate than diving tables alone, but safer as well. For example, what happens if the conditions demand that you divert from your original planned dive profile?

Btw I cut two sets of tables (calculated using software) for every tech dive as a precaution but given the choice I'll stick to the computers 100% of the time and diving pre-cut tables are for a last resort only.