Dan,
There are many things that can incite inflammation and the relationship between oxygen exposure and inflammation is complex.
But you seem to have missed the point. The study group that completed a moderately provocative air dive (30m 25 min) with very low oxygen exposure exhibited the same pattern of inflammatory activation as the UTD-RD group. The gradient factor (GF) decompression group was the only group that did not exhibit these activations, yet the GF group divers had a much greater oxygen exposure than the air dive group. This casts almost overwhelming doubt on the hypothesis that oxygen exposure is what provoked the pattern of greater inflammatory activation seen in the UTD-RD group compared to the GF group.
Your crusade to find fault with these valuable and illuminating studies consistently fails to acknowledge that there are no data supporting the approach you appear to be defending. I would suggest that Diver0001's question to Ross is also pertinent to you. Where is the evidence that UTD-RD was ever a good idea? Where is Georgitsis's evidence base that justifies the approach to decompression he prescribed and taught to you? You behave as though you are defending an established proven methodology against sketchy studies; whereas, in fact, you are perpetrating an arbitrary and idiosyncratic methodology concocted by someone with no relevant training in the face of mounting evidence that it is not the optimal approach.
Simon M
There are many things that can incite inflammation and the relationship between oxygen exposure and inflammation is complex.
But you seem to have missed the point. The study group that completed a moderately provocative air dive (30m 25 min) with very low oxygen exposure exhibited the same pattern of inflammatory activation as the UTD-RD group. The gradient factor (GF) decompression group was the only group that did not exhibit these activations, yet the GF group divers had a much greater oxygen exposure than the air dive group. This casts almost overwhelming doubt on the hypothesis that oxygen exposure is what provoked the pattern of greater inflammatory activation seen in the UTD-RD group compared to the GF group.
Your crusade to find fault with these valuable and illuminating studies consistently fails to acknowledge that there are no data supporting the approach you appear to be defending. I would suggest that Diver0001's question to Ross is also pertinent to you. Where is the evidence that UTD-RD was ever a good idea? Where is Georgitsis's evidence base that justifies the approach to decompression he prescribed and taught to you? You behave as though you are defending an established proven methodology against sketchy studies; whereas, in fact, you are perpetrating an arbitrary and idiosyncratic methodology concocted by someone with no relevant training in the face of mounting evidence that it is not the optimal approach.
Simon M
Last edited: