LOL. Your doubt is irrelevant to the reality.I've already expressed my honest doubts in the existence of such "post-dive lethargy" a.k.a. fatigue.
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
LOL. Your doubt is irrelevant to the reality.I've already expressed my honest doubts in the existence of such "post-dive lethargy" a.k.a. fatigue.
I've already expressed my honest doubts in the existence of such "post-dive lethargy" a.k.a. fatigue.
I think you miss the whole point of the site.These are some neat examples and I enjoyed reading them, but they are limited to 10 data points for each measured phenomenon. Make it 30 data points, or hundreds, or thousands, and now it starts to become statistically more relevant.
I've already expressed my honest doubts in the existence of such "post-dive lethargy" a.k.a. fatigue.
It just get curioser and curioser with every post.
I think you miss the whole point of the site.
Ha! Perhaps. Doing the math often takes the fun out of arguing.
And for the record I still have not stated anything about bubble mechanics. [...] EAN can increase no decompression limits but somehow does not provide safety margin against decompression injury. It does both by reducing the partial pressure of nitrogen and subsequently it's absorption. Which is Henry's law. That is all I have stated is fact.
For example, it would be interesting for a group of regular divers to dive 50 dives each on Nitrox and 50 dives on air, interspersed and double-blind, and log how they felt afterward.