...
In this instance, we see that 41% of the fatalities start because someone ran out of air. I do not for a minute believe that 41% of the total dives made end up in people running out of air. In fact, I'd guess that the rate of people running out of air is something on the order of 0.1% (or even smaller).
This may be fallacious because you are saying one thing and (perhaps) looking at another quite independent thing. Let's grant the idea that 41% of all diving fatalities have as their trigger cause an OOA situation. Does that mean that 41% of the fatalities were people who otherwise had no problem, ran out of air and couldn't handle that and died? Or does it mean that 41% of the fatalities ran into some problem that they could not handle, ran out of air attempting to handle it, and then died? Or ... does it mean that we have so frightened people about running out of air that when it happens they panic and subsequently die of drowning or embolism? Or is it something else entirely?
If it is the first, then we may be able to reduce the problem by teaching them not to run out of air, but if it is the last, we will scare them more and make it worse. If we stress buddy skills, air donation and free ascent skills (which will add significant time to current courses, as per Egstrom's work) we likely reduce problems that might stem from all three possibilities. I submit that the problem is not that we are too caviler concerning running out of air, but rather that the industry is too caviler concerning the ability of students to deal with running out of air. As has been observed, how dangerous is it to run out of air when you are right next to your buddy who is equipped with a long hose and with whom you have practiced air sharing? To which I would add: how dangerous is it to run out of air when you are at a depth that you completely comfortable to make a free ascent from, a depth that you have practiced free ascents from many times? I just don't believe that we make it better by scaring people about how bad it is to run out of air when there really isn't (in my experience) much to be afraid of, unless there are other problems like entanglement or some sort of ceiling.
Since we do not know the total number of people who run out of air in the study period, we can't really come up with a rate of out-of-air fatalities. For all we know, every person that ran out of air died. For all we know, only 10% of the people that ran out of air died.
I rather doubt that anywhere near that number died. While I have never gone OOA unexpectedly, I have, in fact, run out of air hundreds of times, and I'm still not dead.
But what we do know, is that of those who died, running of out of air factors in significantly. And the next thought is that if we could prevent people from running out of air, we could eliminate 41% of the annual fatalities (which would mean about 37 fewer deaths each year).
No, we don't know that, what we know is that running out of air was part of the chain.
So then the question becomes: Why do people run out of air? The answer I've come up with is one that I think is controversial but true: Because we tell them it's OK to run out of air.
It may seem odd at this juncture, but I agree with you. It's like teaching a kid to cross the street, first you teach them not to cross by themselves, then you teach them them to only cross at the crosswalk after looking both ways, then you teach them how to cross in rural areas where there no crosswalks, but pretending that they will never have to cross the street or that crossing the street is so dangerous that is should never be attempted I think is a bit much.
Now, before you decided I'm totally crazy, let me explain that outrageous statement above. Because I'm absolutely certain that if I polled evetry instructor reading this and asked, "Have you ever told your students that it's OK to run out of air" the answer would unanimously be "No!!!" And if I polled every certified diver who's reading this and asked, "Have you ever been told it's OK to run out of air" the answer would be a resounding "No!!!"
So how could I possibly think this? Here's why:
In basic classes, I'm sure we all teach "Don't run out of air, don't run out of air, don't run out of air." But we follow that up with: "But if you do, there are some options." (And we go into combinations of octo, buddy-breathing, pony, free ascent, etc.) We present these options as not only resonable, not only as easy to learn (after, we teach it in a BASIC class) but we also imply, if not state directly, that they have a high incidence of success. We've just inadvertently told them "Don't run out of air but if you do, it's OK because here's how you can solve that probem."
I think we need to stop doing that.
Would it be better simply NOT to teach OOA options? And to simply say, "If you run out of air, there's an excellent chance you're going to die, so don't do it." (Or maybe teach OOA options as an advanced skill.) Shouldn't we be putting the Fear of God in them about running out of air? Because we're certainly not doing it now.
I teach that going OOA is damn stupid because it is a major break in the discipline that is required to keep both you and your buddy alive and well. But ... if you get separated from you buddy (unacceptable) and you run out of air (unacceptable) you can easily apply your free diving skills and the experience that you had making in excess of 20 buoyant free ascents, to save your butt. I also teach both buddy breathing and auxiliary sharing, but more in the context of task loading other exercises such as a doff and don buddy breath, an auxiliary sharing doff and don, a four-corner buddy breathe exercise, and multi pool length air sharing obstacle courses simulating an air sharing swim through a kelp forest. So they are pretty well prepared for it. I have described two actual air sharing incident in other posts.
The other issue with OOA is that there's no penalty for running out of air, other than killing yourself. And how many people REALLY think that whatever they're doing is going to result in their death? Right now, people run out of air and can keep diving. Assuming they don't kill themselves, there's no penalty for it other than a little embarassment in front of other divers.
Maybe we need to change that school of thought. At Reef Seekers (my dive company) we've had a very simple rule on our charters: Run out of air, and you're done diving for the day. Period. No exceptions. Our thought is that you got lucky once, and we don't want to tempt fate twice. In 30 years, we've had exactly one person run out of air (and they lived).
At the DAN workshop, I was asked what I thought the penalty ought to be. I said I thought it was simple: Run out of air, and we revoke your certification card. Want it back? Then you're required to do some remedial training that emphasizes not running out of air. Run out of air twice? Find another sport.
Running out of air, based on the stats, seems phenomenally dangerous. It's certainly not something any of us would recommend yet it's something that, as an industry, we tolerate. Yet it's also something that clearly kills people. And that in turn, has got to have an effect on our insurance rates. Think about it: If we could eliminate 37% of the fatalities tomorrow, wouldn't that also result in fewer lawsuits which should also result in lower insurance rates?
That's about it in a very long nutshell. Thoughts???
- Ken
I submit that running out of air is bad form, is inconsiderate, shows lousy buddy skills, but "phenomenally dangerous?" Naw. What is, in my mind, phenomenally dangerous is the crappy skill level that most divers seem to be turned out with currently ... that is what makes running out of air so dangerous. If we taught people that diving any deeper than they could freedive to required a technical diving frame of mind (and training and gear) would that not solve the problem also?
True, and in an ideal world, we would just add 5-10 hours of additional instruction time to the class and address it in far greater detail. But in the real world, instructors have a finite amount of time to impart the material to students that isn't likely to go up in the near future given current BOW trends. So the question is what do you not talk about or what do you talk about less to give you time to talk more about those things.
All I am arguing is that (using totally made up numbers for hypothetical purposes) if the stats showed that the fatality rate is something like 1 fatality for every 100 OOA incidents while it is 1 fatality for every 20 DCS hits, then it would be foolish to take time away from talking about DCS to talk more about OOA, even if OOA is a higher percent of the fatalities, because clearly the level of training already makes it less likely to kill on a per incident basis than DCS.
Now the problem (and what I was agreeing with Ken on) is that we don't have the necessary statistics to make that determination at this time. So given that we aren't sure how often OOA happens and exactly why, it is best to address how to deal with it successfully and then worry about preventing it once we have a better understanding of why it is happening and how often. If you don't know why divers are doing it in many of the cases where it leads to fatalities, then how can you teach divers to avoid that behavior?
What I'm saying, in a nutshell, is that I don't feel being OOA is the problem, the problem is not having the basic diving skills to deal with being OOA.
Maybe the scariest part of Ken's post is that you can almost imagine a major training agency deciding how much more "expediant" it would be to eliminate all OOA training....or making it something for "very advanced divers"
This is almost a "follow the money" phenomenon....the "entities" that will want to eliminate OOA training, will be the unscrupulous, or the misled...For them it will be the great new way to cut costs and increase profits.
Meanwhile the GOOD instructors, will lose some profit by spending more time on teaching basic skills ( proper weighting and bouyancy/gas management/s drills/buddy awareness/OOA simulations) , and by flunking people that can't learn to dive safely. This will make classes take longer, and there will be less people in some classes....There will also be far less OOA and deaths from this.....hmmnn...this may have just pushed a few more bad instruction entities, over toward eliminating OOA training
REgards,
DanV
P.s.
Maybe we should discuss the CESA issue as well...while I am clearly an advocate for the buddy system and proactively preventing OOA.....when I first started diving I would practice free ascents from 90 and 100 feet, and found them incredibly simple and easy to do....while the practice from this depth is not a safe thing for a person with a pfo ...
Hear! Hear!
Actually, that's not at all what I'm saying.
I'm saying we tend to not pay much attention to really focusing on and teaching not to run out of air. I'm saying that the various OOA options we give them are probably not very well-taught/practiced. I'm saying that this combination gives them a false sense of security that if they run out of air, eveything will be fine because they can handle it. The impression (I think) they're left with is that OOA is no big deal. But the data would seem to suggest otherwise.
I think that what the data says is that as an industry diving instruction does not equip people to either avoid or cope with OOA situations. It needs to do BOTH better.
I'm saying that we really, really, really need to change our emphasis on running out of air. It needs to NOT be acceptable, under any cirumstances. (For the record, this will exclude gear failure, but that's really, really, really rare. It's a straw man.) We need to spend a lot more time on gas managemement, checking air, leaving a good reserve, etc., etc.
I'm also saying do all the OOA drills and options but do them often enough, even it makes for a longer class, so they're actually good at it and there's muscle memory so if the situation arises, they can perform the skills properly.
But at thje same time, give them a REAL reading on the stats and point out the high percentage of fatalities that start with OOA so tjat maybe they have much more respect for the seriousness of running out of air and don't believe in the infallibility of the OOA options.
I'm not advocating soft pedaling the issue, I'm, just saying that the issue is more an indictment of the quality of the skill set that is passed on than it is a question of glorifying or shaming the occurrence.
I disagree quite strongly with "inevitability". That's almost like saying that it going to happen anyhow, so it's not that big a deal. I've made about 5000 dives and I've NEVER run out of air nor has anyone I've been diving with, in a class or recreationally.
I've made about three times that number of dives and (likely due to it being before SPGs) I've run out of air many times, though never without knowing it was going to happen sometime soon.
I don't want to sound too mean with this comment, but saying "running out of air will not be a problem" to me underscores the too cavalier attitude about this that we have in the industry.
If it really does account for 41% of the fatalities, it IS a problem and a big deal.
- Ken
I think it the industry fixed the skills and competence issue the rate would drop by well more than 41%. But that's a cost/benefit question.
