theatis
Contributor
I'm starting another thread on Nitrox, not because I'm fixated on the subject, but because I've recently read two articles on it that take decidedly different angles.
In the May 2006 issue of Dive Training there is an article by Alex Brylske entitled "Nitrox: Understanding the 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' Gas". The author is responding to a letter by a new diver who finds it hard to believe that oxygen could actually be poisonous. The author proceeds to explain why that is the case in a (IMHO) objective and informative manner. If there is any bias on the subject, it's a positive one, and the article ends with "I hope that you do take the nitrox course."
Conversely, in the July 2006 issue of Scuba Diving there is an article by John Francis entitled "Magic Gas?" While this article is also informative, I detect a negative undertone. The author dismisses several perceived benefits to the use of Nitrox and then goes on to talk about its actual benefits. Then, according to the author, it turns out that those benefits are also overvalued. Maybe I'm mistaken, but it seems as if the author is trying very hard to dismiss the actual benefits.
Consider the paragraph (first paragraph on p.83) which discusses the increased no-deco times of Nitrox; the author states "how often do you end your dive when you run out of deco time? Do you go directly to the surface even though you have gas left? Or, like most of us, do you ascend until your computer gives you more minutes, use those, then ascend to get some more, riding your no-deco limits until you've used your gas supply?"
There are two problems with that: one, the underhanded compliment 'Nitrox gives you more no-deco time, BUT it doesn't really matter practically' and two, the fact that the above quote comes across as advice! Given the readership of the magazine, which includes many new and impressionable (such as myself) divers, isn't it at least somewhat irresponsible to endorse riding the computer?
There are numerous other examples of the same formulation but I don't want to bore you with an overly long post. I just wanted to bring it up for discussion and to solicit the thoughts of divers more experienced than I.
In the May 2006 issue of Dive Training there is an article by Alex Brylske entitled "Nitrox: Understanding the 'Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde' Gas". The author is responding to a letter by a new diver who finds it hard to believe that oxygen could actually be poisonous. The author proceeds to explain why that is the case in a (IMHO) objective and informative manner. If there is any bias on the subject, it's a positive one, and the article ends with "I hope that you do take the nitrox course."
Conversely, in the July 2006 issue of Scuba Diving there is an article by John Francis entitled "Magic Gas?" While this article is also informative, I detect a negative undertone. The author dismisses several perceived benefits to the use of Nitrox and then goes on to talk about its actual benefits. Then, according to the author, it turns out that those benefits are also overvalued. Maybe I'm mistaken, but it seems as if the author is trying very hard to dismiss the actual benefits.
Consider the paragraph (first paragraph on p.83) which discusses the increased no-deco times of Nitrox; the author states "how often do you end your dive when you run out of deco time? Do you go directly to the surface even though you have gas left? Or, like most of us, do you ascend until your computer gives you more minutes, use those, then ascend to get some more, riding your no-deco limits until you've used your gas supply?"
There are two problems with that: one, the underhanded compliment 'Nitrox gives you more no-deco time, BUT it doesn't really matter practically' and two, the fact that the above quote comes across as advice! Given the readership of the magazine, which includes many new and impressionable (such as myself) divers, isn't it at least somewhat irresponsible to endorse riding the computer?
There are numerous other examples of the same formulation but I don't want to bore you with an overly long post. I just wanted to bring it up for discussion and to solicit the thoughts of divers more experienced than I.