Use your CO analyzers

[Dr. Lecter]

The more of your posts I read, the more comfortable I am with you not bothering to analyze your fills. Call it apathy/sensibility.

Honestly, I can't even get my dive op to supply a nitrox analyzer so I made my last 10 or so nitrox dives blind. But that fact would really send you into a tizzy, so I withheld it. I figure, if I'm not worried about a real problem like ox tox, why should I worry about a made-up problem like CO poisoning?

For the record, I'll eat a medium-rare burger on Cozumel in a heartbeat. Life is too short to worry about the sky falling. When the plane eventually crashes, you have no control. Trust in Jesus. Trust in Karma. I dunno. Maybe I just trust statistics. I've never won the lottery, so there ain't no way I could die from CO poisoning.

---------- Post added March 7th, 2013 at 02:58 PM ----------


According to DAN, Dave, and whoever, CO never existed in tanks before 2011, when they started monitoring for it. I refuse to believe that. I'm pretty sure CO contamination has always been a risk, it's just a rare and usually preventable one. When a compressor takes in CO, it usually takes in the other stuff with it, i.e. car exhaust or cigarette smoke or burning lubricant. While CO may be odorless and colorless and oh so deadly, it doesn't come in on its own. I mean, really, do you think someone takes a cylinder of medical grade CO and opens the valve next to the compressor intake accidentally? No. If your air tastes like car exhaust or smoke, it's likely contaminated. Don't breath it. If you have no taste buds in your tongue, use an analyzer. My taste buds are just fine so I do my analysis the old-fashioned way, the way that so many millions of divers did successfully before CO was invented in 2011.

---------- Post added March 7th, 2013 at 02:59 PM ----------


Did that teammate do the autopsy on the spot, underwater when he recovered the body? What are his or her medical examiner qualifications? Apathy to rumors is only sensibility, nothing more.

 

[Mike]

When a compressor takes in CO, it usually takes in the other stuff with it, i.e. car exhaust or cigarette smoke or burning lubricant. While CO may be odorless and colorless and oh so deadly, it doesn't come in on its own. I mean, really, do you think someone takes a cylinder of medical grade CO and opens the valve next to the compressor intake accidentally? No. If your air tastes like car exhaust or smoke, it's likely contaminated. Don't breath it. If you have no taste buds in your tongue, use an analyzer. My taste buds are just fine so I do my analysis the old-fashioned way, the way that so many millions of divers did successfully before CO was invented in 2011.

According to how I've been informed the biggest contributor to CO contamination in a tank has nothing to do with anything you cited. It's more likely to be contributed to the compressor consuming it's own oil due to overheating and such and there will be no cigarette smoke or car exhaust smell to alert you. Going by your own logic you're using based on statistics, statistically if it's going to be high in CO it won't be detectable by smell or taste.

While I line up more with yourself in regard to all this and agree with your logic in regard to the odds. However, this is all relatively new and unknown territory. There are many deaths in Cozumel that have been unexplained, many DCS incidents that don't fully follow typical explanation. I would never be shocked if in say 10 years we were looking at CO very differently than today as more and more becomes known.

What I do know is that with more and more testing being done by individual divers, we are finding more and more bad tanks.

 

[ktomlinson]

Mike, you called what mossman is spewing logic. This guy isn't using logic, he's being a troll. Feeding him keeps him coming back for more. Regarding the dive op being supportive, they were as supportive as one could be after the fact. In a perfect world they would fill their own tanks and analyze them before giving them to customers, but unfortunately that's not the norm here. I have my own CO analyzer for a reason, this time it kept someone from getting a headache, one day it may very well keep someone alive.

 

[theduckguru]

When divers start inquiring about air quality as their first question before making a reservation, you will have CO testers on the boats. The charters will advertise them as a safety item to address the concerns of the dollar laiden customer.

As long as someone shows up periodically with a tester and confirms the air is good. You'll never see a CO analyzer on a boat.

On a scale of economy, it is rather silly for 8 divers to show up with analyzers rather than the charters self equipping.

Charters have no problem labling tanks for O2 content, I don't see why they can't certify CO.

Fine, Moss - information direct from a teammate who recovered the body is not up to you selective standards. Your apathy is well noted.

For those who wants to confirm that their air is safe, ask your Ops if they supply portable O2 & CO analyzers on the boats? Please do ask, as we need to expect such. Until that works, you can rent one at the link in my sig, or shop for deals. It's been a while since anyone sponsored a group discount buy, so maybe it's time. I won't, but someone might.

 

[Mossman]

Point made: you do not care about safety. You dive your way and leave the safety discussion to those who won't dive untested tanks.

I do care about safety. But I do not walk around in a big bubble because I'm so worried about safety. There are risks in everything we do and I live my life ignoring the infinitesimal risks in favor of enjoying myself. I've honestly never, ever seen a diver analyzing for CO on a dive boat. Would I ridicule that diver for spending the 10 minutes checking his tanks and likely rejecting one or both in favor of sitting on the boat during the dives? No. But would I rub it in that I saw something particularly rare on the dive he or she sat out, heck yeah.

Point made: You have not actually studied the risks or even paid attention to knowledgeable discussions on SB enough to know that busy compressors all too often produce CO internally by partially burning lubricating oil.

"Knowledgeable discussions on SB" says it all. No, I do not trust my life to Scubaboard discussions. I do not necessarily believe everything posted on the internet. But it's good you do. By the way, I have a deal on an excellent bridge in Brooklyn if you're so inclined. For you, really cheap. Send me a check and I'll mail you the deed. Simple as that. It's got to be true because I said it was and look, it's on Scubaboard.

By which I take it that you're fully trusting in a rumor you heard on the internet. Good for you. That bridge offer is still valid, but only for 90 more days. Talk it over on Scubaboard, I'm sure you'll get the right advice.

Not that anyone would actually listen to Mossman's creed, but I can tell you 14 people, including myself, couldn't "taste" anything in our CO contaminated tanks. Everyone had a headache, and a couple came up puking within minutes of descending. The worse off folks were the ones that started with empty tanks (500psi) when they boarded the boat, and had received multiple fills, vs my dive buddy and I on doubles that were filled upon boarding. It was not an exhaust issue it was an internal combustion issue.

You did say which boat that was, right? And I just missed it.

The more of your posts I read, the more comfortable I am with you not bothering to analyze your fills. Call it apathy/sensibility.

Just say you wish me dead, that's a lot easier. No one wants to read double-talk mumbo jumbo. I talk straight, I deserve a straight response.

According to how I've been informed the biggest contributor to CO contamination in a tank has nothing to do with anything you cited. It's more likely to be contributed to the compressor consuming it's own oil due to overheating and such and there will be no cigarette smoke or car exhaust smell to alert you. Going by your own logic you're using based on statistics, statistically if it's going to be high in CO it won't be detectable by smell or taste.

Oil-free compressors would be a good thing.

But tell me this, Mike. You're a smart guy. Combustion is combustion. Is burning oil really tasteless and odorless? I know it's not when my car burns oil. I know it's not when I leave the olive oil on the stove too long. Are they using special odor-free burning oil? If so, I strongly urge all air dealers to start using stinky oil. That way we don't have to invest in all these fancy detection devices. Except for those without tastebuds, of course.

While I line up more with yourself in regard to all this and agree with your logic in regard to the odds. However, this is all relatively new and unknown territory. There are many deaths in Cozumel that have been unexplained, many DCS incidents that don't fully follow typical explanation. I would never be shocked if in say 10 years we were looking at CO very differently than today as more and more becomes known.

What I do know is that with more and more testing being done by individual divers, we are finding more and more bad tanks.

Ah, yes, you are fully in line with my theory that CO poisoning wasn't invented until 2011.

Sure, prior to 2011, the science was very bad. Unexplained DCS incidences were just filed away as unexplained. Now we have CO to blame, which unfortunately wasn't discovered until 2011, when the science became so accurate that we now know that 10% of divers should be dead because they dove on tanks that, before CO analysis was discovered, obviously had levels high enough to kill them.

Except that 10% of divers didn't die. Either tanks with CO are a brand-new phenomenon, like compressors never burned oil prior to 2011, or something is wrong with the theory. Sure, everyone with an analyzer is now finding dozens of tanks that don't pass muster. They reject the tanks. They don't die. But do you really believe that only the handful of divers with analyzers are the ones finding the high-CO tanks? That would be incredible odds. The fact is, the vast majority of tanks with high-CO levels are not being detected by divers, the divers dive those tanks, they go home blogging about their wonderful Cozumel vacation. That's it. The entire CO conspiracy theory in a nutshell: it either didn't exist before 2011 or it's overblown concern today.

 

[Ron Lee]

Suggesting that the two women who died in the last year "could have" died as a result of CO poisoning is without any supporting facts.

All we know is that there was an apparent failure in the buddy system and the women were never seen again. A more plausible explanation is that they panicked and drowned.

As far as blaming Mexico practices and complacent dive ops, that may play a factor but it is also a reality that today many people are quick to blame others when the individual screws up. Some of those people may be in part driven by the monetary outcome of lawsuits.

Mossman, people are using "high CO tanks" without a viable standard of what "high CO" is. A previous post mentioned 10 PPM. Is that the industry wide accepted standard for allowable CO in a scuba tank? If so, what dive depth/duration did they use to set that standard? You may not know the answer. It is for general discussion.

 

[fred3798]

Air is .2% CO. At what level in a tank ought we to refuse to dive?

 

[citycountryguy]

I think Mossman and DandyDon have to be dive buddies until they get this figured out.

 

[theduckguru]

Air is .2% CO. At what level in a tank ought we to refuse to dive?

Well, that depends a lot. 10 parts per million is CGA Grade E standard for air supported by most of the scuba agencies. IANTD has another standard for nitrox mixes of 2 ppm. Some air fillers have a standard of .3 ppm. And some SB posters say it should be any thing >zero.

http://www.alertdiver.com/402
http://www.fillexpress.com/library/gasquality.shtml

 

[ggunn]

One of the divers who retrieved the body. I do not know why the team decided to minimize public discussion other than the deceased was a close personal friend of all on the team, so their call. As usual, the local authorities said nothing publicly, and the local news didn't do much - not that they are known for accuracy on what they do publish anyway. Same actions as in the Baja CO diver death last year, as expected for any destination that depends on tourist money.

Is that diver a physician? A coroner? A medical examiner? Is he Quincy?

Don't misunderstand me; I am not saying that I know for a fact that the death wasn't from CO poisoning, or that CO contamination is never a problem in SCUBA tanks on Cozumel, only that the above anecdotal evidence does not establish a confirmed case of a death from CO poisoning. You are stating something as fact when it is in my view your willingness to accept the opinion of an inexpert witness as fact because he agrees with your agenda, backed up by your suspicion that "they" don't want you to know what really happened.