What I've learned from the Accidents/Incidents report forum

[Rich Keller]

There is absolutely something to learn from those discussions ...

- people are remarkably good at denial
- many of us think we're better than we actually prove to be
- complacency kills
- "it can't happen to me" ... can

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

I am about as far from complacent as you can get. My reaction to most of these reports is that these people should not have been where they were to begin with. I rarely use scuba below 60ft, do not make penetration dives on scuba and I do not make dives that require decompression on scuba. About 95% of the life in the sea is in the first 33ft along with the best light and visibility. I understand that my view point is different then most but having been a commercial diver when I look at a dive profile and start to add up the numbers on what I would charge someone to make a dive like that I find something else to do when the cost gets too high. Most people view the more challenging dives as a next step, I just see it as work and dangers work at that especially using scuba. For enjoyment I dive shallow, long, low impact and with minimal equipment.

 

[boulderjohn]

@NWGratefulDiver: Did the accident analysis in the cited article discuss the possibility that the tanks were drained after the victims expired or lost consciousness (for whatever reason)?

As DAN writes regularly in their reports, it is often very hard to distinguish the true triggering incident. Frequently the only information they really have is the announced cause of death. In their reports, one of the key causes of death is an air embolism. What caused that? Well, usually we can assume it was a rapid ascent without a properly opened airway. What caused that? Well, often it is running out of air. They have been working very hard to try to separate the triggering incident from the actual cause of death.

In the recent Cozumel incident that caused such a stir, the cause of death was directly related to decompression sickness. Why did the diver have decompression sickness? She did not do any decompression stops after a dive to 400 feet. Why didn't she do any stops? They ran out of air and had to go straight to the surface. Why did they run out of air? They might have had enough air for the dive they planned, but she went to 400 feet unplanned and used too much air doing it. Why did she do that? Narcosis.

So what was the triggering event for that fatality?

 

[MX727]

Just ordered my CO tester. When this first came up a few years ago, I figured it was over reaction. I don't feel that way any longer. Thanks DD. You finally got through to me.

 

[Bubbletrubble]

As DAN writes regularly in their reports, it is often very hard to distinguish the true triggering incident. Frequently the only information they really have is the announced cause of death. In their reports, one of the key causes of death is an air embolism. What caused that? Well, usually we can assume it was a rapid ascent without a properly opened airway. What caused that? Well, often it is running out of air. They have been working very hard to try to separate the triggering incident from the actual cause of death.

In the recent Cozumel incident that caused such a stir, the cause of death was directly related to decompression sickness. Why did the diver have decompression sickness? She did not do any decompression stops after a dive to 400 feet. Why didn't she do any stops? They ran out of air and had to go straight to the surface. Why did they run out of air? They might have had enough air for the dive they planned, but she went to 400 feet unplanned and used too much air doing it. Why did she do that? Narcosis.

So what was the triggering event for that fatality?

@boulderjohn: Thanks for your response. The incident you presented is particularly instructive. Among issues in the chain of precipitating events leading to death in that particular incident, one could point to reckless dive planning, poor gas management, narcosis, inadequate gas supplies, improper choice of breathing gas, lack of deco obligation contingency planning, DCS, etc.

I understand how difficult it is to identify "the initial triggering event" in many cases. I suppose that's why I'm concerned when DAN reports (or other people quoting a DAN report) use terminology that connotes certitude, e.g., "the initial triggering event." Perhaps I'd be more comfortable with the term "likely initial triggering event" since that indicates there is some uncertainty involved in the accident review/classification process.

 

[DandyDon]

Just ordered my CO tester. When this first came up a few years ago, I figured it was over reaction. I don't feel that way any longer. Thanks DD. You finally got through to me.

The unknown CO deaths attributed to drownings may well be a small number worldwide, but we just don't know for sure - much less how many unreported, non-lethal hits there are each year, or how many "travelers flu" cases were really sub-clinical CO hits. They all happen tho, along with the ones we know about - but they don't have to. A portable kit is just not that much money, it can be shared with an entire group, fast & easy to use - and when you do get a reading, well you'll have something interesting to add to your adventure vacation story instead of a high risk dive.

So what happens if you calibrate it annually, carry it on every trip, test ever tank, and never get a reading? You might get bored, I do at times when I don't get a reading for a dozen tanks - but I've gotten a few, in a few different countries, and I'm just a vacation diver.

Some will keep risking it the old way, I know. I know of two couples who survived hits who still don't check. :silly: Makes no sense to me, but their calls.

 

[boulderjohn]

I was thinking of this thread and another one recently during a conversation I was having with someone. the other thread is one started by someone who was alarmed by what she thought was a large number of recent deaths reported in the accident and incident forum. That thread sparked a lot of discussion about why there were so many such deaths.

That was a few weeks ago. My interest was renewed based on the conversation I had, and I went through the most recent threads in the A&I forum--by that I mean the ones that had the most recent posts in them, not the ones started the most recently. I was curious about the divers who died. here is what I found:

The experience of 3 of the divers was unknown because they were new events.

The experience of 16 of the divers ranged from experienced to tech. One diver I placed in this group had 30 dives. I would categorize all the others as ranging from very experienced to tech.

One diver was relatively newly certified and was diving in a very difficult area.

So, to go back to the thread about the high number of deaths. The conclusion that a large number of participants drew from that number was that it was a reflection on the poor quality of initial OW instruction--all these new divers just don't know what they are doing.

I just found that to be interesting.

 

[pixelpixie]

Great information! thank you!

 

[Hatul]

The most common underlying cause of emergency and injury is running out of air at depth. Lack of keeping a tab on the tank pressure.