GUE Membership

[detroit diver]

It was supposedly a support diver that did a bounce dive to 100 ft on his own. Not sanctioned by the expedition.

If you do something stupid, you're going to pay for it. That, and diving is an inexact science.

 

[MikeFerrara]

O-ring,
Where did you hear about this. This is the first I heard. Tell me more!

 

[O-ring]

Not sure what it means...yet. I just heard on some other lists (techdiver, quest) that a GUE support diver got bent on the Brittanic trip (I also heard it explained like DD posted above). That might not mean much...I haven't heard anything about the instructor though...was hoping someone here had heard more than I had.

As for the support diver getting bent...they should be upfront about it. Nobody will be surprised or give them a lot of crap over someone getting bent...shoot, I remember them talking about having to get out of the water and run laps to "get some good bubbles going" so the Duke guys could get some useful data. If they are hiding it...that would look pretty bad, IMHO.

 

[detroit diver]

O-ring once bubbled...
Not sure what it means...yet. I just heard on some other lists (techdiver, quest) that a GUE support diver got bent on the Brittanic trip (I also heard it explained like DD posted above). That might not mean much...I haven't heard anything about the instructor though...was hoping someone here had heard more than I had.

As for the support diver getting bent...they should be upfront about it. Nobody will be surprised or give them a lot of crap over someone getting bent...shoot, I remember them talking about having to get out of the water and run laps to "get some good bubbles going" so the Duke guys could get some useful data. If they are hiding it...that would look pretty bad, IMHO.

If you read the quest post, then you must have missed this response, which I think is very appropriate:


> I had a prostate infection a couple months ago, and
> failed to mention it on
> the list until now. Do I owe you all an apology
> because I "covered it
> up"? No, because it's none of your damn business.
>
> Folks who get bent are free to mention it or not.
> It's their body. You
> have no "right" to their medical information, and
> this notion that there is
> a cover up is ludicrous.
>
> George, GUE, and others given people more than
> enough information to go on
> with respect to avoiding DCS. Don't bounce, don't
> dive with a shunt, don't
> let yourself get hypothermic, use the right mixes,
> take the right gas
> breaks, do the right deep stops, etc. You don't
> need a list of who ignored
> these things to learn them yourself. These feeble
> attempts to personalize
> the subject serve no purpose other than gossip.
>

 

[O-ring]

If you read the quest post, then you must have missed this response, which I think is very appropriate:

..My counterpoint was just that I thought they might want us to learn from it. I can understand people wanting to keep their medical records private though...

 

[MikeFerrara]

Every DCS case is another point of data. We don't need the name of the diver. This privacy argument is BS.

 

[detroit diver]

MikeFerrara once bubbled...
Every DCS case is another point of data. We don't need the name of the diver. This privacy argument is BS.

Not BS at all. If the diver asked not to disclose the info, that's up to him. We don't know otherwise.

If you want to find out about bounce dives and the problems associated with them, go to www.wkpp.org and look for

"Why we dont' bounce dive in the WKPP"

 

[MikeFerrara]

I of course read that long ago. That little diddy is no substutute for data. The one thing we really are lacking in our understanding of decompression is DATA. As I said nobody wants the divers name. Profiles and other relevant facts are what is important. You know the kind of stuff DAN tries to get. Only when it comes to technical diving we are really lacking data because so few dives are done as compared to recreational dives.

Anyone as devoted to the understanding of decompression science as they claim to be should be upfront with the data that they have.

You can disagree or ignore me or tell me to F-off but please please stop with the "If you want to know go read the web-site junk". I think we get too many of those answer around here (usually from the ones who's entire knowledge base on the subject is that website).

If you are envolved in technical diving do yourself a favor and don't trust your life to little write-ups on websites. Or... we can tell DAN to protect everyones privacy by dumping their data base and everyone can just read Georges diddies on the website.

 

[AquaTec]

Why you don't offer names, and you don't advertise the event

It demenstrates that something went wrong on the expidition.
the name proves that something went wrong and provides a point of refference to discuss what went wrong.

by not advertising it, or mentioning any names then the promotors can simply use the excuse that hey you can get bent any time...this is a poor excuse. 99% of bends are due to some known fact or procedure not being adheared to.
but others do not have a victim to discuss, without a name

one last reason is because the diver was probably DIR.
this would allow everybody against their method of decompression to jump on them and use it as an example.

this would not be the case if it was a TDI diver. so you must appreciate the hesitation.

of couse they do have a hard time backing up any of their theories, so you certainly don;t want to advertise that people are getting bent using them.

 

[detroit diver]

MikeFerrara once bubbled...
I of course read that long ago. That little diddy is no substutute for data. The one thing we really are lacking in our understanding of decompression is DATA. As I said nobody wants the divers name. Profiles and other relevant facts are what is important. You know the kind of stuff DAN tries to get. Only when it comes to technical diving we are really lacking data because so few dives are done as compared to recreational dives.

Anyone as devoted to the understanding of decompression science as they claim to be should be upfront with the data that they have.

You can disagree or ignore me or tell me to F-off but please please stop with the "If you want to know go read the web-site junk". I think we get too many of those answer around here (usually from the ones who's entire knowledge base on the subject is that website).

If you are envolved in technical diving do yourself a favor and don't trust your life to little write-ups on websites. Or... we can tell DAN to protect everyones privacy by dumping their data base and everyone can just read Georges diddies on the website.

Actually, I hadn't thought of telling you to f-off, but if you want..

I'm sorry you didn't like the reference to the web page. I don't have a list of what you've read and what you haven't. If you send it to me, I'll peruse that list before offering the info later. And when you know how much that I do or don't know, then you can tell me where my knowledge has come from.

I thought that that link was one of the best explanations of bounce diving that I had seen. And because this team has had a ton of problems with it in the past, they have the data to back it up and the reasons that they don't allow it.

If some of the agencies that had the data would actually release it for public consumption, we would all be better off. But that's another thread...