Diver Deaths by Agency?

[billy_b4c]

I doubt seriously that this data is readily accessable, but has anyone ever seen any diver death data broken down by certifying agency? The reason that I am asking is that a local dive "professional" stated, "You do know that (insert agency here) has had more diver deaths, don't you?" That's a pretty bold statement, and I'm looking for figures to substantiate it.

Please note that I am not trying to restart the perpetual agency war, and I even doubt that this data even exists; just wondering if it does.

[Debraw]

I doubt that kind of information or data is recorded by any reliable source. It would be hard to really give it any credibility even if it was available because if an agency did 10 times more students than another agency then yeah they would have more accidents. It's the law of averages.

[Fish_Whisperer]

This was asked a few months ago. The thing is, PADI, because of sheer numbers and length of time as a certifying agency, is probably going to have the most, whereas a different, smaller agency like MDEA, doesn't have ANY. The basic question of "deaths per agency," is too general to really net any statistics that are going to be meaningful.

[NWGratefulDiver]

I doubt seriously that this data is readily accessable, but has anyone ever seen any diver death data broken down by certifying agency? The reason that I am asking is that a local dive "professional" stated, "You do know that (insert agency here) has had more diver deaths, don't you?" That's a pretty bold statement, and I'm looking for figures to substantiate it.

Please note that I am not trying to restart the perpetual agency war, and I even doubt that this data even exists; just wondering if it does.
I don't believe anyone keeps statistics on diver deaths by agency. In fact, I can see at least one obvious problem with trying to collect such a statistic ... lots of divers hold certifications from more than one agency.

For example, I have certs from six different agencies. If I were to get into a fatal diving accident, which one would get the "credit" ???

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[cerich]

GUE has lead to the death of independent thinking among more divers than any other agency.;)

Avoid the shop that got you to ask this question, it says volumes about them.

[Cacia]

because if an agency did 10 times more students than another agency then yeah they would have more accidents. It's the law of averages.


That can be corrected statistically, otherwise all studies would need to have the same sample sizes. What is the bigger problem many times iis
something like

Dr X has more lawsuits (and let's assume he did have more "bad surgical outcomes")

than Dr Y. Can you assume he is an inferior surgeon? Not if his referral patterns bring him sicker more complicated patients, like what happens at a tertiary care center or a teaching hospital. That is why looking this stuff up on physicians is very misleading, IMV. The best specialists are doing the toughest cases, on the worst protoplasm.

So, let's say agency X has the most deaths per some given number.

But maybe the they get the top shelf dive candidates looking for the training that will allow them to do more aggressive profiles, etc. The selection that provides a different set of people has already occurred....

and now you have divers doing different dives.

or, one agency might have more vacation divers, more unfit divers, even different disposable income populations. Income level alone has a big influence on death rates, unless I am mistaken. Access to health care, diet, all that.

It is hard to correct for all of the differences in one study.

[jd950]

Excuse the brief sidetrip here, but is GUE pronounced "gooey" or "Gway" or "Gay" or what?

Sorry for my ignorance.

[Charlie99]

The reason that I am asking is that a local dive "professional" stated, "You do know that (insert agency here) has had more diver deaths, don't you?" The correct answer is "No, I didn't know that. What do you have to substantiate that claim?"

I doubt that he has anything to back up his statement, and you should be careful about trusting anything else that he tells you.

[rakkis]

A large number of divers hold certifications from various agencies as well. So even if you COULD get the normalized stats, you'd still need to consider that.

[JeffG]

Excuse the brief sidetrip here, but is GUE pronounced "gooey" or "Gway" or "Gay" or what?

Sorry for my ignorance.
http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?t=185520

[jd950]

Thanks, I should of searched but figured I might be the only one that didn't know the correct pronunciation. I guess I shoud have known it would just be said G-U-E. I doubted anyone would really want to call it gooey, but.....

[-hh]

I doubt that kind of information or data is recorded by any reliable source.

DAN collects this sort of information on their Dive Accident / Fatality statistics. I think that they once might have published the results (early 1990s?), but they've not done it since.



It would be hard to really give it any credibility even if it was available because if an agency did 10 times more students than another agency then yeah they would have more accidents. It's the law of averages.

You could argue that you could try to normalize the data by cross-referencing it to the number of divers certified, but the dive Agencies jealously guard that data.

If you could get current participants to data-share, you could do a good enough job cross-referencing these various sources to gain some insight on the relative performance of the different Agencies for the first 0-3 years since a diver was first certified. Clearly, this is not the kind of information that the "not the winner" would want to have available to anyone, especially the insurance companies.

After that initial start, the analysis problem gets complicated by diving frequency rates and the drop-out rates. Plus there's the wrinkle of divers that hold Cards from multiple Agencies - - where to you catagorize them?

All in all, about the best you can hope for is an aggregate risk based on the number of actual divers ... which is another number that's not well known; see the current issue of Undercurrent for the discussion.

Bottom line is that the numbers could be firmed up quite a bit if someone were willing to pay for the work to be done...currently, its a "don't ask/don't tell".


-hh

[RonFrank]

75% of statistics are made up on the spot, and the rest are inaccurate and misleading! :mooner:

Since EVERY diver that has been certified has died, or will die, than every agency has a diver death rate of 100%... Problem solved! :eyebrow:

I assume you mean divers deaths resulting from dive accidents?

I happen to have that right here, in my left pocket! Wait, wrong pants!

Sorry, on this one you are on your own. OTOH, it should be rather easy to pull the BS-O-Meter on the guy that made the statement. DAN does not have this data, or at least does not publish it, and that is likely the only source that tracks this type of stuff at a global level.

[lifeisfullofgooddives]

Personaly I think people should be more concerned with learning as much as you can from a "good" instructor. Which is why I kinda think this question is not to valid.

I have had good & not so good instructors for the same agency....I really don't think agency matters....

There really is no point to keeping these type of statistics...because you could be the best diver in the world...trained by the best agency....and still screw up and kill yourself

[Rick Inman]

GUE has lead to the death of independent thinking among more divers than any other agency.
To believe this statement, I'd have to totally give up my independent thinking and trust you.

Pass.

[BKP]

Whew... talk about a can of worms...

Next would be:

-Death by regulator brand
-Death by full moon cycle
-Death by paddles or splits ;)

[Cacia]

the insurance companies do it with cars though.

don't they?

[BKP]

the insurance companies do it with cars though.

don't they?
Perhaps... however, cars aren't subjective... they either have a 30mph crumple zone, or not... etc... Agencies, on the other hand vary from instructor to instructor... Too subjective...

[jviehe]

To put some perspective on things, there are about 100 diving fatalities every year on average, half of which are attributed to medical problems underwater. PADI does release its certification numbers, and on average issues 900,000 certs of all levels every year. So, an attempt to link an agency with deaths is going to be statistically insignificant.

[james croft]

I have dozens of c-cards from various agencies. Who would get the blame?

[Rick Murchison]

I have dozens of c-cards from various agencies. Who would get the blame?PADI of course.
Next question...
Rick :D

[GreenDiverDown]

GUE has lead to the death of independent thinking among more divers than any other agency.



What?

[JeffG]

What?
I didn't know that you took a GUE class.

[GreenDiverDown]

I didn't know that you took a GUE class.

What?

[RJP]

75% of statistics are made up on the spot, and the rest are inaccurate and misleading! :mooner:

Three out of four people make up 75% of the US population.

[GreenDiverDown]

Three out of four people make up 75% of the US population.

Finally... something I can understand.

[RoyN]

I think the blame should go to the diver themselves, not the agency. It is because of the diver's health or mental state that caused them to die. My aunt who scuba dive years ago died was not because she was PADI but because she panic underwater in Pt. Lobos in 2004. I took classes in both NAUI and PADI and all of them are very careful in making sure divers play it safe. Had she followed proper procedure on how to untangle in kelp, she would have been alive. Anyways, thats my 2 cent opinion.

[billy_b4c]

Thanks for all of the responses, but I didn't think that this data is readily accessible. Someone did make a good point that the insurance companies most likely would have this data. I agree, and am pretty sure that DAN does as well. This information would be the Holy Grail of retail SCUBA marketing, without a doubt.

As far as some agencies having more students than others, that data can be easily compiled by percentages. And as for which agency would "get the blame" in cases of multiple agency certifications, I would think that it would be the agency that issued the OW. For mulitple OW certs, the most recent.

...But this is all moot, for we can't get this data.

It wasn't anyone affiliated with a dive shop that made this statement, but his agency does train divers. I manage a dive shop, so his comment was an attempt to engage in an arguement. My exact reply was, "That is a bold-assed statement. I'd like to see the numbers on that."

Anyway, thanks to all for the participation and the ideas.

[-hh]

Whew... talk about a can of worms...

Next would be:

-Death by regulator brand
-Death by full moon cycle
-Death by paddles or splits ;)


IIRC, DAN has been publishing numbers that infer the risk by gender.


-hh

[Diver Dennis]

Perhaps the relevant question is, as it always has been, how safe is diving in general and how many deaths can be directly linked to poor training. Documented diver deaths include drowning, whether it be from a heart attack or running out of air. Diving, IMHO, is a very safe sport.

[The Kraken]

The better question would be, what is the percentage of divers certified by agency XYZ that have fallen victim to a fatal diving accident?

Not to be confused with "died while diving" (strokes, heart attacks, etc. which would have occurred regardless of the environment)

the K

[Rick Murchison]

... And as for which agency would "get the blame" in cases of multiple agency certifications, I would think that it would be the agency that issued the OW. Why would you think that? It seems to me that the Scuba safety aspects - procedures, principles and practices - of an OW cert are quickly eclipsed by follow-on training, and that any realistic agency association with a mishap should be applied to the "most applicable." Would you really assign YMCA, where I got my OW cert in 1971, responsibility for a mishap if I have one now? I'm an instructor with SSI but I took my instructor training through NAUI and NASDS, crossing over to SSI when NASDS & SSI rejoined - would you assign SSI responsibility if I were to get bent on a multi-gas deep decompression dive? (Training for such dives has come from NAUI, TDI, IANTD, NSS-CDS and NACD)
No, in my analysis of "Agency assignment" to a mishap, we need to look at what happened with specific reference to the standards and common practices within an agency's activities. If the mishap victim violates established standards & practices then there's no legitimate agency association (unless there's a whole bunch of the same violation indicating we don't have a clear understanding of the agency's real vs professed practices). If, on the other hand, the following of a common practice - like settling to the bottom to get on the knees to clear a flooded mask - contributes to the silt-out that contributes to the ultimate mishap, then the agency or agencies that instilled that habit needs to be taken to task.
Rick

[billy_b4c]

Why would you think that? It seems to me that the Scuba safety aspects - procedures, principles and practices - of an OW cert are quickly eclipsed by follow-on training, and that any realistic agency association with a mishap should be applied to the "most applicable." Would you really assign YMCA, where I got my OW cert in 1971, responsibility for a mishap if I have one now? I'm an instructor with SSI...


Hi Rick -

No, I think in the case of a professional that they would chalk that one up to your current affiliation, but all of this is really hypothetical. We can't get this data, if it exists at all. Imagine the lawyer feeding frenzy if one agency was to use it against another.

[BKP]

IIRC, DAN has been publishing numbers that infer the risk by gender.


-hh
Actually, I believe that might have a tad greater credibility...

One of the industry mags had done a male vs female diving strengths/weaknesses comparison (more anecdotal than empirical, however). It used basic precepts such as comparative SAC rate, overall strength, pre-disposition to panic, health issues, etc.

If I can find it, I'll post the mag/issue if anyone's interested.

[jviehe]

IIRC, DAN has been publishing numbers that infer the risk by gender.


-hh
I wouldnt say that they "infer" anything. They only report the statistics. Im not sure they draw conclusions from them.

[Walter]

I think the blame should go to the diver themselves, not the agency. It is because of the diver's health or mental state that caused them to die. My aunt who scuba dive years ago died was not because she was PADI but because she panic underwater in Pt. Lobos in 2004. I took classes in both NAUI and PADI and all of them are very careful in making sure divers play it safe. Had she followed proper procedure on how to untangle in kelp, she would have been alive. Anyways, thats my 2 cent opinion.

Of course, if she were taught about the panic cycle and how to break it as well as having learned skills required by some agencies, but sadly missing from most OW courses, she would probably still be with you. It probably wasn't her fault. Forgive her.

[Rick Murchison]

Hi Rick -

No, I think in the case of a professional that they would chalk that one up to your current affiliation, but all of this is really hypothetical. We can't get this data, if it exists at all. Imagine the lawyer feeding frenzy if one agency was to use it against another.Well, thankfully, the fatality numbers for Scuba are as low as most any other watersport activity, barely enough to make it out of the statistical "noise" for the number of participants, so, whatever our gut feelings about agency shortcomings, the statistics support a "safe" rather than "reckless" package.
Here on SB we see every fatality and many get "loud" treatment and enough wild speculation to spread blame with a very broad brush indeed.
So, while I think there's a lot of "leaping logic" in most mishap threads, I still think it's worthwhile to reflect on agency practices, general and specific, and how they might be improved to lower our already very low mishap rate. Zero may not be attainable, but aiming for it constantly is the best way to get closer.
With that in mind, I think that "Diver Deaths by Agency" isn't something that can be quantified in a worthwhile fashion, but I do think that mishaps should be examined with a critical eye towards what the diver did and what the diver was trained to do, and whether there is an agency level action item in there somewhere. Often there won't be, because the mishap victim violated the practices & procedures he was taught, and sometimes it'll be an industry-wide change... but every now and then there's a need for just one or two agencies to change what they're doing, and we shouldn't sweep such findings aside as "agency bashing." :)
Rick

[billy_b4c]

Well said, Rick! I agree with you completely, but it woulda been nice to have some data to throw back at him! lol!

[cmalinowski]

Well said, Rick! I agree with you completely, but it woulda been nice to have some data to throw back at him! lol!
Just make something up like he did :)

[jviehe]

Of course, if she were taught about the panic cycle and how to break it as well as having learned skills required by some agencies, but sadly missing from most OW courses, she would probably still be with you. It probably wasn't her fault. Forgive her.
I dont know about most courses, but PADI teaches how to respond to emergencies and thus panic. Stop. Breath. Think. Act.

[Walter]

I dont know about most courses, but PADI teaches how to respond to emergencies and thus panic. Stop. Breath. Think. Act.

"Stop. Breathe. Think. Act." is a very small part of understanding the panic cycle. If that's all that's there, it's not nearly enough. It's not going to stop panic, certainly not without the skills that should be taught, but aren't.

[NWGratefulDiver]

"Stop. Breathe. Think. Act." is a very small part of understanding the panic cycle. If that's all that's there, it's not nearly enough. It's not going to stop panic, certainly not without the skills that should be taught, but aren't.
That's always the crux, isn't it ... it's useless telling students what to do unless you also teach them how to do it ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

[billy_b4c]

Just make something up like he did :)

Ya know....I was about to say something like "Well then I would be no better than he is." But it occured to me that I could make up something just horribly ridiculous to point out how ridiculous that statement was.

[GrandpaScuba]

I assume you mean divers deaths resulting from dive accidents?

So, how do you define a "dive accident"? If you are skiing and have a heart attack, no one calls it a skiing accident. But if you are diving and have a heart attack, they do call it a diving accident.

[GrandpaScuba]

"Stop. Breathe. Think. Act." is a very small part of understanding the panic cycle. If that's all that's there, it's not nearly enough. It's not going to stop panic, certainly not without the skills that should be taught, but aren't.
Of course, if you are out of air, the "Breathe" part is somewhat iffy. ;)

[diver-dad]

.........a local dive "professional" stated, "You do know that (insert agency here) has had more diver deaths, don't you?" That's a pretty bold statement, and I'm looking for figures to substantiate it......

Folowing what Rakkis and others have said, allow me to get nerdy for a moment here ... :D

As pointed out above, the agency with the highest numbers of people who they've certified can be expected to have the highest numbers of incidents.

So ... Bare numbers are meaningless. To be anywhere near statistically significant, you need to "normalize" the numbers to be able to compare them......

Probably the easist way to do this, for example, is to divide [the number of PADI incidents] by [the total number of PADI divers]. Only after that can you compare it to NAUI as [total NAUI incidents] / [total NAUI divers], etc.


-------------------------------

IMHO, however, the information taught by any of the major agencies (PADI, NAUI, YMCA, etc) are so similar for the OW level divers, that the other variables that come with the temprament, condition, and intelligence of the individual divers, the ability of the instructors to TEACH, and on to the decisions to dive, the conditions for the dive, etc probably override any agency influences.

[Walter]

IMHO, however, the information taught by any of the major agencies (PADI, NAUI, YMCA, etc) are so similar for the OW level divers, that the other variables that come with the temprament, condition, and intelligence of the individual divers, the ability of the instructors to TEACH, and on to the decisions to dive, the conditions for the dive, etc probably override any agency influences.

Sounds like you haven't read the standards of PADI, NAUI and YMCA. I have. They are vastly different in their requirements.

[cancun mark]

I would think that the recreational agencies would be pretty much the same. OTOH as far as percentage of certified divers that die diving, NACD and NSSCDS would have an unfair skew due to the nature of the dives, and they have some of the highest and most demanding standards of training.

I just dont think it would be a valid factor in accident analysis. Level of certification and dive experience would be far more meaningful.

[under water]

As agencies go, it could be that NASA has the highest death rate per trainee. But what does that signify anyway?
More technical agencies will probably have more 'adventurous' students. More popular agencies will have more vacation "shouldn't be diving yet" students.
Even if you had the data you wouldn't be any further along using it to make much of a statement about anything.
Now the DAN data about things like obesity is significant.
However. as has been said before. Note the BS meter of the person that made the assertion to you and ask them to reference their source.

[Walter]

I would think that the recreational agencies would be pretty much the same.

You would be mistaken.

[-hh]

Perhaps the relevant question is, as it always has been, how safe is diving in general and how many deaths can be directly linked to poor training...


The fatality curve is bathtub-shaped. Either this means that 80% of all divers either have <1 year or >10 years experience, or that there's an inexperience factor acting as a contributor.


-hh

[cancun mark]

You would be mistaken.

Prove me wrong Walter :mooner:

[Zeeman]

Prove me wrong Walter :mooner:

I was just about to bite at the same piece of bait myself.