Rise and Fall of the Bubble (Model) ?

[rjack321]

Thanks for the information: is there a complete list of the more recent studies that are free-access and conveniently located somewhere on the internet ?

Start wading through the 1,000+ posts on the topic. You can find them here on SB, as well as RBW and CCRx. There are dozens of embedded citations which need to be read and understood in the context of the arguments made. There is no "one" bibliographic list and if there was it wouldn't make sense without the accompanying expert commentary (in some cases by the authors)

 

[Roger Hobden]

Start wading through the 1,000+ posts on the topic. You can find them here on SB, as well as RBW and CCRx. There are dozens of embedded citations which need to be read and understood in the context of the arguments made. There is no "one" bibliographic list and if there was it wouldn't make sense without the accompanying expert commentary (in some cases by the authors)

Hmm ... the way science usually works, is that on a regular basis every few years, two or three key articles come out either as "state of the art" summaries of a given field, or, more commonly now, a systematic review of the literature in relation to a given topic.

ScubaBoard is a very nice forum, with dozens of people willing to give newcomers hundreds of key pieces of advice that could only be acquired otherwise through decades of experience.

But it does not appear to be organized as a scientific database which could be used efficiently to locate and retrieve academic information, at least to my knowledge.

I would be interested in knowing were on the Internet (not on ScubaBoard) I could find any existing scientific documents that would presumably summarize both sides of the argument.

 

[tridacna]

Hmm ... the way science usually works, is that on a regular basis every few years, two or three key articles come out either as "state of the art" summaries of a given field, or, more commonly now, a systematic review of the literature in relation to a given topic.

ScubaBoard is a very nice forum, with dozens of people willing to give newcomers hundreds of key pieces of advice that could only be acquired otherwise through decades of experience.

But it does not appear to be organized as a scientific database which could be used efficiently to locate and retrieve academic information, at least to my knowledge.

I would be interested in knowing were on the Internet (not on ScubaBoard) I could find any existing scientific documents that would presumably summarize both sides of the argument.

Look for the published documents on some of the threads on Scubaboard. Not hard to find. Yes, you’re correct - SB is not a peer reviewed journal BUT Simon Mitchell is a peer reviewed scientist who posts here on Deco Science quite frequently. OTOH RossH is a businessman with financial interest in selling his software. No publications.

 

[Jack Hammer]

On a side note, reading through all the BS in those threads will leave you with a much better understanding of current deco science and answer a lot of the natural questions that arise when trying to grasp the subtle nuances of a difficult and complex subject.

 

[KenGordon]

On a side note, reading through all the BS in those threads will leave you with a much better understanding of current deco science and answer a lot of the natural questions that arise when trying to grasp the subtle nuances of a difficult and complex subject.

This is very true. While Ross has made a fool of himself he did everyone a favour by (indirectly) making people really understand how these models work. The rebuttals were extremely interesting.

 

[RainPilot]

On a side note, reading through all the BS in those threads will leave you with a much better understanding of current deco science and answer a lot of the natural questions that arise when trying to grasp the subtle nuances of a difficult and complex subject.

I learned a HUGE amount from the tangential stuff on those threads, it may not be the most pleasant reading experience but patience in wading through the threads is quite rewarding.

@Roger Hobden , the only people with funding for these types of studies are commercial divers and military. Commercial has gone all-saturation, basically, and so the COMEX studies etc are very unlikely to be repeated.
The military will fund some studies but their goals are not necessarily the same as recreational divers so there perforce needs to be some extrapolation of their data to try find application to our diving.
DAN does a fair bit of research but they do not have the ability to do human tests to a DCS endpoint so there is a lot of gray area in their results, reflected in the conservative nature of their conclusions.

Personally, I look at persons who:

1. Understand and work in Deco Research routinely
2. Actually do the dives they are talking about
3. Have no outside incentive to "bend" the data to fit.

Once I have that list, I then pay close attention to what those people are doing on their own dives. My list right now is @David Doolette and @Dr Simon Mitchell.

 

[sigxbill]

I preferred the board with Ross. Now when discussing decompression there is no one to present a counter argument for comparison ...

 

[taimen]

Not really an answer to your specific question. But instead of reading forum threads, try to read presentations or articles by researchers.
The Decompression Controversies presentation is very good. Another good read is Scuba Physiological by Simon Pridmore. It is actually a collection of scientific articles edited to more readable format.

 

[tursiops]

there is no one to present a good counter argument for comparison

I've bolded and underlined the key word in your statement. There were no "good" counter arguments before he left, either.

 

[dmaziuk]

Unfortunately his "good" counter-arguments seemed to mostly be based on how the math works out. Which likely isn't even good enough for a well-calibrated perfectly spherical diver of uniform density... It would be nice to have a good counter-argument, I agree.