Diving Education Today

[DCBC]

If you only look back then you'll never find a way forward.

It would appear you don't believe in constructive reviews. This requires looking backward in time, seeing what was done, what went wrong and implementing lessons learned to make things better. Sometimes you have to look backward to see the best way forward.

Teh brain is your best bet, always. But that has nothing to do with your main point, which is hating the progress we've made.

Again you are mistaken. I have not said anything to indicate that I hate the progress that has been made. If you wish to make things up in your mind, please finish the conversation with yourself.

When you have 38 years of experience training divers we can sit down and drink a beer, toast to Tantor and congratulate both ourselves with this accomplishment. You for your success in your generation and me in mine.

I'd be happy to, but perhaps when you have 38 years of experience training divers, you may have a different perspective.

I don't know what happened that made Quebec do what they did. From what I know about Quebec they like to be different, just because.... so you never know what's real and what's politics with those guys.

I've given you the official statement, but you can of course ignore the facts or just pretend there's not a problem. I do hope however that something is done by the certification agencies before this happens in other jurisdictions.

You and I don't seem to agree on many things. That's ok, I can easily accept that. I am not going to change your opinions any more than you will change mind. We have had different experiences that have led to different conclusions. Lets agree to disagree. Now for that beer....

 

[Teamcasa]

Yes. There actions were a result of high statistical information surrounding diver fatalities as a result of inadequate basic diver training.

But why not license bicycle riders? There are far more fatalities as a result from riding a bike than from diving.

The real reason for government intervention in these cases are easy sources of revenue with little political backlash. With so few divers there is little political backlash where as with bicycle riders there are so many the would make too much noise.

 

[Rhone Man]

I haven't read the whole thread, but people see what they want to see.

In the "good old days" you had to practically be a Navy seal to be able to dive.

Nowadays, diving is available to the young and old, the disabled, pregnant women (with a health warning), girls with slight frames (God bless 'em) and the generally unfit and overweight. Most of them only need to do a half day DSD or "resort" course to experience the joys of the underwater world.

Personally I think that is a good thing. I love the sport and I want as many other people as possible to be able to see the beauty that I see. If bodies start stacking up like cordwood, you'll know I was wrong. But I don't see any evidence of that yet, despite many valiant attempts to imply this.

People always hanker for "good old days". Even if they actually weren't that great.

 

[Thalassamania]

... Tough training didn't just help me become a better diver. Tough training helped me to be a better person. All I knew when I started diving at age 13 was that I wanted to be a diver. My instructors took care of the rest. I did what I was told and it was challenging, but fun. I had no idea how those skills would still be paying off to this day.

Tough training can make for better performance, but so can smart training. I think in diving, smart trumps tough under most circumstances.

 

[DCBC]

But why not license bicycle riders? There are far more fatalities as a result from riding a bike than from diving.

The real reason for government intervention in these cases are easy sources of revenue with little political backlash. With so few divers there is little political backlash where as with bicycle riders there are so many the would make too much noise.

I don't know much about bicycle riders, but if you do and feel licensing is appropriate, go for it. If it saves lives, you've got my support.

Certainly LAC felt that diver certification was required, so went ahead and established standards for the first diver certification program. These standards are still the highest in sport diving. These standards have increased over the years; I wonder why? Perhaps their concern is the safety of the diver and not the generation of revenue...

 

[DCBC]

I haven't read the whole thread, but people see what they want to see. ...People always hanker for "good old days". Even if they actually weren't that great.

If you had read the thread, I think you would see this is not exclusively a comparison with the past, but also with the current day. Some diver certifications organizations have lowered their standards, while other organizations have increased them. I find this observation interesting.

Another interesting piece of information was a post I did on SB asking "How happy are you with today's level of diver education?" The majority of respondents were not satisfied with it (http://www.scubaboard.com/forums/ba...w-happy-you-todays-level-diver-education.html).

My post was meant to instigate discussion. It seems however that it's much easier to be complacent with the status quo rather than to question why things are as they are.

 

[boulderjohn]

There have been vague references to the annual DAN report on fatalities, so I thought I would provide some specifics from the most recent report, which covers fatalities through 2006. That way people will be able to use actual facts.

To create its report, DAN has to rely on whatever evidence it has on hand. In many cases they have full autopsies; in many other cases they have precious little such information. In many cases they know a lot about the diver's history; in many cases they know next to nothing.

The report was first done in 1970, but they only covered the United States in those first years. For the last two decades they include both the U.S. and Canada.

In the first decade of study (1970-1979), there were an average of 114.4 annual deaths in the U.S. alone, with a high of 147 and a low of 102. In the last decade of study (1997-2006), there were an average of 84.1 deaths in the U.S. and Canada combined, with a high of 91 and a low of 75. That low was reached in the last year of the study so far, 2006.

The average age of the fatalities has been going steadily upward, and it is now at 48. Age seems to be a very dominant factor, as does obesity and cardiovascular health.

About a quarter of the fatalities were attributed to some form of cardiac attack. They only reached that conclusion when they had definite evidence, though, such as in an autopsy. When you read the individual case reports, the descriptions of many of the other fatalities for which they do not have a clear diagnosis look a whole lot like the descriptions of the cardiac deaths. There could be many more.

Where the information was known, 40% of the fatalities had more than 10 years of experience, 13% had 6-10 years experience, and 15% had 3-5 years of experience.

7 of the fatalities (nearly 10%) had professional certifications, mostly instructors. 6 of them were technical divers, and 5 were on rebreathers. (Those last statistics overlap to a large degree--some were instructors with technical training on rebreathers.)

2 of the divers were conducting scientific research, although it is not clear what their training for that was.

Overweighting was remarkable in some cases, even with very experienced divers. I noticed at least three cases where divers had over 50 pounds of lead. One of those was a DM hoping to assist in a class, except that he sank to the bottom and could not get up without assistance.

All of the above are facts taken from the study. What follows is some interpretation.

I examined every case study in search of divers whose deaths might be attributed to training. I tried to include only newer (2 years or less experience) divers, but I also included some whose experience was unknown but who acted like they were new or inexperienced. I found 7 cases in all, but nothing is clear cut. In the cases where there was a rapid ascent causing an embolism, there was never a clear reason for the rapid ascent. If you read those cases and then read the case studies of the people with the cardiac arrests, you see a similarity with several. The diver seemed to be doing fine and then suddenly panicked. One was bipolar, obese, and taking several medications.

The most clear cut training issue was a relatively new diver who went OOA while deep and was unsuccessful in an attempt to get an alternate air source from his buddy. A couple of other OOA at depth rounded out the 7.

I saw one case of what I believe to be very poor instructor decision-making. The student died during an OW dive in a cold river in strong current and poor visibility. Another student death was to an older woman who had a cardiac condition. (These were not included in the 7 above.)

There were also several clear cases of idiocy, including a young diver who disappeared trying to set a personal depth record on air, doing the deepest segment alone.

There were a number of cases of poorly conditioned people extending themselves beyond their physical limits in rough water, having a fatal event before even submerging.

 

[Diver0001]

Sometimes you have to look backward to see the best way forward.

Maybe there's truth in both. What I know for sure is that fixating on the past and rejecting the present does not lead to improvement.

Again you are mistaken. I have not said anything to indicate that I hate the progress that has been made. If you wish to make things up in your mind, please finish the conversation with yourself.

oh come come, Wayne. You're not one to take your ball and go home for this stuff. If you think I misunderstand you then just point it out. From where I'm sitting I'd say it comes across as hating. If you have a better word, then tell me what it is.

I'd be happy to, but perhaps when you have 38 years of experience training divers, you may have a different perspective.

My mother always tried to play the when-you-get-older-you'll-know-better card too but she could never convince me either.

I've given you the official statement, but you can of course ignore the facts or just pretend there's not a problem. I do hope however that something is done by the certification agencies before this happens in other jurisdictions.

Well the fact that Quebec did this doesn't concern me much. Nobody pays much attention to what Quebec does. What concerns me more is the EU. Europeans over-regulate everything. They're really Big-brotherish and the EU is big brotherish AND full of people with power and personal agendas who are as stupid as a box of rocks. I think eventually government legislation concerning diving is inevitable but not because of the failure of agencies to regulate themselves... more because of law-makers need to score with whatever little thing they can get in their portfolio. Some blow-hard sport minister will eventually decide that it's in HIS best interest career wise to do it and it will happen. Politics has nothing to do with diving.

You and I don't seem to agree on many things. That's ok, I can easily accept that. I am not going to change your opinions any more than you will change mind. We have had different experiences that have led to different conclusions. Lets agree to disagree. Now for that beer....

I'll just make clear that I don't think that how things are is a utopia or that there is no room or need for improvement. I just think that being cynical about where we are and wishing it would all go back to the way it was 40 years ago doesn't get us anywhere.

R..

 

[Kingpatzer]

. . . Diving in the North Atlantic can be dangerous. I'd want him/her to complete the most intensive program . . .

Here is an area where I somewhat agree with DCBC.

Taking the average newly minted diver into an environment significantly more hazardous than the average quarry or warm-water reef probably does merit a slightly higher level of training than is typically seen from most dive shops.

That said, there's also nothing in the standards of PADI to preclude additional time and even excursion dives being made part of the course so as to ensure that the students demonstrate their skills to the satisfaction of the instructor.

I would be willing to be that most PADI shops sending people into the North Atlantic do try to spend a bit more time with them. I would also be willing to bet that the average diver looking to dive in the North Atlantic is aware of the need for a higher level of training. And would hopefully be smart enough to seek it out.

To this end, one thing I don't think any of the short course programs do well is driving the point home that the OW certification is not to be taken as a declaration of competency to perform any dive. While it's repeated in the course material more than a few times that the diver should only dive within the limits of their certification in conditions similar to or better than those in which they were trained; the student is still told at the end of the day that they are now a diver and can go diving anywhere in the world with the card they hold.

It's a mixed message that doesn't, in my mind, adequately convey the reality.

OW divers have entry level training, and that training is sufficient for the typical warm water vacation diver. But they do have a little more than a 'license to learn' for more advanced diving scenarios. This is why there are specialty course and dive clubs and the like.

Where we run into conflict in this discussion is, I think, that the "old school" crowd have a vision of a single course producing a diver equivalent to someone today holding perhaps OW, AOW, Rescue and one or two specialties with the accompanying 25 dives under their belt.

Those saying there isn't a problem aren't looking at OW divers trying to dive in conditions harsher than a nice calm reef or the local quarry.

The problem becomes, though, that very few of those warm water vacation divers really care to go drop down on a Lake Superior wreck in late October. That additional training is essential for those who do, but it is not for those who don't. And so we come to the intersection of cost and benefits. The bars are being set where they are because they adequately balance those two considerations.

Those who need more training will get it. And there are those who definitely need more training. But that relatively small subset of divers does not represent the majority.

 

[DCBC]

I thought I would provide some specifics from the most recent report, which covers fatalities through 2006. That way people will be able to use actual facts.

Thanks John; this is helpful.