Keeping up with Changing Thinking in Scuba

[CAPTAIN SINBAD]

In terms of how to keep up with knowledge, I should acknowledge people like the Thorntons (TD USA), Leigh Bishop and Roz Lunn (Eurotek), Sue Crowe (Oztek), and Tomasz Stachura (Baltic Tech), and others who put on these shows and place a strong emphasis on presentations by diving medicine and physiology experts. These shows are an excellent source of up to date information. TD USA is next week!

Simon M

Great idea! Some of the presentations at BTS this year were quite interesting. Instead of these "mega-events" I think it would be a great idea if we could have smaller shows at the LDS or Dive Club level where experts could come and present their findings to local communities. The costs to bring them could be covered by the brands the LDS carries and it may be one avenue that can actually help in letting the dive shop survive the age of internet but I am not sure how easy/hard it would be to get sponsorship for these events.

 

[Blasto]

An interesting question posed in post 1.
How DO we know when using the internet to "research" any subject, which article, paper or link is to the latest, or most accurate information on any subject, and which ones have been made obsolete by later work?

I... don't know. It's just something you pick up as you do it, I guess.

Searching for some of the same exact things I did 10 years ago, I'm finding a completely different level of answers - much better ones - including many that have been published 10+ years ago. Just couldn't find them back then.

Some of it is search AI improving, but most of it is my own effort. Better skimming, knowing which phrases to select for the next search, how to modify requests to get what I want, spotting the yellow and red flags.

But if I had to put it down to one improvable skill, it's reading. Read entire articles or papers, not just the conclusion. When you notice anything you don't know, have any doubt about, have heard different before, or haven't heard before - select it and search for it in a new tab, right away, until you understand it and get an idea of how solid it is. Don't close the browser until you feel that you've exhausted the entire tree of evidence and ideas leading to the conclusion to the best of your comprehension ability.

 

[EireDiver606]

Have you considered running off the paper/study and handing it to him saying " I ran across this the other day. I think you will be very interested in this new information."

Of course I have, but a lot of the divers believe this and if I show him the results, I will look like a know it all and won’t make any new friends in the club. Basically because I have so little experience level and their instructors told them about deep stops, they probably won’t believe me

 

[Lorenzoid]

Of course I have, but a lot of the divers believe this and if I show him the results, I will look like a know it all and won’t make any new friends in the club. Basically because I have so little experience level and their instructors told them about deep stops, they probably won’t believe me

But maybe there is some way to phrase it that will sound less like you being a know-it-all than someone who is simply curious and trying to learn from as many sources as he can? Perhaps show him the paper with an open-ended remark like "What do you think of this?"

 

[Michael Guerrero]

I guess it should be in Deco for Divers,

Mark discounts the NEDU study, though he doesn't mention it by name, saying that some recent studies seem to indicate deep stops and bubble models are less effective but they didn't test normal profiles and are thus not relevant.

 

[Dr Simon Mitchell]

Mark discounts the NEDU study, though he doesn't mention it by name, saying that some recent studies seem to indicate deep stops and bubble models are less effective but they didn't test normal profiles and are thus not relevant.

Hello,

Mark may have said that previously, but I don't think that is his message now that the issue has been more fully discussed.

Which sort of speaks to the intent of the OP's original post. Even books that people should be able to rely on can become out of date very quickly.

Simon M

 

[Michael Guerrero]

Mark may have said that previously, but I don't think that is his message now that the issue has been more fully discussed.

I think a 2nd, updated edition of his book, capturing much of the recent research, would sell well to this audience. His first book was very good.

 

[mcpowell]

I didn’t read through the entire thread, but thought I would put in my 2 cents.

When I’m “in” to an activity, i.e. scuba, snowskiing, woodworking etc, I read forums...a lot. I tend to gravitate to the forums which seem the most up-to-date and thorough. And then, when I want to search a topic, I will still google it, but will add a specifier onto the search phrase:

A few examples:
Deep stop site:scubaboard.com (this will pull from scubaboard’s “deep stop” threads)

Cozumel restaurants site:scubaboard.com ( hopefully you get the idea now)

Granted, this requires you do some research as to which forums are current, etc. but it does clear the clutter from google searches.

 

[boulderjohn]

I would like to commend TDI for a new publication that does a pretty good job of being up to date on information.

Decompression Theory Pt 4 | SDI | TDI | ERDI

 

[rjack321]

Just a small plug here...
Many of the discussions here (and in other forums) have linked back to the original research and publications. For instance when the gas density thread was opened by Dr. Mitchell a couple years ago here:
Gas density guidelines

There was a link to the original paper here:
https://www.omao.noaa.gov/sites/def...rs and Scientific Diving Proceedings 2016.pdf

Not only does it have the gas density work on page 66, but there's a lot of other "current best practices" recommendations so I read it cover to cover at the time. There's definite value to be found in reading original work and associated papers and publications in UHMS and Rubicon or medline citations. Even if I only get an abstract, I can usually decide if the work seems relevant enough to dig deeper or track down the full paper behind a paywall.

In the case of the gas density work, I was never a deep air guy and had always tried to minimize WOB even on OC, so I didn't really change anything I was doing much. But it was nevertheless interesting and I have slightly modified how deep I am willing to go on a diluent based on that publication. So overall, reading the original work was valuable to me.