Undercurrent--"Why Divers Die"

[OHGoDive]

Well, as one of the posters on "that" side of the discussion, I neither said nor implied any such thing ...

Agreed.

and I didn't notice anyone else doing so either.

perhaps I'm more sensitive :14:

I think most generalizations on both sides of this discussion are wrong ... that's about normal for Internet conversations ...

Ay yup.

all things being equal (which they never are) the more fit, the better.

That's all I'm sayin'

 

[in_cavediver]

Well, I guess that my take on fitness is that if people are going to spend countless hours working on the other 9 reasons (because they're easier, have more impact on safety, whatever) that it's disingenuous to ignore fitness. I don't think you can rank any of the subjects you listed and say any one is more important than another.

They all need to be considered, and you can't just ignore or rationalize away the importance of one of them (like fitness) because it's a touchy/sensitive subject to some people.

I agree, when you take time to work on your diving, fitness is definitely something to think about. I just think it falls below mastering basic dive skills on the priority list for most divers. I definitely do not think all items on the list are equal in value nor do I believe the rankings are the same for each individual diver.

On my list of improvements to reduce risk, fitness is a much higher priority if not the top priority. (mostly because the other factors are pretty well managed). Now, for a newer diver or a vacation only diver, training time will be better spent on the basic skills of diving rather than on a cardio workout for reducing thier diving risk.

Does that make sense?

(I also removed BMI because I belive to be a flawed descriptor for divers. Overall fitness is independent of wieght/height and is far more applicable to the sport of diving. This differentation would weed out many of the 'exceptions' to the BMI scale)

Lastly, for the heated debate, the OP presented 'BMI obesity' as 'the reason divers die' and defended that assertion to the point of dismissing other explanations. I just find it humorous that the next segment goes on and discusses one assertion I made in post 50

 

[Cacia]

Well, I guess that my take on fitness is that if people are going to spend countless hours working on the other 9 reasons (because they're easier, have more impact on safety, whatever) that it's disingenuous to ignore fitness.

That is what I believe too, and it seems to me that we often place too much emphasis on things that matter less. Sometimes I wonder if the scuba gods could charge certification fees for weight loss or fitness, it might be different.

big risk factors - IE, undertraining of divers.

I really think all this "training" at recreational depths is a bit over emphasized, to be honest. My dad and his friends dove for years and taught themselves, basicly. Some of the best divers I know have had very little training. I think I would have to say if I could choose one or the other---give me the physical fitness and I will train myself, read some books, and get some experience.

The good news is, I think it is changing. Divers seem to be putting more emphasis on fitness lately, that is a good thing.

The BMI debate is sort of useless, there are better measures, namely hip waist ratios, and body fat percentage.---if you want it. Seems people would rather just harp on the shortcomings of this rough screening criteria.

 

[danielt]

diving obese is a major risk.......whether your on land or under water u dont have to be einstein to work that out.
these people get very defensive cause deep down they know it is true!
i know this b/c im a smoker and people always tell me smoking is no good.....truth is they are CORRECT!
being fit (gving up smokes) will only improve diving.....
hello...........

 

[Charlie59]

Just when I thought it was safe to come to scubaboard again.

 

[Rick Murchison]

Let's just throw a wrench in this one, shall we?

I'm going to speak in generalities, I'll stipulate that there are exceptions.

We can all agree that poor buoyancy control can create diving situations that are less safe, but not often fatal.

Weighting issues often lead to problems with buoyancy control, especially in newer divers.

A diver that has more body fat needs more lead to compensate for the relative 'lightness' of fat tissue over muscle.

If you add neoprene to the equation there needs to be more neoprene to cover a larger person.

Neoprene itself needs lead to offset it's inherent buoyancy.

Therefore, the more neoprene needed to cover a diver, the more lead needed for the offset.

Neoprene also compresses at depth to become less buoyant and needs more air in the BC to compensate.

The swing between the inherent buoyancy of neoprene at the surface vs. at depth becomes a greater factor the more neoprene is involved.

I don't think there is no relationship between getting a larger diver weighted properly given the relationship between the inherent buoyancy of a fully kitted diver and the neoprene compression at depth PLUS the difficulty in weighting divers with a higher percentage of body fat.

Anyone who has worked with significant numbers of divers will tell you that leaner individuals seem to have an easier time achieving proper weighting and good buoyancy control seems to come faster than dealing with bigger divers.

All speculation, of course.

Rachel

You have just indicted most women.
I, for example, am in a constant battle with the scale... but am neutral with only three pounds of lead. (The lovely young Kat says I'm "dense" I say "sleek" )
Most women need more lead than that, even some pretty skinny ones.
---
I won't argue the point that being too fat is bad - it is. Morbid obesity is a "high risk" way to live no matter what you're doing, and achieving a "safer" weight should be a goal. But so is being too skinny (a point lost on Americans in general).
Our obsession with fat - and some folks' obsession with wanting to control what other folks do based on their 'fat status' - is overblown, especially in diving. I've been diving for a year or three now, and I've seen some horrible divers who are a hazard to themselves and to everyone around them. I can absolutely guarantee you that (barring those who are so fat they can't handle their weightbelt or so skinny they can't handle their tank - and there are indeed many more of the former than the latter in diving circles) there is zero correlation between BMI and in-water competence. Zero.
As for how an individual's weight affects their diving, my experience is that it's "highly variable." There may be some gross trends out there, but the very best divers I know - in skill, technique, endurance under water, handling stress - are 'stocky...' what the typical fat basher would call "overweight."
I'm not defending morbid obesity here... but I do tire of folks who have a burning desire to restrict others' recreational activities because of appearance rather than performance.
Rick

 

[Sjassi]

In 3 years of diving, i have never met an obese diver? Maybe it's not much of a problem in Europe.

 

[MXGratefulDiver]

You have just indicted most women.
I, for example, am in a constant battle with the scale... but am neutral with only three pounds of lead. (The lovely young Kat says I'm "dense" I say "sleek" )
Most women need more lead than that, even some pretty skinny ones.
---

To address Rachel's observations ... it also assumes divers wearing neoprene. Where I live the vast majority of divers wear drysuits. Most are shell suits, which don't have the compression problems described by Rachel.

However, to look at the other side of that coin, divers who are thin ... especially women ... tend to wear multiple layers of undergarment because they get cold easily. And the more undergarment you wear, the more lead you have to wear to offset the buoyancy of the undergarment.

For that matter, for those who wear wetsuits, the problem is that often the thin people need thicker wetsuits ... or even two wetsuits layered one on top of the other ... to maintain warmth.

So the problem she's describing isn't unique to fat people.

I won't argue the point that being too fat is bad - it is. Morbid obesity is a "high risk" way to live no matter what you're doing, and achieving a "safer" weight should be a goal. But so is being too skinny (a point lost on Americans in general).
Our obsession with fat - and some folks' obsession with wanting to control what other folks do based on their 'fat status' - is overblown, especially in diving. I've been diving for a year or three now, and I've seen some horrible divers who are a hazard to themselves and to everyone around them. I can absolutely guarantee you that (barring those who are so fat they can't handle their weightbelt or so skinny they can't handle their tank - and there are indeed many more of the former than the latter in diving circles) there is zero correlation between BMI and in-water competence. Zero.
As for how an individual's weight affects their diving, my experience is that it's "highly variable." There may be some gross trends out there, but the very best divers I know - in skill, technique, endurance under water, handling stress - are 'stocky...' what the typical fat basher would call "overweight."
I'm not defending morbid obesity here... but I do tire of folks who have a burning desire to restrict others' recreational activities because of appearance rather than performance.
Rick

I will say this ... in the past four months I've lost 30 lbs. I feel more fit, my energy level has increased, and I am starting to like the way I look. But losing weight hasn't improved my diving skills at all.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

 

[ArcticDiver]

...But losing weight hasn't improved my diving skills at all.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Oh...Gee

 

[Cacia]

I saw yesterday on the news that some insurance companies are now giving 20% discounts to those who have BMI's that actuarial science indiucates will have lower risk of death and illness.

It was suggested that this is the beginning of a national trend. BMI's while not accurate and "fair" to everyone may very well be utilized if the numbers support the overall premise.

A given smoker could be healthier that a certain non-smoker. That has not stopped the insurance companies from making generalizations with financial implications. Whether it is right or wrong, seems it is coming.

And this example is only the tip of the iceburg regarding how financial and government entities will do with information about us. Wait till your genes are mapped and part of your medical record...