On Sun, 3 Nov 2002 18:58:19 +1100, David Strike <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

To recap, my ENTIRE contention is that it depends on the responsible
individual to dive within his limits, and it's up to the INDIVIDUAL to
assume his own risks, be it climbing the Everest or setting a deep dive
record.  It's THEIR business.

So, my entire position on the matter had already been clearly spelt out,
not just once, but numerous times in the past when the subject of "deep
air"; or diving records surfaced.   It's 100% coherent and consistent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for the choice between air and trimix, it becomes a personal choice,
depending on how the INDIVIDUAL assesses the risk, such as the Hawaiian
deep diver whose quote prompted the present subject.  That he'd rather
trust the Devil he knows (AIR) than the Devil he doesn't know (TRIMIX).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therefore, it is NOT accurate to characterize my position as:

>It seems to me that the discussion has moved from what gas(es) are more
>suited to deep diving, to suggesting that air is safer than, say, trimix
>based on body counts?

The body count is irrelevant to my stated position.

It's the WKPP mentality that's prevalent in all scuba-diving groups -- the
dead body count, rather than the INDIVIDUAL responsibility of choice,
skill, and preference.  So, I merely used it as an example to draw
attention to my observation that there were more trimix fatalities than
deep air.  The fact that "deep air" has been practiced much more than
the "new kid on the block" trimix makes it all that much more significant
that so many have died so soon, using trimix.    ;-)

With this preface, I'll abbreviate my response to your comments.


>Surely it would only be valid if the comparison was between an air diver and
>a trimix diver performing the same dives to the same depths and for the same
>duration in the same conditions? :-)

Ideally, yes.  But impossible in practice.  Not to mention the ILLOGIC
of forcing the Hawaiian diver who had dived 15,000 deep dives on AIR to
do 15,000 dives on trimix to the same depths when he doesn't believe in
it to do it even once in the first place!  :-))
>
>> >What's the basis for your assertion?  :-)

>> Lots of sources.  Hey, I am on vacation and have no desire to do any
>> extended debate or counting game.

> Those deaths that are periodically
>listed on, say, Tech; Cavers; the Rebreather and the GUE forums - or any of
>the internet diving forums - are far from comprehsive. :-)

That's correct!   Besides, Tech and Cavers hardly ever miss a "deep air"
fatality but they hardly ever report on a trimix fatality other than
bragging that none existed in George's caves.  ;-)  Of course "deep air"
didn't cause George his own fatality either!   G is a man of many
contradictions.  He is also a man of great diving skills, but LOGIC
is not among his forte.  ;-)


>Then there's the matter of whether the death was directly caused by the
>breathing medium, or by other causes? (i.e. Equipment failure; failure to
>adhere rigidly to dive plan; personal fitness levels; other external
>factors - currents; sea state; downwellings; or even by exceeding one's
>abilities and going beyond the comfort zone!)  :-)

Absolutely!  We're again in 100% agreement here.  That's exactly MY
repeatedly stated position of the blame on a CASE by CASE and the
individual DIVER.   Never falsely generalize or stereotype.

Trimix is not going to save an irresponsible diver!  It's not the GAS.
It;s the diver!  I know of one CASE of a dead trimix diver who had a
lifetime total of about 80 dives, having dived deep air, and culminated
in DYING diving trimix, and was characterized (the person) as an accident
waiting to happen, and it did, in less than 100 dives in his entire life!


>(I personally know of two deaths on the same deep Sydney wreck:
>The first was on air.
>In the second case, the diver was on trimix.

That's 1 vs 1.   :-)


> He dissappeared before he could be rescued and the body has never
>been recovered.

Sounds like what you said about some "deep air" divers!  :-))  They
still haven't come up yet, and dead men can't talk!  BUT everyone
blames it on "deep air", except ME, because we don't have the facts!

>Various scenarios have been suggested, but in no instance
>was it suggested that the use of trimix was to blame.)

So, how is it that we know so much that trimix is NOT to blame, when
a diver is dead diving trimix and was never recovered?

>
>It's probably also true to say that more deep exploration divers are, today,
>using gas mixtures other than air on their dives.  It's also fair to say
>that deep diving - especially where direct access back to the surface isn't
>an option - carries with it a greater degree of risk   This holds
>particularly true in a penetration dive.  Narcosis is only one of the
>factors that increases the dangers.  :-)
>
>Strike

Again we come a full circle to our complete and total agreement on the
true CAUSE and ISSUE, as we had agreed to begin with.    :-))

We merely differ on our different placements of importance on INDIVIDUAL
choice and responsibility, and my steadfast refusal to stereotype
anything (such as "deep air") or anybody (not even George the Devil
himself!).   ;-)))

As for body counts, blame it on the mentality of MOST of the Techdiver
and WKPP folks.

Remember, I am still on vacation, trying hard NOT to have to REPEAT the
same stuff I have posted at least a dozen times in the past.  So, to save
MY time during the next three weeks, for other dissidents, I'll simply say,

        ***  See my reply to Strike and at least a dozen  ***
        ***    other similar replies in the archives      ***

Having FUN breathing AIR.   :-)

Aloha,

-- Bob.