On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:32:41 +1000, David Strike <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>This morning - co-incidentally - I received the following Press Release.

>But it seems to me to be an interesting discussion point!  :-)


>___________________________________________
>Solo Diving: PADI Worldwide's Position

( SNIP )

It's about time that DIR and PADI are BEGINNING to DSR (Do SOMETHING
Right), after other divers have been saying the same for YEARS!  :-)

First, DIR is now recommending the SHORT hose for OW diving.

And PADI (for years the patriach of RULES over THINKING) is now
leading even the DIR boys into making SENSE in jettisoning the
old rules in favor of putting responsibility where responsibility
belongs!

How refreshing!  LOOK at those keywords:

    responsible diver
    self-reliant diver

I have have preached those over my scuba-LIST soapbox and
newsgroup soapbox hundreds of times over years, beginning
OVER A DECADE ago!   If I didn't know better, I might have
accused PADI of plagiarizing my writing!  :-)   But I DO know
better, because I had read and learned those ideas (which I
had been embracing ever since I outgrew my couple of years of
being a Clueless Newbie Diver) from divers/writers who earned MY
respect for SIR (Saying It Right)!

Now let's hear PADI's version ...

>Can Solo Diving be done responsibly?

*I* italized (capitalized) PADI's keywords for MY emphasis:

>     Yes, but let's be clear about what RESPONSIBLE solo diving is

>to pursue RESPONSIBLE solo diving. This is true in other adventure
>sport activities such as solo rock climbing.

So, how is it different from responsible buddy diving?  The key idea
is, that the diver must be SELF-RESPONSIBLE, and SELF-RELIANT, even
when diving with a buddy, an SOB, of a team of SOBs.
>
>  It is important to clarify what RESPONSIBLE solo scuba diving is.
>  To RESPONSIBLY engage in solo scuba diving, a diver must first
>  be highly experienced, have a hundred or so buddy accompanied
>  scuba dives, be absolutely SELF-RELIANT ...

( snip )

Couldn't have said it much better myself.   ;-)


>What concerns does PADI have with regard to solo diving?

PADI should have quit while it's ahead. ... Here's something that
is NOT validly concluded from data, but merely using SOME statistics
that have NO particular relevant bearing on the supposed conclusion!
>
>  When a problem occurs on a solo dive, or when the diver is alone
> in the water, there is little or no chance of assistance for the
> distressed diver. This decreases the chances of a diver surviving
> the problem or having a favorable outcome.

Ain't necessarily so.  The annals of fatality statistics in diving
contains an overwhelming proportion of cases that involve DOUBLE
fatalities or TRIPLE fatalities involving BUDDIES and TRIPLES
because one or more of them rely on the others.  Tje one to whom
those non-self-responsible divers rely, probably would NOT have
been in a double/triple fatality cases, had they been diving SOLO,
without the excess baggage of incompetent/not-qualified buddies.

>Diving alone reduces the chance of survival regardless of the problem.

Non sequitur and unsubstantiated.

>Since 1989, there were at least 538 fatalities where it was
>clear divers were either intentionally diving solo, or became
>separated from a buddy and were de facto alone.

A VERY POOR argument, reflecting FUZZY thinking and what we
statisticians call "confounding" of effects that need to be
clearly SEPARATED!

The "intentionally diving solo" group is ENTIRELY different group
of solo divers from the so-called "de facto" alone divers because
they lost their buddies!

The latter strongly contradicts what was said before, in terms
of VERY experience, self-responsible, and self-reliant divers as
SOLO divers.

First of all, such divers are UNLIKELY to be separated from a buddy
if they CHOOSE to dive with a buddy.  Even if they did, they would
be sufficiently self-reliant to save their own necks.

In the number "538" fatalities cited, one must make an analysis of
how many of those were "intentionally solo, and self-reliant",
vs all the OTHER categories.  I would be extremely surprised if
more than 10 of those 538 were "intentinally solo, very experienced,
and absolutely self-reliant" divers!

>     PADI's position is clear; solo diving proponents should advocate
>responsible solo diving on its own unique merits, requisite training,
>and equipment needs

Agreed.

>and not through sensationalized attempts to disparage a
>proven safety system, that has served the majority of recreational
>scuba divers well.

A rather superfluous, redundant, strawman to make a case for a
self-responsible, self-reliant DIVER.   As a matter of fact, SOLO
diving is only a teeeny-tiny minor aspect of the whole RESPONSIBILITY
theme!

That's MY take on PADI Worldwide's position.

-- Bob.