 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / UK Scuba / August 2005Too many fatal diving incidents
Hi, I look after the diving newsfeeds for ukdivers.net and just lately (i. e. this season) there seems to be a awful lot more fatal diving incidents. Are we getting too adventurous or too complacent, or is this the norm? Mike T > I look after the diving newsfeeds for ukdivers.net and just lately (i. > e. this season) there seems to be a awful lot more fatal diving > incidents. Are we getting too adventurous or too complacent, or is > this the norm? As far as I am aware all is normal, the only change this year seems to be a quicker and higher profile reporting of diving incidents. Any reasons for the perceived rise can be hard to determine, if they ever are, until the incident reports and analysis are published later this year. Then you have the problem that you are dealing with very small numbers overall, you cannot really determine patterns from one year, small changes in those figures make for big headlines. For example : let's say the incidents increased from 20 to 30 one year, what do you think would be reported in the gutter press - a) "There was an increase on fatal incidents from 0.00001% to 0.000015%" b) "Diver fatalities rose by 50% this year" Then there are the causes (where known). A few years back we had a year where (IIRC) a significant number of the fatal diving incidents were actually due to heart attacks, I am sure that you could statistically "prove" that diving caused heart attacks if you looked at just that year! At present I am certainly reading nothing into what some are seeing as the "alarming" rise in incidents. There may be something there, we simply wont know until we can analyse them, what I can say though is that knee jerk reactions will do nothing whatsoever to "fix" what may or may not be a problem. Cheers Keith L > Then there are the causes (where known). A few years back we had a year > where (IIRC) a significant number of the fatal diving incidents were > actually due to heart attacks, I am sure that you could statistically > "prove" that diving caused heart attacks if you looked at just that year! Interestingly, there seems to have been a significant rise last year in the number of incidents involving men in the 40 - 55 age bracket with undiagnosed medical problems. The UK Sport Diving committee is adamant that this has nothing to do with the removal of the requirement for a regular medical every 3 years for persons over 40 and every 1 year for persons over 50. As someone in that age bracket, who was diagnosed with mild hypertension during a completely unrelated visit to the doctors some 4 years after my last routine medical, my personal opinion is that the UK Sport Diving Committee should take another look at the evidence. But for the grace of $DEITY, I could have discovered my medical problem at depth where it probably would have been fatal. To all of you over 40 : my advice is to go and get a medical, even if you don't think there's anything wrong with you. -- Pete > Interestingly, there seems to have been a significant rise last year in > the number of incidents involving men in the 40 - 55 age bracket with > undiagnosed medical problems. Thankfully I'm out of that range in another couple of months. > The UK Sport Diving committee is adamant that this has nothing to do > with the removal of the requirement for a regular medical every 3 > years for persons over 40 and every 1 year for persons over 50. I think their problem was that they weren't finding people to stop diving so they were taking time and money for nothing. The self certify form asks all the big questions and if you pass that dishonestly you'd lie to the doctor anyway. > As someone in that age bracket, who was diagnosed with mild hypertension > during a completely unrelated visit to the doctors some 4 years after my > last routine medical, my personal opinion is that the UK Sport Diving > Committee should take another look at the evidence. But for the > grace of $DEITY, I could have discovered my medical problem at > depth where it probably would have been fatal. Sorry but this conjours up the image of somebody swimming over to you and pushing a flash card at you saying "Pete. You have mild hypertension". Conversely I went diving one weekend and had a heart attack in bed the following Wednesday night. It could have happened in the water and I wouldn't have recognised it and probably attempted to finish the dive. I might have ended up as a sad statistic. However when I asked the consultant who cared for me 'could I have seen this coming' he told me that nothing but an Angeogram would have detected it and the risk factors on Angeograms are such that they never do them without other symptoms. I ended up on the table in the Cardiac lab because, as the Doctor said, "You are having a heart attack and you are having it now". (Never let somebody tell you that it is reassuring to have a clear diagnosis.) The real problem is that things that can kill you diving are things that kill you suddenly - something breaks. These often have little or no precursors. That is why the UKSDMC decided that if you could honestly tick all the boxes on their form you would not have anything that would show up on a medical. > To all of you over 40 : my advice is to go and get a medical, > even if you don't think there's anything wrong with you. I have one every year as, obviously, I can't self certify but I don't place a whole lot of reliance on it. There is no dive so wonderful that I can't shrug and walk away from it if I don't feel up to it. nigelH > The real problem is that things that can kill you diving are things > that kill you suddenly - something breaks. These often have little or [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > place a whole lot of reliance on it. There is no dive so wonderful that > I can't shrug and walk away from it if I don't feel up to it. Single most important advice you can give any diver, I'm a little older than you and have never had a single problem in 35 years that doesn't mean it cannot happen on the next dive. Richard > nigelH > The self certify form asks all the big questions and if you > pass that dishonestly you'd lie to the doctor anyway. It's not a question of dishonesty: you might not realise you've failed the self-certification test. How long will it be before insurance companies decide to stop paying out on the grounds that people have lied on the form about medical problems, when they have been unaware of the problem's existence? > Sorry but this conjours up the image of somebody swimming over to you > and pushing a flash card at you saying "Pete. You have mild hypertension". Hopefully a yellow card rather than a red one! I'm not trying to be melodramatic: it was the view of the BSAC medical referee that I saw that untreated high blood pressure can lead to shortness of breath and blackouts under water. > I might have ended up as a sad statistic. However when I asked the > consultant who cared for me 'could I have seen this coming' he told me > that nothing but an Angeogram would have detected it and the risk factors > on Angeograms are such that they never do them without other symptoms. I agree that for such a case, the routine medicals wouldn't pick it up. I've also talked to plenty of people who have had quite serious medical problems picked up by diving medicals. If you have no other contact with the medical profession I think it's still possible that medical problems with quite serious consequences for divers would go undiagnosed. -- Pete Hi Keith, I have just done a quick check and there seems to have been at least one fatality every week. I have been diving for 10 years and I can't remember it being this bad.Can't help the feeling that some people just don't take diving seriously enough these days. Cheers > I have just done a quick check and there seems to have been at least > one fatality every week... Really? Going back to what point Mike? The BSAC incident year which starts in October or the MCA one which is calendar based? Now one incident per week since the start of either of those periods and we should be worried! We're obviously not have a "safe" year like 2003 which saw a 50% reduction in UK fatalities from the level a couple of years previously, but is it as "bad" as last year which saw a 200%+ increase over the previous year? (*) My whole point Mike is that we are dealing with very low numbers indeed and any slight variation in those numbers can be given a meaning far beyond any factual status. We cannot know whether there may be any primary reasons or underlying trends until we see the detailed analysis. In all honesty Mike you are falling for the gutter press "diving is dangerous" garbage hype. Diving =CAN= be a dangerous sport, if an individual wants to make it so, but as long as with training and experience we can recognise and mitigate those dangers then it is no more dangerous than many other activities. Regards Keith L (*) The figures I have given are in fact correct! I presented them in that manner to demonstrate just how pointless it is taking one year or one set of incidents in isolation. My analysis is derived from the BSAC 2004 Incident Report (http://www.bsac.org/techserv/increp04/intro.htm) and is based upon the actual figures for UK diving fatalities since 2000 to 2004 which are - 18,22,14,11 and 25 > In all honesty Mike you are falling for the gutter press "diving is > dangerous" garbage hype. Diving =CAN= be a dangerous sport, if an > individual wants to make it so, but as long as with training and > experience we can recognise and mitigate those dangers then it is no more > dangerous than many other activities. Can't honestly say I've seen a lot of coverage in the gutter press about diving. Don't think they really care TBH. Pregnant micro-celebs are far more interesting. However, I've got to say I have my doubts about how safe diving really is. If it's so safe, why do I personally know people who are dead, not to mention the friends of a friend. And I know a lot of people who've been bent. I don't suppose anyone knows how many dives are done in the UK a year. Or how many deeper than 30m dives are done a year. I just have this nagging suspicion that if we did, diving isn't that safe. I still think it's worth the risk, just don't think it should be played down. Jason  SignatureSee http://www.scuba-addict.co.uk/ for trip reports including the Costa Blanca, Gibraltar, Gran Canaria and the UK Hi Keith I take your point about seeing the statistics at the end of the year and admit that I am talking more of a feeling rather than raw stats. Your view however is one that I have taken for many years i.e., it's safe provided you obey the rules.... etc. I'm not saying diving is dangerous period, all I am suggesting is there seems to be an increase in fatal incidents so far this year. Now if there is anything in what I suggest, we'd be better taking notice and be a little more careful, rather than the old "there's nothing to worry about" head in the sand approach. Incidentally, the BSAC incident reports only relate to BSAC and the incidents that are reported via members and club Diving Officers, Whilst they might be an indication they only show a part of the full picture. Just how big a part I'm not sure perhaps 30% at a guess. What do you think? Mike Hi Mike > ... Now if there is > anything in what I suggest, we'd be better taking notice and be a > little more careful, rather than the old "there's nothing to worry > about" head in the sand approach. I am certainly not saying "nothing to worry about", there might be, we just don't know yet. But what I am saying is "don't panic, don't exaggerate and don't go for knee jerk reactions". You post title says 'Too many fatal diving incidents', you have yourself made a 'one a week' claim, you cannot substantiate either of those statements. That's gutter press talk Mike, the very last thing we need right now, and that's why I replied. > Incidentally, the BSAC incident reports only relate to BSAC and the > incidents that are reported via members and club Diving Officers, > Whilst they might be an indication they only show a part of the full > picture. Sorry Mike - you have made a statement of "fact" there that is simply wrong :-) Regarding UK diving fatalities, which is what you were talking about and I was quoting, I can assure you that the BSAC incident reports are accurate and complete. Non fatal incidents are on a voluntary reporting basis, but the BSAC report also includes fatal accident statistics from BSAC divers worldwide (which were excluded from my figures). So regarding UK fatalities Mike the BSAC Incident Reports are definitive, they are very widely read, used and referenced even by the MCA, the HSE and other government bodies. There are no other or better figures for the UK. Regards Keith L Hi Keith, I have just updated the newsfeed with todays news. 1 death in Australia (Sharks) and 1 diver missing in the UK on the Kyarra wreck (again we lost diver there last month). A quote from the BSAC incident report 2004 "Fatalities The 2004 incident year has seen 25 fatal incidents in the UK, a serious increase compared with the average of 16.5 per year over the last ten years. 6 of the 25 were BSAC members" Seems to me like the Trend is continuing.... No gutter press here. simply facts! Mike T >A quote from the BSAC incident report 2004 >"Fatalities [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Seems to me like the Trend is continuing.... >No gutter press here. simply facts! From the 2003 report "The 2003 incident year has seen 11 fatal incidents in the UK, a significant reduction compared with the average of 16.3 per year over the last 10 years." So over the two years 36 or 18 per year - just about average. Taking one datum on its own proves nothing you have to look at a the trend; that is in statistics 101. -- Pete diving 'at' melbourne 'dot' me 'dot' uk >>A quote from the BSAC incident report 2004 >>"Fatalities [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Taking one datum on its own proves nothing you have to look at a the > trend; that is in statistics 101. Right, what we have right now is a case of five people walking past all between 5'6" and 5"10, then the sixth person who walks past is 6'2" - do we suddenly conclude that people are getting taller? SignatureThe law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread. - Anatole France. > Right, what we have right now is a case of five people walking past all > between 5'6" and 5"10, then the sixth person who walks past is 6'2" - do > we suddenly conclude that people are getting taller? You can only make that assumption and report it as fact if you are a journalist :-) Keith L >>Right, what we have right now is a case of five people walking past all >>between 5'6" and 5"10, then the sixth person who walks past is 6'2" - do [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Keith L ...and if you're working for The Sun you can even suggest that that person is having an affair with the five others. SignatureMichael Wolf ----- Cthulhu For President. Why settle for the lesser evil? remove stopspam to reply > Right, what we have right now is a case of five people walking past all > between 5'6" and 5"10, then the sixth person who walks past is 6'2" - do > we suddenly conclude that people are getting taller? No, in fact it's worse than that. The noise on such a tiny number is massive, and the sad thing is that even a doubling of the number of incidents doesn't support a hypothesis that "Diving is more likely to cause a death this year than last" at a reasonable level. The thing to look up if you feel so inclined is "significance" [NB: This isn't a dig at BarryNL, it's more a comment for the OP, it just fitted in cintext here]. This isn't to say we shouldn't teach and practise safe diving -- but we do that anyway. It's just saying that you cannot use the statistics you quote to support your hypothesis. Broadcasting this in a public forum is a bit dangerous too - some journalist will pick it up and run with it and before we know it we'll have more attempts at draconian regulation having to be fought off by BSAC/SAAC/SSA/PADI. If there is a serious, reasoned point to make then by all means make it - we need more chat around here - but scaremongering benefits no one. cheers, Ben 26/08/2005 15:41:35 BarryNL <no@spam.com> wrote in message <430ee77d$0$11071$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> > >>A quote from the BSAC incident report 2004 > >>"Fatalities [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > > > So over the two years 36 or 18 per year - just about average. Why not take it over 5 years I'm sure you can average it out to be meaningless. Alterntatively let's wait until the end of the season and see what the result is, as Keith suggested, that way we don't have to concern ourselves now. > 26/08/2005 15:41:35 > BarryNL <no@spam.com> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > the result is, as Keith suggested, that way we don't have to concern > ourselves now. The time period is irrelevent. You would expect to see the number of incidents over an arbitrary time period falling somewhere on a "normal distribution". To simplify, this means that there is a fairly high probability that the number of incidents will fall near the actual average and a small probability that the number of incidents will be far removed from the average (either very high or very low). Whichever occurs it can still fall on the normal curve and so does not represent any new trend. In fact it's the nature of statistics that you can never take them as proving something, you can only calculate the probability that they are telling you something. So, for example if the fatality statistics for the last 5 years were 10, 15, 12, 13, 15, then this might indicate that 13 incidents is the average or it might just be that the last five years have, purely by chance, had very high incident levels and the actual average is 5 per year. Clearly one conclusion is more likely than the other. Anyway, the point I'm making is that a high level of incidents in one year does not indicate anything from which we can usefully draw any conclusions. Signature"The earth has enough for man’s need but not for man’s greed." - Gandi "Mike Tomlinson" <mike@ukdivers.net> wrote... > A quote from the BSAC incident report 2004 > "Fatalities > The 2004 incident year has seen 25 fatal incidents in the UK, a > serious increase compared with the average of 16.5 per year over the > last ten years. 6 of the 25 were BSAC members" > Seems to me like the Trend is continuing.... > No gutter press here. simply facts! Mike Well done - hunt around long enough and you will of course extrapolate a statistic that backs up your specific point, ignore enough variables, take the right baselines, disregard other factors - and you can "prove" anything! Of course for it to have any meaning whatsoever relating to diving practices and diving safety you would have to assume that exactly the same number of divers are diving now as there were 10 years ago, they are doing the same number of dives, they are doing the same type of dives. Now we know from basic statistics (PADI for instance) and small scale surveys into diving habits that none of those variables have stayed static enough to be able to draw any conclusions whatsoever from the raw mathematical statistics you quote. But that doesn't matter, you've "proved" your point, you've found a thin thread on which to hang your entire assumption that there are too many fatal diving incidents. But then again, you are providing a news feed, so we must not forget the first and most fundamental rule of journalism - "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story" Welcome to the gutter Mike :-) Cheers Keith L 26/08/2005 15:41:35 Keith Lawrence <false@nospam.com> wrote in message <430ebeeb$0$38041$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk> > "Mike Tomlinson" <mike@ukdivers.net> wrote... > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Keith L 26/08/2005 15:41:35 Keith Lawrence <false@nospam.com> wrote in message <430ebeeb$0$38041$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk> > "Mike Tomlinson" <mike@ukdivers.net> wrote... > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Keith L 26/08/2005 15:41:35 Keith Lawrence <false@nospam.com> wrote in message <430ebeeb$0$38041$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk> > "Mike Tomlinson" <mike@ukdivers.net> wrote... > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > Keith L Hi Keith Look, all I'm saying is that there seems to be a lot more fatal incidents than usual and was asking if others feel the same. In response I have been hit with "gutter press", "alarmist", "wait until the 2005 stats are out" "quantitative statistics" (which we all know can mean anything you like) and a feeling of "shut up Mike, we shouldn't be discussing this on an open forum" I get an unexpected sense of "hitting a nerve" and defensiveness and "better nip this it in the bud" which I think speaks for itself. I'll do a personal review so far this year and keep monitoring the situation, probably more in a qualitative way, unfortunately other than the BSAC incident reports and general dive talk I don't have much in the way of knowing the fatalities in previous years. Incidentally I would add that this "feeling" is shared with some of my diving colleages. Hope that will minimise any bad press. Mike T Mike T > Look, all I'm saying is that there seems to be a lot more fatal > incidents than usual and was asking if others feel the same. In [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > I get an unexpected sense of "hitting a nerve" and defensiveness > and "better nip this it in the bud" which I think speaks for itself. Hi Mike You're right about "hitting a nerve", the whole of diving in the UK is under a lot of pressure right now from external sources and we are in danger of being subjected to some half ar*ed knee jerk reactions based on nothing more than gutter press feelings and hype. I am not in any way saying "shut up Mike" or anybody else for that matter, all that I am saying is keep things in perspective. I just wanted to point out that the noise on these statistically extremely small figures is so huge that you can't make any conclusions. > I'll do a personal review so far this year and keep monitoring the > situation, probably more in a qualitative way, unfortunately other > than the BSAC incident reports and general dive talk I don't have > much in the way of knowing the fatalities in previous years. > Incidentally I would add that this "feeling" is shared with some of > my diving colleages. What more can we ask Mike - look at it in a qualitative way :-) The BSAC incident reports going back several years are available online, in there you will find more detailed descriptions (where we have them) of all of the fatal incidents reported. I know exactly what you mean by this "feeling", but I think that it's based more on perception and increased press coverage than any reality. The mainstream press have been having a bit of a feeding frenzy on diving since that bloody awful Open Water film, both the main press and even the BBC have been reporting diving incidents this year where in previous years they hardly even warranted a page filler or a two line mention in a local section. > Hope that will minimise any bad press. Bad press can do us all an awful lot of damage Mike. What I'm very wary of is this bad press feeding into the diving community itself and being perpetuated or even given a validity that it simply does not have. Why are the papers full of these things? Well it's because the divers themselves are "worried" about it. Why are the divers "worried" about it? Well it's because the papers are full of these things... I hope you can see where I'm coming from on this Mike. Discuss, analyse, report by all means - but your opening statements and your thread heading of "Too many fatal diving incidents" was not a brilliant starting point IMHO :-) Cheers Keith L > Bad press can do us all an awful lot of damage Mike. What I'm very wary of > is this bad press feeding into the diving community itself and being [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > "Too many fatal diving incidents" was not a brilliant starting point IMHO > :-) To be honest, I don't think SCUBA has to worry too much about bad press. Restrictions only tend to come in following a moral panic which means the public at large needs to perceive a threat. Even if the public does think scuba is getting more dangerous it's still only a problem for those who choose to scuba dive. So long as Joe Public doesn't think there's scuba divers waiting in the bushes to push trimix on their kids I think we're safe. Signature"The earth has enough for man’s need but not for man’s greed." - Gandi > To be honest, I don't think SCUBA has to worry too much about bad press. > Restrictions only tend to come in following a moral panic which means the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > divers waiting in the bushes to push trimix on their kids I think we're > safe. If only it worked that way. Nothing is more certain than that the public and, worse yet, politicians, will do everything in their power to protect us from ourselves, whether we like it or not. It's a shame, but it's how life is these days, and has been for quite some time. Lee >>To be honest, I don't think SCUBA has to worry too much about bad press. >>Restrictions only tend to come in following a moral panic which means the [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > from ourselves, whether we like it or not. It's a shame, but it's how life > is these days, and has been for quite some time. Well, I won't be worrying yet. Politicians only tend to pick on things the lower classes do - like wearing hoodies. Scuba diving is a far too expensive middle class sport for the politicians to want to attack it. I mean look how horribly dangerous skiing is, yet no-one's interested in restricting that. Signature"The earth has enough for man’s need but not for man’s greed." - Gandi >> If only it worked that way. Nothing is more certain than that the public >> and, worse yet, politicians, will do everything in their power to protect [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > mean look how horribly dangerous skiing is, yet no-one's interested in > restricting that. Really? There are no limits on where you may ski? There are no rules applied when the powers that be conclude that your skiing is too risky for someone of your skill and experience? If so, you're environment is unique in my experience. I'm betting there are already laws and regulations controlling your diving. Are there not laws about the design and marking of your equipment? Are you not required to take training and master certain skills before you are allowed to dive at all? Have you, by any chance, reviewed the requirements for buying an Inspiration closed circuit rebreather? I think, if you look, you'll find that diving is already partially regulated and, if you chose to review its history, will be able to see how the public and politicians have already stepped in to protect you from yourself. Lee >I'm betting there are already laws and regulations controlling your diving. None for rereational diving in the UK. >Are there not laws about the design and marking of your equipment? Not really (in the UK) commercial diving excepted. > Are you >not required to take training and master certain skills before you are >allowed to dive at all? Nope. Anyone in the UK can buy kit, strap it to their backs and jump in. > Have you, by any chance, reviewed the requirements >for buying an Inspiration closed circuit rebreather? Manufacturer imposed. No legal requirements. You can buy them on ebay, and there's a thriving 2nd hand market for them. I know someone who bought one and went diving with it with no instructor training at all. >I think, if you look, you'll find that diving is already partially regulated >and, if you chose to review its history, will be able to see how the public >and politicians have already stepped in to protect you from yourself. Not yet in the UK. Not for recreational diving, anyway, and lets keep it that way. Gordon >>I think, if you look, you'll find that diving is already partially >>regulated [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Not yet in the UK. Not for recreational diving, anyway, and lets keep > it that way. I'm surprised and a bit skeptical, but fully in agreement with the concept of keeping diving as unregulated as possible. Lee > Really? There are no limits on where you may ski? Nope. > There are no rules > applied when the powers that be conclude that your skiing is too risky for > someone of your skill and experience? Nope. > If so, you're environment is unique > in my experience. I don't think it's "unique" - but it's certainly different from your side of the Atlantic... > I'm betting there are already laws and regulations controlling your diving. > Are there not laws about the design and marking of your equipment? There are laws about the testing of any kit you're planning to sell - there's nothing about kit you're planning to use. > Are you > not required to take training and master certain skills before you are > allowed to dive at all? Nope. Amateur diving in the UK is unrestricted in law[1] - you can do it with no training whatsoever, if that's what you want. > Have you, by any chance, reviewed the requirements > for buying an Inspiration closed circuit rebreather? That's a requirement imposed by the manufacturer, not by any sort of law. > I think, if you look, you'll find that diving is already partially regulated Not over here - not for amateur diving, anyway. Commercial stuff is quite different. Vic. [1] Although certain private sites may impose restrictions on whom they let in... >>>To be honest, I don't think SCUBA has to worry too much about bad press. >>>Restrictions only tend to come in following a moral panic which means the [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >mean look how horribly dangerous skiing is, yet no-one's interested in >restricting that. It has happened at least once. I was in Weymouth this Monday, doing a rubbishy dive on the Countess knowing perfectly well that Hood was a couple of hundred yards away and I couldn't dive it because prat councilors who think they know my abilities and attitude to risk better than I do. Bah! ------------------------------------- York BSAC Web Page: http://website.lineone.net/~york_bsac > It has happened at least once. I was in Weymouth this Monday, doing a > rubbishy dive on the Countess knowing perfectly well that Hood was a > couple of hundred yards away and I couldn't dive it because prat > councilors who think they know my abilities and attitude to risk better > than I do. Bah! You don't honestly believe that safety has really got anything to do with why we can't dive the Hood? Jason SignatureSee http://www.scuba-addict.co.uk/ for UK diving reports and the UK Underwater Visibility Database. View the database or add your own report > You don't honestly believe that safety has really got anything to do with > why we can't dive the Hood? Of course it does. Anythnig else would mean that The Powers The Be are corrupt, and that couldn't be true, could it? Vic. >> You don't honestly believe that safety has really got anything to do >> with why we can't dive the Hood? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Anythnig else would mean that The Powers The Be are corrupt, and that > couldn't be true, could it? It's not the Powers That Be, is it? Just some private company managing their property as they see fit for the benefit of the shareholders, though I blame the government for selling our property to them in the first place without sufficient safeguards. Jason Signaturehttp://www.scuba-addict.co.uk/ for Aussie diving reports including Coral Bay, Rottnest Island, Dunsborough and Darwin >Hi Keith, >I have just done a quick check and there seems to have been at least >one fatality every week. I have been diving for 10 years and I can't >remember it being this bad.Can't help the feeling that some people >just don't take diving seriously enough these days. In your back yard, Norway, accidents have had a peculiar pattern the last couple of years. SCUBA fatalities have hovered around 6-8 from the early 1990's, until last year when there were zero. (OK, one happened, but it was technically in Sweden). Then there are three? this year so far; and we have the accident-prone summer season almost behind us now. If you say 1 per week this translates to 50 a year, which fit the population ratio between the UK and Norway. This pattern has now changed radically. The change seem to have happened in 2002 or early 2003. The classic "rusty diver going out alone a dark evening" type of accident is almost gone. Ditto the newbie accidents. They still happen, but they don't seem to be fatal anymore. They used to be responsible for two thirds of fatalities. The fatalities seem to have changed to course incidents and working diver incidents. There have also been a disturbing number of multiple-fatiality incidents, something that was almost unheard of in the 1990s. The "deep-dark-and-scary-on-air" ones are still with us; but a lot of these end well too, with the patient recovering fully after chamber treatment. Small boat fatalities also went down by a third at this point in time. They outnumber SCUBA fatalites by almost 100:1. -- mrr > Hi, > I look after the diving newsfeeds for ukdivers.net and just lately (i. > e. this season) there seems to be a awful lot more fatal diving > incidents. Are we getting too adventurous or too complacent, or is > this the norm? > Mike T Some sort of Heart Attack at Stoney today, they stopped us getting in circa 11am whilst a 'grey faced man clutching his chest' was removed from the water and then from site. Don't think it was fatal, no sirens on leaving. >> Hi, >> I look after the diving newsfeeds for ukdivers.net and just lately (i. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >from the water and then from site. Don't think it was fatal, no sirens >on leaving. I was there on the slip when it happened. It did look like a heart attack. A diver was sent for oxygen and runs from the slipway to the main centre and says very clearly to the guy there. "We have an emergency and need emergency oxygen." Stoney guy says to mate "Do we have any? Were do we keep it?" Answer comes and after finishing his conversation with his mate wonders off to find it at a snail's pace. This disillusioned diver returns to the slip muttering about it. By this time some of the private training groups have respond and provide oxygen. First response NHS vehicle arrives and Stoney guy tells him to drive into a slot near the shop and reverse all the way to the slip telling all who are parked there, they are in his way. There is ample room to do a 4 or 5 point turn by the slip as several other divers had done during the morning. Ambulance arrives and the same happens. The vehicle is instructed to reverse all the way. Lots of people moving kit to help. Again there was enough room to do a multi point turn at the end. This time a woman from Stoney who hates everyone is now telling any one with a non mini car they are being inconsiderate by parking there. Mine was a Peugeot 406 estate in a parking bay and it was jammed into the hedge and I got an ear full. "Hear say", but the guy left hospital late that afternoon. I was told it was some form of bad chest infection that the extra pressure (he was at 12 meters) brought on a "condition" / "attack" / "seizure"? I was **very impressed** by the divers that found him, got him to the slip, did all the correct things, sent people off for oxygen etc., and one of them accompanied him to hospital in the ambulance. SignatureMick Whittingham 'and I will make it a felony to drink small beer.' William Shakespeare, Henry VI part 2. "Mick Whittingham" <Mick@whittinghamsite.fsnet.co.uk> wrote... > >Some sort of Heart Attack at Stoney today... > I was there on the slip when it happened... Thanks very much for posting that first hand account Mike. The response of other divers to such situations was, as always, excellent. The response of the Stoney staff I find incredible, well below their normal high safety response standards. That one warrants a formal complaint to Stoney IMHO. Keith L >"Mick Whittingham" <Mick@whittinghamsite.fsnet.co.uk> wrote... > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >The response of other divers to such situations was, as always, excellent. Me, I left those who were on the ball to do what was needed, I just shifted kit and de-finned those who were administering first aid if they wanted it. >The response of the Stoney staff I find incredible, well below their normal >high safety response standards. Everyone has their off days and it was raining for most of the day. It was a young lad who went for the emergency oxygen but I believe what he said when he came back, just because he was so disgusted. For an emergency response set up you need a situation where a panicking idiot mumbling for help is immediately responded to with the maximum haste that is commensurate with efficiency. And in my opinion you tell an ambulance guy what the situation is and not just wave him into a parking slot to turn round and tell him to reverse. These ambulance and first response estate cars guys really do know where they can get their vehicles 99% of the time >That one warrants a formal complaint to >Stoney IMHO. But I like diving there :-) What was nice was the level of relief and smiles I got from friends when it was realised it was not me who had the problem. There was a certain similarity in age, shape, beard and hair colour (or lack of it). SignatureMick Whittingham 'and I will make it a felony to drink small beer.' William Shakespeare, Henry VI part 2. [off stoney] >But I like diving there :-) So far I've avoided it like the plague and will try to continue to do so SignatureIan "Democracy, what we need - Kakistocracy what we've got" >[off stoney] >>But I like diving there :-) > >So far I've avoided it like the plague and will try to continue to do >so When the sea is rough on the coasts that are available to me and I'm not some where warm :-) my choice is some what limited. SignatureMick Whittingham 'and I will make it a felony to drink small beer.' William Shakespeare, Henry VI part 2. >>[off stoney] >>>But I like diving there :-) [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >When the sea is rough on the coasts that are available to me and I'm not >some where warm :-) my choice is some what limited. I've never been in a position to have as an alternative an inland site, if a sea dive is not possible because of weather then I'd usually do something other than diving. I'd use them for training but it's not really a pleasure IMO to dive in a quarry. SignatureIan "Democracy, what we need - Kakistocracy what we've got" >>>[off stoney] >>>>But I like diving there :-) [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >site, if a sea dive is not possible because of weather then I'd >usually do something other than diving. There's always the bike to go out on. >I'd use them for training but >it's not really a pleasure IMO to dive in a quarry. I sort of agree with you. Any of the inland sites at the weekend are to be avoided like the plague but during the week you can get to enjoy a dive there. Sometimes I get to buddy some one who does the driving there. SignatureMick Whittingham 'and I will make it a felony to drink small beer.' William Shakespeare, Henry VI part 2. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.