> On Jul 26, 2016, at 6:16 AM, Robert Helling <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all, > >> On 26.07.2016, at 14:30, Robert Helling <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> I haven’t had time to read in the proceedings of the DAN workshop that was >> linked before. What I saw that came most closely to a recommendation was a >> report of a plan to do a study trying to bend subjects in a simulated fly >> after dive scenario. Which is not much that could be put into software. >> Maybe one should check the Rubicon Archive for more scientific information >> on the issue. >> > > > ok, I did some Rubicon search and follow up reading an the two most relevant > papers seem to be > > http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/6255/SPUMS_V9N3_4.pdf?sequence=1 > > <http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/6255/SPUMS_V9N3_4.pdf?sequence=1> > and > http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/5611/DAN_FAD_2002.pdf?sequence=1 > > <http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/5611/DAN_FAD_2002.pdf?sequence=1> > (in particular the executive summary). > > Upshot seems to be: Very hard to asses given the low number of cases > (boarding a place when you already have DCS symptoms seems to be a totally > different game, though), but 12-18h limits, maybe 24h seem to be a good idea > and there is no model on the marked that is able to predict this.
This seems to match my expectations. a) made up random shit b) semi-scientific algorithms, tuned by random numbers without any scientific basis in order to match pre-conceived notions of "this sounds about right" /D
_______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
