The liveliest letters from the Diver mailbag...

---

IT TAKES A BIG MAN
As one of those oversized and apparently less-than-desirable divers, I was given a glimmer of hope when I read Dr Ian Sibley-Calder's letter (No Automatic Ban on Oversized Divers, February).
Some large people are not fit to dive under any circumstances, like some "normal" people, but to tar with the same brush everybody with a Body Mass Index of 30 or more is outrageous.
I failed my first medical three years ago because my BMI was 36. The doctor was not a diver, so did not consider himself qualified to judge whether or not I was "fit" to dive. He was able only to "go by the form".
I was given the name of a sympathetic doctor who was a diver. When I told him why I had failed my medical, he took the trouble to ask about my lifestyle and find out more about me. He also spoke to my club's diving officer at my request, rather than making a snap decision on my future diving career.
In case you're wondering, I'm 6ft 4in and my weight varies between 17.5-19.5 stone. I play rugby, lead a very energetic life and can pull my oversized, unworthy body into our RIB with 40lb of weight around my waist.
I am a very active member of the club committee, an assistant club instructor, and did more dives than anybody else in the club last year. So thank you to that doctor, without whom I would probably have thrown in the towel at the start, just because of an impersonal little calculation that I was a bit chubby.
I hope this letter will give other chubby people the will to carry on, even if they haven't seen their feet for a day or two. And for all you doctors with the power to turn people away from the BSAC, chill out and get to know your patients a bit better before signing that form.
I hope Dr Sibley-Calder can influence the rest of the medical world in bringing about some tolerance toward us un-normal folk.
Neville "Gargantuan" Jones, Brackley, Northants

UK WRECKIES STAND UP AND BE COUNTED
Diver readers know better than anyone that the most undervalued and under-used resources available for advancing maritime heritage in the UK are those creatures from the deep so demonised by the establishment - wreck-divers!
Wreck-diving does have its mavericks, but they are a minority and, even then, less mindless than depicted. Many are simply over-enthusiastic, and need only to have their endeavours rechannelled into better causes, by example or encouragement.
One problem is that when they attempt to get involved in heritage diving, they quickly learn that they must pay for appropriate training - and keep paying. They are offered no assistance with funding, seldom as much as a word of thanks!
From time to time, however, the curtain twitches and a ray of hope is glimpsed. Recently I witnessed such a twitch, when the Archaeological Diving Unit provided underwater video equipment to a group of UK wreck-divers, enabling them to bring back data from a wreck site they had found and reported as being of possible heritage interest .
No big deal, no fuss, just practical support and encouragement for what was recognised as a wreck-diver initiative.
My appeal is for fellow wreck-divers to start shaking the maritime heritage establishment tree, to win recognition, to prise the pundits away from their podiums and publications, to make them get wet alongside wreck-divers.
We need to start showing by example what has to be done and how. A start would be to make heritage diving training free and more easily available. Bodies such as the Nautical Archaeological Society do exist, but does the system really enable them to be effective?
Public money for maritime heritage is limited, so we need "best value" thinking on how it should be spent - some trimming at the "talking" end of fund support and encouragement at the "doing" end would be welcome.
We have several leading politicians who are divers, or perhaps I should say divers who are leading politicians. Wouldn't it be something if they could find time to support this plea for a new reality in maritime heritage?
Norman Temple, Seadive Organisation, Ramsgate

UNDER-DRESSED OR OVER-DRESSED?
As an ex-commercial diver, I was surprised at Bill Woolford's comments about other parties on the same trip as him "having to be helped up the dive ladder" (All Decked Up Like A Christmas Tree, Deep Breath, February).
Surely he was taught that this is when the risk of a bend is high.
The IANTD regularly teaches the practice of removing stage bottles and handing them to someone on the vessel, to reduce post-dive exertion. The people with whom I dive would expect to be helped onto the boat after an extended-range dive.
Mr Woolford criticises the amount of equipment available on today's market. I agree that some of this is nothing more than a gimmick. Marketing managers realise that the need for something new is paramount in a saturated market, but it is somewhat unfair to brand the divers as "Christmas trees".
Redundancy is something Mr Woolford seems to know very little about. I agree that all this "technical" equipment might do more harm than good in untrained hands, but surely diving "regularly beyond 60m" with no redundant buoyancy needs thinking about. I have never heard of any training agency advocating removal of a stab jacket or wing on the strength of wearing "an extra-baggy drysuit".
I would be interested in the complete weight of Mr Woolford's equipment compared to the amount of lift a baggy drysuit provides. Diving like this is asking for trouble. He might not have had an incident yet, but it needs to happen only once. What is his contingency plan for a drysuit hose failure at depth, or a torch-bulb failure in the dark, rendering reading of his decompression stops almost impossible?
It's as if he never underwent any sort of formal training at the beginning of his dive career, and no one has talked to him regarding kit configuration.
At least the boys with the redundant kit are more likely to be able to deal with any problem posed in a competent manner, reducing diver stress. I regularly dive with the kind of equipment Mr Woolford describes and would advise: Don't knock it before you've tried it!
Mike Joseph, Club Co-ordinator, Just Diving

I couldn't agree more with Bill Woolford regarding the current fashion for divers to deck themselves out like Christmas trees to carry out perfectly straightforward dives. In my book, simplicity equals safety. The reliability of today's equipment is such that one simple back-up system coupled with proper training and confidence in the buddy system will ensure a more-than-adequate margin of safety.
Pressure on trainees to spend upwards of £2000 to kit themselves out with what is now considered a fairly basic set of equipment is largely responsible for the huge fall-out rate between initial training and becoming a regular diver.
The static membership of diving organisations bears witness to this, despite the large number of trainees coming through each year.
What's wrong with starting off with a decent set of secondhand gear? There's plenty on offer in diving magazines and local papers, older members are always willing to vet stuff for new divers and there is plenty of life in gear up to 10 years old which can be had for a song.
I am diving with a 15-year-old steel cylinder, still in good condition, and have recently retired an 18-year-old Sportsways demand valve. The performance of its replacement is indistinguishable from the old valve in normal diving conditions.
What some equipment freaks will not accept is that the basic design of DVs has not altered one iota in the past 30 years. All the much-heralded improvements are merely tinkering with an item which, like the bicycle, reached a state where further significant improvement was impossible very early in its development.
We now have valves that cost three times as much but are far more easily damaged and prone to icing - and they call this progress!

John Ferguson, Kirkintilloch Thistle BSAC, Glasgow

RIP-OFF BRITAIN TO BLAME
I empathise with Paul James (Off-Gassing, February) about the high prices we pay for diving equipment in the UK. Yes, they are high compared to many other countries and, yes, this does appear to be due partly to uncompetitive practices of equipment manufacturers. But the other aspect is that the UK is an incredibly expensive country in which to run a small business.
Our high land and building prices mean high rents. We have the most expensive transport costs in the world. High petrol prices push up those in virtually every business and these get passed down the line. Business rates are particularly high for smaller shops and premises, like those of dive retailers.
High interest rates (about double those in the USA), high bank charges, expensive telephone calls - yes, we have "rip-off Britain", and pay more than we should have to for diving equipment, but it's not the local dive shop that's the problem, it's our whole social structure.
Perhaps for some things the Internet will force the UK (and Europe) to tackle the larger issues as more people shop worldwide and complain about our prices. Living in hope.
Charles Stirling, Bristol

The practice of controlled pricing described by Paul James might have been technically illegal in the past, but from March the Competition Act comes into full effect. This forbids manufacturers and distributors attempting to control prices by restricting supply. Further details are available from the Office of Fair Trading on 01345 224499, or www.oft.gov.uk
William Hudson, Abingdon

BREATHING THE BUTEYKO WAY
I am not an asthma sufferer but thought the following report would be of interest, in the light of Dr Peter Wilmshurst's reply to the letter Another Way of Breathing (February).
"In 1952, Russian scientist and medical doctor Konstantin Buteyko is reported as "discovering' one of the major links in the cause of asthma - "Over-Breathing', correctly termed hyperventilation. After clinical tests in Russia, the method is now fully endorsed by the Russian Ministry of Health and is widely used across the country.
"Trials were conducted in Australia in December 1994 - January 1995 through the Mater Hospital in Brisbane by Prof C Mitchel and Dr S Bowler. The results were released at the Conference for Thoracic Physicians Society in Hobart, Tasmania in March 1995.
"After six weeks, people from the group that had been taught the Buteyko technique reduced the intake of bronchodilators by 90 per cent and steroid medication by 17 per cent along with improvement in their condition. In contrast, ones from the control group who used the most advanced traditional treatments were only able to reduce medication intake by less than 5 per cent."
This method has cropped up regularly on TV programmes in Australia and has shown that this technique does work with many people. Quite a number of doctors recommend it. All I can say to Chris Brailsford is, give it a try.
Walt Deas, Queensland, Australia

COMPUTER CONFUSION
The record described in Jersey Woman Claims Depth Record (News, January), is the kind I prefer to the deep air record reported on in previous issues of Diver. Natasha Abels chose the appropriate mix for the depth (although trimix 8/67 still gives a high partial pressure of oxygen of 1.52 at 180m) and the rest, as they say, is history. I cringed only when I heard of her near-miss on deep air at 130m! Luckily she escaped and learned the lesson.
I have one question, however, regarding your inset picture of the computer. It is a Beuchat Aladin Pro, which essentially is a Uwatec Aladin Pro, AFAIK-rated to 99.9m. Admittedly, some early Uwatec Aladins and also the Spirotechnique/Aqualung Monitor II were rated to 127m, but that still leaves us 53m short.
The Air X Natasha is seen wearing on the portrait is also rated to go to 99.9m max. So how can it be that the computer in the inset shows a maximum depth of 600ft?
Adri Haine

Natasha Abels replies: Maximum depth limit on the current Aladin Pro is 99m but the model we used was an earlier version with no maximum depth cap. Production stopped some five years ago and it is difficult to obtain - Mk 1 Aladins change hands in the USA for up to $1000! The 600ft shown is correct. The Aladin Air X will give depth readings to 127m (contrary to the instructions). Mark Ellyatt's had its case crushed on the dive by the pressure and on ascending it showed masses of bubbles under the screen. It wailed and beeped for a few hours, but was dead before it broke the surface! We also used a Dive Rite Nitek 3 in gauge mode, which gives depth to 200m and seems a very reliable deep technical-diving tool. Only three or four gauges made now work deeper than 99.9m, and be wary of reputable watches marked good for 200m but which pop nearer 80m. We have had some expensive experiences!

DRAGGING THE OCTO
I was concerned to see your brief review of the Aqualung Low Profile Octopus (What's Bubbling, February). The description of it as able to "be stored comfortably in a BC pocket" and "offering minimal drag if left dangling" highlights two of the worst possible practices with an octopus and uses them as selling points.
Octopuses, or any other alternative air source, need to be available and functioning instantly. Having to dig around in a BC pocket increases the risk of the out-of-air diver taking the reg out of your mouth (if he didn't do it to start with), in which case you're going to regret not having your own octo on a quick release!
For the same reason, an octo should never be allowed to trail behind, regardless of its drag factor. The out-of-air diver can't get to it or, if he can, chances are he will end up with a mouthful of debris, dredged up from the bottom. So, again, he'll go for the reg in your mouth.
By all means, stress the good points - it is a good alternative air source reg, because it works either way up - but please avoid encouraging people to persist with bad habits.
Iain Smith, Cambridge

BOYS FROM BRAZIL
Your magazine is very interesting but I was annoyed with what I read about the "Manic Brazilians" (Intoxicating Curaçao, February). As an international diver and a professional, I would never stereotype a country as Andy Blackford did.
I know many bad English divers but I have never read in any Brazilian magazine about the "Manic English". I know many Americans and Germans who don't know how to dive, yet are certified.
It's very sad to read in a prestigious magazine like yours such an impolite report.
Leandro Capucho dos Santos, Brazil

Editor's reply: We wouldn't dream of condemning all Brazilians as bad divers but this was a bunch of instructors behaving badly and they happened to be from Brazil. If they had been English, American or German, we would have said so!

LAY OFF THE PINS
On my only dive on the Knoll Pins at Lundy last summer, a dive-boat anchor chain was rubbing against some of the fragile marine life that is now a shadow of what was there in the early "70s. Divers and others are asked by English Nature not to anchor at Knoll Pins for good reason. Please avoid doing this, and give the marine life at this still-superb site a chance.
Keith Hiscock, Plymouth

RAINBOW CLEAN-UP
As the health of the oceans becomes more critical, what can we divers do to help? Perhaps something we did on 1 January - holding a clean-up day on Rainbow Reef in Jordan.
Sixteen of us went diving with bags and gloves, collecting plastic cups, yoghurt pots, fishing line and bottles. The amount of rubbish we collected was amazing. The different sea life we saw when engaged in this activity - gobies, shrimps, small invertebrates, etc - was surprising, and we all had a good feeling at the end of the day.
If all divers spent one dive of their holidays on this activity, what a positive step forward to improve our environment it would be!
Marie Mitchell, Nuneaton

---

Appeared in DIVER - April 2000

---

We want to hear from you Write now to diving's brightest, most controversial letters section. There is £10 for the author of the lead letter each month. Address it to Diver, 55 High Street, Teddington, Middlesex TW11 8HA, fax 0181 943 4312 or e-mail editorial@divermag.co.uk. Please include your full name and home address.

Go to Beachcomber
Previous Letters

---

DIVERNET NAVIGATOR