The situation in Italy

[Will]

Massimo Malpieri's post:
___________________

Thankyou Will for your question, as it helps to clear up the concept precisely.
As mentioned, during the ascent air contained in the pulmonary alveoli (which has been compressed during the descent) expands very rapidly (an apneist can exceed 100meters/minute during the ascent - Rignani Lolli has reached 162m/min) creating a very high pressure inside the alveoli that blocks any kind of gas exchange, although in some cases there is a transfer of CO2 from the alveoli to the blood (phenomenon of samba during surfacing); so therefore it is impossible for plasma to ooze into the alveoli, also because in this case the apneist would be victim of an acute pulmonary oedema upon resurfacing. I can say that during the course of our research we have established many physiological parameters in both the cardiopulmonary and hormonal systems, and thanks to your excellent translation I will post several pubblications on the physiology of apnea, if that is okay with you.
____________________

I leave on Friday for Egypt but I will have some time before then to translate and I would love to read your publications.

 

[Adrian]

Originally posted by joefox
...Plus, as I told you, there's one thing that I like of sport institutions: if you're good at your sport, you don't need money to train or compete. I guess this point alone should convince everyone: every choice deserve respect. If freedivers don't respect each other, then we do have a problem.

Joefox

Giorgio,
Getting back to the "exclusivity" question, I see CMAS as the only official institution in the world, which means that if a freediver wants to benefit from the economic aid given by CMAS and aquire an "official" title, he is obliged to join CMAS-oriented federations. Therefore there is not much free choice there in practical terms, not when there is only one institution that offers these advantages.

The way I see it, because of this monopoly and official status CMAS should take extra care in respecting their freedivers by allowing them to compete in any competition they feel like.

In fact, due to their priviledged status CMAS should be the first ones to promote a good camaderie between freedivers and remove those obstacles that give rise to bad feelings, bad publicity and bad public relations.

If it's true as Alaister says, that CMAS wants to "protect their investment" my perception is that there are no good economic reasons to promote this type of exclusivity. Certainly there are no good social ones! Again, how can a federated freediver hurt CMAS by competing with other organizations?

CMAS will not lose anything by relaxng this exclusivity policy. It will only gain more members and more respect. It also makes good long term economic sense. What's there to lose?

Giorgio, why don't you pass this on to whoever is responsible for public relations at CMAS? We might even get an answer regarding this specific question!

Adrian

 

[Adrian]

By the way, anybody know where I can find CMAS regulations for freediving and competitions?

Adrian

 

[Kars]

Cmas apnoe competition Rules

Here they are:

http://www.cmas.org/comspo/apn/general/docutheque/

Good luck and come up well within time.

Kars,
love and peace.

 

[donmoore]

Plasma or Blood in lthe Lungs?

It doesn’t appears to me this has been answered. I was a little criticized for saying it is only the plasma that goes into the lungs when a person dives deeper than the reserve lung capacity. I was told the body can not filter out (separate) the plasma from red and while blood). I was also told I should do some reading of research on this before I made such a claim. I have attempted to do this from search engines and I have not found many medical/scientific studies, but several instances where freedivers who have studied the subject say the “alveoli becomes engrossed with plasma to decrease the negative pressure space”. Frank Pernett, you seem to be able to find scientific studies well. Maybe you can post some about this.

Will, asked a more precise question on this, and maybe it was due to differences in languages, but the answer that seemed to come from Prof. Malpieri was on what was happening in a very fast ascent and not the filtering of plasma from the rest of the blood into the alveoli on a descent. Please help me understand this better. Also the 162/m per minute that Rignani Lolli has achieved seems much faster than what is possible in constant ballast.

So the real questions I have are:
1. What goes into the lungs in a cb dive deeper than the reserve capacity of the lungs?
2. Is it dangerous in itself?
3. Are their documented cases of lung embolism from not enough room for expansion due to blood taking up lung volume in cb?
4. Is there evidence to support these answers?

If red blood was part of the blood shift, then wouldn’t most dives that were below reserve capacity, result in the diver coughing and spitting blood? A real world analysis would say no. Take any meet with several good divers. I wasn’t at Cyprus last year, but from reading the news it sounded like the only diver who spit blood was Herbert and it was from a ruptured eardrum and not from red blood in his lungs from blood shift. Some of the recent World record events have had divers going below their reserve capacity day after day without any spitting of red blood.

The bottom line question that some of us I believe are thinking is, does this research and conclusions reach by it really directly apply to constant ballast? Was good research and conclusions from it apply in a non-real world way that has resulted in the removal of discipline that is held precious by the people doing it?
don

 

[juka]

I'd like to come back to another point of Prof. Massimo Malpieri's post.
till now my understanding was that an exhale during the last few meters actually decreases the risk of SWB due to the smaller final volume of the exhaled lungs which means less space for O2 which travels back from blood into the lungs during ascent because of the sudden partial pressure differential of O2 between the lungs and arterial blood.
is there a mistake im my reasoning?

questin no.6

does a partial exhale during last meters of CB increase or decrease risk of SWB?

regarding cmas,
I think freedivers will choose the best organization by themselves and cmas's strange regulations won't change it.
the cmas's connections to IOC shouldn't be overestimated. in spite of these connections cmas wasn't able to bring finswimming to olympics, although world championships in this sport are already being held for decades and there are thousands of finswimmers all over the world (anyway I don't think FD should and will ever be an olympic sport as Erik has already pointed out).

 

[DeepThought]

Hi Don.
I will try to answer some of your questions with what I was thought in the course, and how I understand it. I would be very happy if someone would correct me if I'm wrong or affirm my understanding of this.

I think that the definition of "blood goes into the lungs" is what might have caused this confusion.

On the way down:

When blood shift occurs, blood (as it is) expands the "vascular" (not sure of defenition) part of the alveoli and compensates for the negative pressure in the "air-part" of the lungs by making the alveoli to take more space.
That part is what I normaly consdier as normal blood shift, and I think what happens commonly. The small blood vessels in the lungs must be trained to acheive that "stretch" without breaking. If they break, some amount of blood get into the "air part" of the lung, this is a lung injury.

When your alveolis are stretched due to bloodshift, plasma might "sip" through the alveoli walls (that are now thinner due to stretching) into the "Air part" of the lungs due to still existing negetive pressure and the temporary increased pressure of the heart beats. That situation is still normal I think, and fits what you heard Kirk Krack talk about, regarding amount of time spent in negetive pressure and so.

So, how I figured it, in constant ballast, it is possible to get to a certain depth where you will have normal blood shift to the lungs (lung erection), and might have some plasma left afterwards in the "air part", which is not a serious health problem.

In case you have gone too far, which is a different depth for everyone, you might get blood in your lungs do to extream negetive pressure.

On the way up:

The blood filled alveoli needs to shrink because of the increasing pressure in the "air-part" of the lungs. In good/common situation, the blood will go to the heart and the lung erection will be gone and everything is normal (sans plasma in the lung).

It may happen that the heart will not be able to pump enough blood out of the alveolis, and there will be some kind of lung-over-pressure injury, either air entering the blood vessel part of the lung, or blood rapturing some alveoli because of the high pressure on the alveoli, though I'm not sure about that last part.

There is also a possible worst case scenario, though I don't think it ever happened:
The strong pressure of the blood coming out of the lungs might break a weak point in the lung-heart artery, or a weak point in the heart walls. If such a thing ever happen, there is a good chance the diver would die from cardiac arrest/internal hamerige, or will be saved with some emergency operation.
I don't think such a thing ever happen before.

Did I get it right?

My conclusion is that every CB to below residual volume depth has a risk POTENTIAL, but that's why people should be thought to advance slowly, and listen to their bodies. Increasing their REPEATED personal bests by small measures time after time, over a long traning period.
This is acceptable to me, since there is no way at all to practice freediving safely with NO education.

 

[alastair]

This is the thread with the most concurrently running conversations EVER!!

To jump back to my comments of last week (as if anyone is interested...)

It seems that Apnea Academy has now resolved any previous difficulties with CMAS and are now fully affiliated.

Indeed, I took part in a very well organized and exciting FIPSAS/CMAS national selection comp at the weekend that was won by the AA team!! It's already fascinating to me that there are so many apneists here that they have to hold selections in order to take part in the national championships!

I (and most people) were blown away 150m and 153m womens dynamics.

Indeed the level of the entire comp was pretty high - especially in the DWF where I came 23rd with 100m. This is just plain unfair!!

I had alot of discussions about Jump Blue and I can summarize the main arguments here :

Pro : the only apnea disciplines with the posibility of becomming Olympic events are dynamic and Jump Blue, These will be supported exclusively in the future. All questions of safetly are secondary to this main goal.

Against : Apart from any arguments about the purity of CB compared to JB, the IOC should support the proliferation of sport for the masses. Jump blue is extremely difficult to set up for recreational purposes, and there don't seem to be many comps organized this year. If you announce the 'death' of static and CB, then you'd better have an alternative that many people can access, or you'll damage the sport. (Again, safety was definitely secondary.)

One final thing is that Italy seems to have discovered the Russian monofin. Perhaps half monofinners were using Skate monos. They are truly amazing. Mine is on order..!

Ciao

Al

 

[efattah]

Just because humans don't (yet) have a way to get to other solar systems, should we 'ban' interstellar space travel because:
1. It is too dangerous, and
2. There is no existing way to do it safely
??

Problems exist to be solved. Running a constant weight competition presents challenges. Not all the challenges have been solved. But, all the challenges CAN be solved, and WILL be solved, whether CMAS wants it or not. The people who run CMAS must be the most non-creative, non-innovative people in the world; who in the world walks away from a problem because no solution currently exists? If no solution exists, then you must FIND A SOLUTION.

Concerning keeping the epiglottis open (the malpieri maneuver), think of how many athletes have blacked out at 15m or more in constant weight. Their epiglottis closed shut automatically when they lost consciousness. They were dragged up to the surface quickly. Did their lungs explode? No. I myself have witnessed three blackouts from 15-24m, and the athletes packed to the max, and didn't suffer lung injuries after waking up. These were deep dives too (60-71m).

Concerning controlling the rate of ascent of the athlete (after deep blackout), it is very possible. I can think of several safety systems which would allow the surface operators to control the ascent rate of the athlete, especially in the last part where DCS may become an issue.

These problems are minor ones, and simple ones. It seems to me that the CMAS is trying to find problems (any problems) with constant weight to avoid the 'pain' of having to hold competitions in this event.

Instead of looking at AIDA competitions and saying 'look at all those problems and dangers', CMAS should ACT like the LEADER and SOLVE the PROBLEMS.

CMAS should solve the problems and show the world that the CMAS is the real leader in underwater activities.

By abandoning constant weight, CMAS is not proving that they are a leader in underwater activities. They are proving that they are unable to handle even simple problems. Why then should anyone look up to the CMAS?

If the CMAS wants to gain respect, then it should start working to solve the problems in constant weight. Then, it should come into the public and DEMONSTRATE a new safety system, new recovery system, new regulations, which solve the problems. Then, people will say, 'look, the CMAS is the leader.'

Otherwise, some other people or other organizations will solve the problems. A few years from now, CMAS will look upon the solutions, and wonder why they didn't think of it themselves.


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada

 

[Adrian]

Thanks for your report Alastair,
Fantastic distances and congratulations on your DWF 100 meters! If I could go so far I'd be happy! I'ts my next goal.

When you say "All questions of safetly are secondary to this main goal." I don't know how to interpret this. It's not your expression, it's my convoluted mind! Does this mean that safety is not the overriding factor in determining the viability of dynamics and JB as apnea's main sport but that the IOC "mass audience index" is?

As an aside I thought that the Olympics was to determine who was the best in a particular sport. One could say who cares if anybody watches, but I guess that's where the money comes from!

Adrian

 

[Adrian]

Originally posted by efattah
Just because humans don't (yet) have a way to get to other solar systems, should we 'ban' interstellar space travel because:
1. It is too dangerous, and
2. There is no existing way to do it safely
??...


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada

Eric,

Space travel should clearly be banned because I hear there's some pretty good constant weight competitions on Saturn's moons and that is simply not acceptable.

Sorry, I'm feeling kind of flippant...

Adrian

 

[fpernett]

Real Dangers

When this thread started it was about the Italian situation, that in the next months, can be the World situation. The main debate is around how safe is CB diving, and about the "real" dangers of it.
Prof. Malpieri stated very well the causes of pulmonary hypertension in CB dives, but, what is the real dangers of it?.
Let's clarify what is the blood-shift or the intrathoracic bood pooling, this implies a redistribution of blood flow, the pulmonary arteries are high capacitance vessel so they can "hold" a lot of blood. In immersion our body deverts the blood flow from splachnic and limbs circulation to pulmonary circulation, so the amount of blood in the thorax is increased, this doesn't mean that the bood is inside the alveoli, is the vessels.
Another phenomenon is the hypoxic vasoconstriction, where the pulmonary capillaries get narrowed when exposed to alveolar hypoxia, this focus the blood flow in oxygen rich alveoli, in a CB dive, mainly at the end, this vasoconstriction can be huge. All this factors augment the pulmonary pressure, and make them close to the "stress failure", where will be a leakage of blood component to interstitial tissue (and at very high pressures could reach the alveoli).
This stress failure can be achieved also with heavy exercise (like running), that's why it has been recorded pulmonary edema in horses after a race and in experiment with cyclist. This is more know in our media as "lung squeeze or chest squeeze", this has been proven (Boussuges A. Hemorragie intra-alveolaire: un accident inhabituel chez un plongeur en apnee.Presse Med:24;1169-1170-StraussMB.Thoracic squeeze diving casualty. Clin Aviat Aerosp Med 1971;42:673-675)
So this is a real danger for us, but can be avoided by progressive depht training, avoiding extreme FRC diving and heavy contractions, there is also a personal predisposition to this, and we have seen 170 meters No-limits dives without lung squezze.
Another thing that I read, and maybe I misunderstood is a statment that in ascent the intra-thoracic pressure is very high and that blocks the Oxygen transfer. In fact, the intra-thoracic pressure get lower in ascent, and that will promote transfer from blood to alveoli, or it was about vascular hypertension, that will block the Oxygen transfer. That will be a problem of the only Oxygen store in a dive where the lungs.
I think we must discuss where is the strong clinical evidence that constant ballast is detrimental to health?. This is not the safer sport, but with research and education the risks can be minimized.
Banning the practice is not the best way to make it.

 

[efattah]

Sometime in the distant past, land mammals went into the ocean to look for food. Eventually they evolved into seals, dolphins, whales, sea lions etc...

If the CMAS had existed millions of years ago, the CMAS would have 'banned' or prevented any animal from entering the ocean to look for food, because there was some dangers associated with this activity.

If that had happened, then the seals, dolphins and whales we know today would not exist. They exist only because the CMAS did not exist millions of years ago.

Even worse, those animals did not have special safety systems, scuba divers, the malpieri maneuver....

...somehow the animals are still alive, and they can now dive to the absolute bottom of the ocean.

If humans choose to follow the path of these animals, so be it.


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada

 

[Kars]

My quess is that the love for the deep blue's will not be withheld by any organisation, or even law. Love is blind. Competition may be forbidden, but there alway's will be the brother to brother dual thing, with friends as judges.
CW/CB is just a natural feeling challenge, like the challenge: who is the fastest running a certain distance.

I just hope people can just forget their ego's they have tied so much to 'their' group, and come to some sensible regulations to provide enough safety and fun for themselves.
How is it posible that we now know enough to draw regulations in stone for the upcoming generations? Science is still trying to catch up, the only thing we can do is go slow and steady, and keep our eyes open for new discoveries, I think.

Ciao,
Kars.

love and peace,

 

[DeepThought]

Thank you for clarification Frank.

Anyway, what bugs me about CMAS is that they demand exclusiveness.

 

[alastair]

Adrian,

This was not a direct quote, but a summary of the impressions I got talking to people heavily involved on both sides of the debate.

They all mentioned safety, but my impression was that the overriding factor was spectator enjoyment.

Despite the obvious interest I would have in seeing the sport at the Olympics, I have to say that I agree with one (pro CB) guy I spoke with who said, "there is a real possibility that JB is deliberately complicated in order to restrict the people practicing it to only the serious competitor. If this is true then it is against the IOC goals and would be a serious impediment to the continuing growth of the sport"

Hmm...

Al

P.S. Thanks for the moral boost on my 100m, but...

There were 5 performances of 138m or over and 3 of 150m or more.

The 2 strongest static competitors were not present, but there were still 2 clean performances of over 6:30

 

[joefox]

Alastair, who would be "heavily involved" on which sides?

You are speaking for yourself and -at the most- your friends. This must be clear.

I'm still reading all the posts in this thread. In 5 minutes I'll talk to with Mr. Ferrero, Presdient of CMAS, someone who's "heavily involved" for sure.

Joefox

 

[efattah]

Joefox,

Perhaps you can ask the CMAS President why the CMAS does not have the creativity, energy or innovation to solve problems like the problems which need to be solved in constant weight.

Why does the CMAS force amateur divers to solve these problems?


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada

 

[joefox]

Because CMAS is a democratic institution and the will of the national federations is LAW.

They simply consider CB comps totally UNSAFE.

Safe CB comps are an AIDA problem, not CMAS.

Joefox

 

[efattah]

But Joefox, constant ballast competitions can be MADE SAFE. Why doesn't CMAS try to FIX something for once? If it isn't safe, MAKE IT SAFE, don't just ignore it.


Eric Fattah
BC, Canada