Newsgroups: bit.listserv.scuba-l
Date:         Mon, 9 Nov 1992 10:14:07 PST
From:         Dave Waller <dave@HPDSM0B.PTP.HP.COM>
Subject:      Re: HOME-BREW NITROX
              07 Nov 92 06:06:39 PST." <9211071451.AA10763@relay.hp.com>

Hans writes:

> Second thing is just this - what exactly are people defining as
> NITROX ????  It appears to me that people are starting to missuse that
> word as badly as the word "WEIGHT."  NITROX in actuallity is nothing more
> standard tank of compressed air which any scuba-shop I am sure will gladly
> take $5.00 to fill it for you.  However what you are doing is defining NITROX
> as is ENRICHED AIR (not to be confused with each other).  My point is this

NITROX has come to mean EANx in common usage. Your harping on this point
is mere sophistry, and quite irrelevant. The vast majority of divers that
are familiar with the term "Nitrox" are well aware that it generally refers
to non-normoxic mixes, although the EANx community does recognize that
technically speaking normoxic gas is also "Nitrox". Let's put this petty
point to rest, okay?

> 1) Enriched air both home-brew or retailed by trained people is dangerous
>    in many repects.

How so? Especially with respect to your assertion that EANx mixed by trained
individuals is dangerous. What dangers in particular is one facing from
EANx 32 that they do not face using normal air?

>    How can you regulate the amount of O2 from pure and mix
>    it with compressed air

Simply because *YOU* are ignorant about these matters doesn't mean that
everyone is. Those with proper training can quite accurately compose an
accurate mix and do it very safely; the fact that you don't know how this
is done simply displays your own ignorance, it does not indict the process
that is well known by others.

>    and then say,"Yep, yessiree Bob, this is just right
>    I think I will just hop in water here see, and check out if I don't spaz
>    out with siezures from over doing the good 'ole stuff O2."

It this the way you, or your dive buddies approach diving? On what basis
do you charge serious Nitrox divers, who have recieved proper training in
skills and knowlege, with such sloppy and careless an approach to using an
alternative gas technology?

> 2) If the body was meant to breath pure oxygen don't you think that our
> body's would be a little more efficient in removeing inert gases from the
> air that we normally breath everyday.  Maybe that is the reason why humans
> cannot breath O or O3.

If the body was meant to breath under water, humans would have been given
gills. The point you make above is worthless rhetorical diatribe. EVERYTHING
we do that is associated with SCUBA diving is an act of extending human
capabilities well beyond what they are naturally. Nitrox is merely an
additional tool to accomplis that goal.

And, BTW, humans *can* breath pure O2 for extended periods of time, with
some limitations, of course. A human being could breath EANx 32 indefinitely
on the surface without ill effects.

> 3) Why wouldn't you just go for a re-breather. Which does the same thing
> except it does its mixing underwater while you are breathing ENRICHED AIR.

Again, your ignorance is shouting to be recognized. They are hardly the
"same thing" at all. Why not learn about both before making grossly incorrect
public pronouncements?

> I am sure Myself and family/friends in UDT/SEAL would more than try to talk
> people out of ENRICHED AIR.

Too bad for them. Hopefully, they'll be enlightened as to the gross ignorance
that is being pushed on them, and go somewhere else.

> 4) If it is bottom time you want then go for dualies.

Do you even understand the benefit of using EANx? This statement suggests
that you do not.

Dave Waller
YMCA Instructor