Talk:Deep water blackout

message: I reverted the fairly major change to the definition of SWB for two reasons:
* 1. it is a significant change and requires some discussion and
* 2. it makes a nonsense of the preceding section.
* 3. (As a side issue Wikipedia provides facts and information it doesn't provide safety advice so the warning should go anyway.)
So I thought we could put it to discussion here.
The article acknowledges that there are different usages of the term SWB by different swimming fraternities and then goes on to state that for the purposes of this article... etc. the terms are taken to mean the following... etc.
The proposed changes would then have contradicted this and made a nonsense of bith SWB and DWB.  If we want to put more weight on the different usages it can be done but it needs to be handled differently.
There is a lot of confusion about the use of the terms SWB & DWB and most of it has to do with the evolving use of language.  This is not surprising because different swimming interests use the terms to describe different things.  The original use of SWB was associated with specific problems arising out of the way WWII closed-circuit rebreathers worked.  Since the 1950's US scuba organisations have used the term SWB to describe blackout on ascent from depth.  Outside of scuba/freedive use, in the swimming pool fraternity there is a growing use of the term SWB to describe blackouts occuring entirely in shallow water.  The distinction between the DWB latent hypoxia and the SWB suppressed beathing reflex is very important to maintain because SWB is now being taught in pool swimming circles as SWB.
When I learnt to dive in Australia DWB was associated with problems attributed depth such as nitrogen narcosis, latent hypoxia was just called latent hypoxia and SWB as described in the article SWB was not discussed at all because it was not a scuba related problem, actually we didn't know it existed.  The base of the problem is that two groups are using SWB to refer to conficting mechanisms and these need to be accommodated without totally confusing the two articles; we can probably handle that but the solution needs some consensus.  Suggestions? Ex nihil 00:43, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SWB & DWB use of terms 

message: * Ex nihil 00:22, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe you are quite correct in everything you say above. We could probably clarify this with a bit of thought.   Nitrogen narcosis and other unpleasant things that might afflict people at depth are something separate, perhaps we mention these merely to put them in their proper place and link out, they are really mostly SCUBA things not apnea things.  This article is just about latent hypoxia on ascent which may sometimes, but not necessarily, be exacerbated by hyperventilation over-extending bottom time.  The rather loose usage of terms by different groups is a problem, it is tempting to impose a discipline of usage and I suppose if we were writing a textbook rather than an encyclopedia article perhaps we could have done that.  However, I think that with a bit of thought we could come up with a coordinated form of words for the three articles NNarc, SWB and DWB that satisfies all groups and describes everything with such clarity that the terms would logically fall into place. Why not have a go? Ex nihil 00:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other stuff 

message: I had a somewhat difficult time intuitively grasping what the mechanism was for this phoenominon. Compare to the shallow water blackout, which has a very simple and understandable description of the mechanism.
I'm extrapolating a bit from other articles, and I'm a total layman to this stuff. It seems to me that when holding breath, oxygen is absorbed into the bloodstream and (less massive) carbon dioxide fills the lungs, creating lower gaseous pressure (not explained in the article) but that the pressure of the water on the lungs compresses the lungs enough to offset this loss of gaseous pressure (also not really explained in this article) to keep the pressure levels sufficient for conciousness, but then upon rising to the surface, as the lungs expand again due to lower compression from the water, the lung gas density falls below what's necesary to maintain conciousness - hence they black out near the surface. Is that a correct interpretation of the article? In any case, it could definitely be explained more clearly for laymen to understand, as I'm not even sure if I'm reading the correct meaning for it. SenorBeef 12:15, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mechanism could really be clarified for laymen 

message: C class:  Insufficient referencing to meet WP:WIABCA.  B-class articles generally require at least one reference per section, and ideally at least one reference per paragraph.  After making improvements, you may wish to consider the Good Article criteria.  WPMED does not currently have a process for approving new A-class articles.
Additionally, this article could easily fall into the scope of more than one WikiProject.  The addition of a banner by WP:WikiProject SCUBA might be appropriate (although the choice is ultimately up to their members).  WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:24, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, and have done so, now that I noticed. I suggest that if you spot any other articles that might be in the scope of WPSCUBA but has not been tagged to leave a note on the project talk page. Could have saved a few years! Cheers,• • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:05, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment

message: The link points to the German article "Tiefenrausch" but the meaning of this word is "nitrogen narcosis".
PadH (talk) 17:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong link to German Wikipedia 

message: I suggest a merge with Shallow water blackout and a rename to Freediving blackout with redirects and disambiguation where applicable.
There appear to be several aspects of blackout associated with freediving, with a significant amount of overlap in when they are likely to occur, and in causative factors, mechanism etc. There are also a wide range of alternative names. The only thing they all have in common, is their association with apnea diving, which suggests that they may be logically combined in one article. At present, the size of the combined article appears likely to be within the preferred range. The existing separate articles are both fairly small, and no articles appear to exist for the other types of blackout.
Redirects would probably include: Shallow water blackout, Deep water blackout, Blackout of ascent, Apnea blackout, Surface blackout, Hypoxic blackout and possibly others.
I have been looking for reliable sources and have so far found the following, some of which may be more reliable than others:
* 
* (with 27 refs)
* 
* 
* 
* 
*  (several references listed)
*  Full report (several references listed)
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
* 
*  (terminology - Hypoxic vs Shallow water)
*  (with long list of references)
*  
Comments and discussion please. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:20, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge and rename? 

message: Both articles were created by the same editor  Ex nihil at the same time, so I imagine there was a good reason to keep them separate then. Would be useful to get their input. CV9933 (talk) 15:07, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: The article content was merged into Freediving blackout as discussed, and the title redirected to Freediving blackout, but that did not cover the alternative usage for deep air diving blackout, so I changed it again to a disambiguation page with a short referenced explanation of the alternative meanings and links to the relevant articles. If anyone thinks there is a better way to handle this, please let me know. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 07:16, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged and converted to redirect, then a disambiguation.