I Asked Prof Simon Mitchell About The Helium Penalty

0:00
On this helium purity question, when you
0:02
boil it all down,
0:04
it's simple. If you do less
0:06
decompression,
0:08
there's more risk.
0:09
You may have seen the recent video
0:11
circulating online that had some divers
0:14
doing some very deep dives with no
0:17
helium programmed into the computer.
0:19
I talked about it on my social media
0:22
channels and it got a whole load of
0:24
comments and that kind of led into a
0:26
discussion about the helium penalty. So,
0:29
I thought that I would go straight to
0:31
one of the world experts in
0:33
decompression physiology and medicine.
0:36
And I just come back to the fundamental
0:37
message, which is
0:39
if you do less decompression, it's more
0:41
risk.
0:42
I'm sure most people will know Professor
0:44
Simon Mitchell. He's a diving physician.
0:47
He's a professor at the University of
0:50
Auckland. He's editor of the Diving and
0:53
Hyperbaric Medicine Journal.
0:56
Perhaps most importantly, he's also a
0:59
technical diver. I'm very invested in
1:02
getting the right answers for us. So,
1:05
actually has a whole load of skin in
1:07
this game himself. So, in the
1:09
conversation you're about to see, he
1:11
explains what the helium penalty is,
1:14
where it comes from, and then talks
1:16
about some of the more recent research
1:19
that is in place and provides some real
1:22
practical advice on what that means to
1:25
to us and him as a diver. It's an
1:28
absolutely fascinating interview. I
1:31
think it will be really useful. I hope
1:34
you enjoy it.
1:35
Hello, Simon. Thank you very much for
1:37
coming on to the Deep Wreck Diver
1:39
channel. Yeah, no, Dom, thanks for
1:41
asking me, you know, to talk about this.
1:43
It's obviously a
1:45
topic of some, you know, considerable
1:47
relevance to, you know, all of our
1:50
technical diving colleagues. So, yeah,
1:52
no, happy to answer questions. Yeah.
1:54
There has been some research done on
1:56
this. We've we've seen that the paper
1:58
that's on the the Shearwater website is
2:00
frequently referred to. I think it'd be
2:02
useful to get your kind of summary of
2:04
that.
2:05
Yeah, uh look, I I wonder actually
2:08
though whether it's worth
2:10
just stepping back a little bit and
2:12
looking at the origins of the helium
2:15
penalty because
2:17
if you don't understand that, then it's
2:19
pretty hard to have the debate about
2:22
what the more recent research shows. Uh
2:25
and I can summarize that very quickly if
2:27
that's acceptable to you. Of course.
2:30
Yeah, well, uh
2:32
the helium penalty is something that
2:35
arose out of uh some I think uh
2:38
assumptions that were made by Buhlmann
2:41
back when he was doing his original
2:43
research and design of his algorithm uh
2:46
based essentially on
2:49
the
2:50
the the physical properties of the
2:52
various gases that he was considering.
2:54
Uh I think a fair summary of it is to
2:56
say that
2:57
Buhlmann assumed that
3:00
helium uh would be a faster exchanging
3:03
gas than nitrogen and it's probably best
3:06
just to keep it as simple as that. Based
3:08
largely on the fact that it's a smaller,
3:10
more diffusible molecule and therefore
3:13
you would take up and actually eliminate
3:16
helium
3:18
more quickly than nitrogen.
3:20
But what that meant was on a dive where
3:23
you were breathing
3:25
a substantial amount of helium, you
3:27
would [clears throat]
3:28
build it up in your fast tissues more
3:30
quickly. That would mean that during an
3:34
ascent at the end of your dive,
3:38
the fast tissues would start to reach
3:40
their Buhlmann supersaturation limits
3:42
with helium uh earlier than they would
3:45
have if
3:46
you were breathing nitrogen because
3:48
you've absorbed that helium really
3:50
quickly. So this more rapidly absorbed
3:53
gas would be the limiting gas as you
3:55
started to ascend.
3:57
And that would mean
3:59
that you would require deeper stops
4:02
because those tissues that had
4:04
accumulated a lot of helium would be
4:06
reaching their super saturation limits
4:07
more quickly.
4:09
And of course, during those deeper
4:10
stops, you would be absorbing more gas
4:13
in the slower tissues, and that would
4:15
mean
4:16
that at the other end of your
4:18
decompression, the sort of the shallower
4:20
end, you would have to spend longer to
4:22
unload those slower tissues that
4:25
have accumulated more gas during the
4:27
deeper stops. And so,
4:29
that's where the helium penalty came
4:31
from. Because you had to stop earlier in
4:33
the ascent because you've absorbed a
4:35
larger quantity of inert gas being
4:37
helium, you had to spend more time at
4:40
the other end unloading those slow
4:42
tissues. And that that was the origin of
4:44
the helium penalty.
4:47
Now, fast forward to
4:49
the work that he that David Doolette did
4:52
in Adelaide some years ago actually. He
4:55
looked at helium versus nitrogen
4:58
kinetics in
5:00
a couple of tissues that were of
5:03
relevance to the kind of
5:05
diving that we do in terms of their you
5:07
know, their on-gassing and off-gassing
5:09
kinetics.
5:10
And I if I recall correctly, those two
5:12
tissues were skeletal muscle and brain.
5:15
You know, in a very well conducted,
5:18
carefully calibrated experiment, he
5:20
showed that in fact, helium and nitrogen
5:23
kinetics were quite similar in those
5:25
tissues. It's important to understand
5:27
that David wasn't saying there isn't a
5:29
difference between helium and nitrogen.
5:31
There actually is. If you actually
5:34
compare
5:35
total body out-gassing from saturation
5:38
on helium or nitrogen, helium is
5:41
quicker.
5:42
Uh but that's whole body saturation.
5:44
It's It's the same as the kind of dives
5:47
that we do where you don't get whole
5:49
body saturation.
5:51
So there is a difference in helium and
5:53
nitrogen kinetics, but what David was
5:55
saying is that in the tissues that are
5:57
substantially relevant to what we do,
5:59
the kind of dives, depths, and durations
6:01
that we do as tech divers,
6:03
there's probably not as much difference
6:05
as Buhlmann assumed there was.
6:08
So
6:09
that's the origin of the helium penalty.
6:11
That is the current evidence about
6:14
helium versus nitrogen kinetics in
6:16
relevant tissues that David
6:19
has
6:20
published.
6:22
I guess now the question is, well, how
6:24
do we
6:25
rationalize those two things? How do we
6:28
interpret David's findings in relation
6:31
to the Buhlmann prescriptions that were
6:34
based on this assumption that helium was
6:36
very different?
6:37
So So shall I go on and talk about that?
6:40
>> Absolutely, because there is a lot of
6:42
people out there, I'm sure you know this
6:43
already, who are simply not programming
6:46
helium into their dive computers. I know
6:48
some, I'm sure you do as well. And by
6:51
and large, those people seem to be
6:53
getting away with it or it seems to be
6:55
working for them. I guess it'd just be
6:57
useful We would all like a bit of
6:58
clarity or an understanding of which way
7:00
the risks go. Yeah, well, there's only
7:02
one way the risks go.
7:04
I
7:04
>> [clears throat]
7:04
>> put this one like this.
7:07
If before any of this discussion
7:09
emerged, right?
7:11
Like and before any debate about the
7:13
helium penalty emerged,
7:15
I I let's just say I'd gone online and
7:18
said, "Hey guys,
7:20
let's just
7:21
cut the amount of decompression that we
7:23
do by 30% or 20% or something like
7:27
that."
7:28
Everyone would have looked at me and
7:29
gone, "You're bonkers. Why would we do
7:31
that?" Like
7:33
people get bent doing what we do. This
7:34
is when we were doing decompressions
7:37
with the helium penalty in place. If I'd
7:39
said, "Hey, let's just cut our
7:40
decompressions." Lots of people would
7:42
go, "Yeah, are you bonkers? You're mad."
7:45
But now, what's happening is people are
7:47
doing exactly that based on this idea
7:50
that
7:51
we don't have to account for the helium
7:53
penalty. You're right, some people are
7:55
getting away with it and some people
7:58
probably aren't. What it really comes
8:00
down to is
8:03
the fact that yes, over the years we've
8:06
been doing this these decompressions
8:09
that have assumed that the helium
8:12
penalty is real, the difference in
8:14
helium and nitrogen kinetics is real.
8:17
We've adhered to the algorithms that
8:21
have assumed that and we've been doing
8:23
these longer decompressions as a result.
8:27
David's point, and I think it's very
8:29
important and it's kind of the view I
8:31
subscribe to, is that
8:34
yeah, Buhlmann might have had it wrong
8:37
in terms of some of the important
8:39
tissues that are relevant to the kind of
8:41
diving we do, but he may have been
8:44
prescribing the amount the right amount
8:46
of decompression, but for the wrong
8:48
reason. In other words,
8:50
we were doing the kind of decompressions
8:52
that you need for deep diving,
8:55
uh
8:56
but
8:57
based on a flawed assumption.
9:01
But what that means is if you then take
9:03
that assumption away and do shorter
9:05
decompressions as a result, your risk is
9:06
going to be higher and there's no doubt
9:08
about that. I mean, it's simple. If you
9:11
do less decompression, your risk is
9:12
higher.
9:13
So, if you're going to be all clever and
9:16
say, "Okay, well, we'll we'll
9:19
we'll ditch the helium penalty. We'll
9:20
tell our computers we're just diving on
9:22
nitrogen
9:24
and we'll have shorter decompressions as
9:25
a result." There's no magic that you've
9:27
just suddenly invoked that reduces your
9:30
risk or makes it the same as the risk
9:32
you had before. You are assuming higher
9:35
risk. There is absolutely no doubt about
9:37
that. There's There's just simple
9:39
physics, right? You spend longer
9:40
decompressing, you'll have less risk.
9:44
So, if you're going to ignore the helium
9:46
penalty, you're increasing your risk.
9:48
How much by? I can't tell you that.
9:50
Nobody knows, but it's definitely
9:52
increased risk.
9:54
That That's the defining thing. And one
9:55
of the things I think it is important to
9:57
point out about the kind of diving we do
9:59
is that if you accept a particular
10:02
algorithm,
10:04
then you have to understand that the
10:06
decompressions that it prescribes across
10:10
the depth range are not iso risk. There
10:13
are one or two iso risk algorithms that
10:15
David has developed for the US Navy, but
10:17
none of the ones we use as tech divers
10:19
are like that. And And what I mean by
10:21
this is that as you go deeper, even when
10:23
you're using the same algorithm,
10:26
the risk gets greater
10:28
even though you're using the same
10:30
algorithm, like Bühlmann gradient
10:32
factors 50/70.
10:34
A 50-m dive is less risk than a 100-m
10:38
dive is less risk than a 150-m dive. The
10:40
risk gets greater the deeper you go. One
10:42
of the things about the helium penalty
10:44
is that because you tend to use more
10:47
helium at those deeper depths, it's
10:49
tended to prescribe increasingly
10:51
conservative
10:53
uh well, it's imposed more helium
10:55
penalty decompression time on these
10:57
deeper dives. So, I guess what I'm
11:00
saying is
11:01
the deeper you go and ignore the helium
11:04
penalty, the more risk you're assuming.
11:07
So, ignoring the helium penalty at a
11:09
fifth on a 50-m dive
11:11
may not be as bad as ignoring it on a
11:14
100-m dive or of even worse, a 150-m
11:17
dive. This is not based on any real
11:20
data, really, except to say that we know
11:23
that
11:24
you know, the helium penalty probably
11:26
becomes more important as you go deeper
11:28
cuz you're breathing more helium, and
11:30
therefore ignoring it as you go deeper
11:32
will impart more risk on the diving you
11:36
do.
11:37
So, there's nothing magical about
11:39
ignoring the helium penalty and it
11:42
doesn't say it magically adjust your
11:44
risk so that it's the same as if you
11:47
didn't ignore it. If you do less
11:49
decompression, you're going to assume
11:50
more risk.
11:51
And actually, that conversation we've
11:53
just had kind of summarizes the whole
11:55
thing. If I mean, if you want to know
11:57
what I recommend, I don't I don't ignore
11:59
the helium penalty. I
12:02
you know, I've been diving
12:04
kind of with it in place for, you know,
12:06
the last 26 years since I started diving
12:09
rebreathers, going pretty deep.
12:12
Uh it's served me well. I've actually
12:15
had musculoskeletal decompression
12:17
sickness several times during that
12:19
period. And so why why would I
12:22
volunteer, you know, I've I've it So,
12:24
what that tells me is I'm getting close
12:26
to the edge of my envelope of risk and
12:29
I don't I I don't want to make it any
12:32
more risky
12:33
by, you know, arbitrarily ignoring what
12:37
Bühlmann had in place when he designed
12:39
his algorithm. If if I do less
12:41
decompression, I'm going to have more
12:43
risk. So, I don't do it.
12:45
Uh yes, people are doing it and getting
12:48
away with it.
12:49
Uh what that means is
12:52
that, you know, they on that particular
12:54
day, on that particular dive, it was
12:57
okay. Uh they can't say that that means
13:00
it will be okay every time. Definitely
13:02
not. One of the things uh that has
13:04
emerged in recent times, also David
13:06
Doolette's work, is that
13:09
uh the same diver doing the same dive,
13:12
alt you know, like absolutely the same
13:15
dive, depth, time, decompression,
13:18
temperature, workload. This is data from
13:21
his experimental dives in the US Navy.
13:23
So, everything very carefully be
13:26
Same diver doing identical dives
13:29
can produce markedly different bubble
13:31
grades. Markedly different. It's like
13:33
landmark study, really interesting.
13:36
Freely available online by the way, if
13:37
you
13:38
PubMed search do that DJ, you can find
13:41
it.
13:43
Uh published in DHM 2024.
13:46
Anyway,
13:47
what that tells us is that yeah, you can
13:50
do a dive
13:51
uh one day that you you know you produce
13:53
no bubbles and you can do exactly the
13:55
same dive a week later and produce grade
13:57
four bubbles. Well, that's he clearly
13:59
showed that.
14:00
So, these people that say, "Well, okay,
14:02
I've dived the helium I've dived without
14:04
the helium penalty,
14:05
uh just ignored it and told my computer
14:08
I was diving nitrox and it was fine. So,
14:10
therefore I'm fine." Doesn't necessarily
14:12
hold because
14:14
that intra-individual variability that
14:17
David's demonstrated could come bite you
14:18
on the ass,
14:19
you know, on another dive a week or two
14:21
weeks or whatever later.
14:23
So, you just need to be very careful
14:25
about this. And I just come back to the
14:26
fundamental message which is
14:28
if you do less decompression, it's more
14:30
risk. So,
14:33
I hope that's kind of answered your
14:34
questions, Dom. I But I'm I'm happy to
14:37
go into it further if you want. No, I
14:40
mean that's that's absolutely
14:41
fascinating. I think getting that kind
14:42
of the linkage that you've drawn there.
14:44
So,
14:46
doing less decompression equals more
14:47
risk and going deeper, breathing more
14:51
helium equals more risk. So, effectively
14:53
you if you you know, the point you've
14:55
just made there, you're putting risk on
14:57
top of risk. Although, you know, I think
14:59
your point is also that it's not
15:01
possible really to to necessarily
15:03
quantify that and it will be different
15:05
for the same individual on different
15:06
days anyway.
15:08
Several people have told me, you know,
15:10
in online comments, so obviously take
15:12
that with a pinch of salt, that they or
15:15
groups they're associated with are doing
15:16
active research into this area. And and
15:19
and trying to study it. Now, you've
15:20
obviously mentioned the stuff that goes
15:22
on, you know, with the US Navy that is
15:26
I guess the gold standard research. Are
15:29
you aware of or are you involved in any
15:31
other groups that are doing stuff in
15:34
this area? Short answer, no. Probably
15:36
no. I'm editor of Diving and Hyperbaric
15:38
Medicine Journal and
15:41
pretty well linked up with most of the
15:43
serious researchers around the world and
15:48
I'm not aware of anyone who is actively
15:52
looking at this. That's not saying no
15:54
one is. You just have to be careful
15:57
you know, people talk about research
16:00
amongst technical diving groups, but
16:01
it's often
16:03
essentially uncontrolled or
16:05
non-standardized anecdote and
16:07
uh
16:08
So, I No, look, I don't know of any any
16:11
research that's going on specifically to
16:13
address this issue of the helium
16:15
penalty, but I look
16:17
I can virtually guarantee you that
16:19
answer. I mean
16:20
if if you do less risk than we all used
16:23
to do when we assumed that Buhlmann had
16:26
it right, if you do less risk than
16:29
sorry, less decompression than he
16:30
prescribed, you are assuming more risk.
16:33
You You don't need research to determine
16:36
that. I mean, there's decades of
16:38
research in the US Navy
16:40
where they're trying to minimize the
16:43
amount of decompression that their
16:45
military operators have to do because,
16:47
you know, decompression is time and time
16:49
is risk in a military environment.
16:52
You know, they're trying to minimize
16:53
that. So, they're butting up against
16:55
risk of decompression sickness. This is
16:57
what their research is all about is
16:59
trying to to minimize the amount of
17:01
decompression they do. And, you know,
17:03
there's decades of data that show that
17:05
the more decompression you do, the less
17:07
the risk and the less decompression you
17:09
do, the more the risk. And
17:11
so, there's
17:12
you know [laughter]
17:13
you don't really need research to tell
17:15
you that if you ignore the helium
17:17
penalty, risk is going to be higher. The
17:19
only question is is how high and are you
17:22
prepared to accept it?
17:24
Uh and you know, if if people are
17:26
advocating
17:28
for ignoring the helium penalty, then
17:30
they kind of have to answer those
17:32
questions as well. Okay, you're going to
17:33
have higher risk. You can't really
17:36
quantify that change. I mean, that would
17:38
be an interesting thing perhaps to do in
17:41
a research project, but it'd be very
17:43
hard and you need big data for it
17:45
because like I say, all this individual
17:48
variability makes studying this kind of
17:50
thing very difficult, but you know, are
17:52
you are you aware that there's an
17:54
increased risk and are you prepared to
17:56
accept it?
17:57
And and I think that is a a perspective
18:01
that sometimes missing from these online
18:03
discussions that occur. That you do get
18:06
the sense that there are some people who
18:08
think
18:09
that they can ignore the helium penalty
18:12
and their risk isn't changed. Well,
18:13
that's nonsense. It's just nonsense. If
18:16
you do less risk, there's more Sorry,
18:18
less decompression, there's more risk.
18:20
No question. Don't know if you thought I
18:22
was, but I'm not advocating getting rid
18:25
of the helium penalty. I've just been
18:26
involved in these discussions and there
18:28
are people who are absolutely out there
18:31
who are saying the helium penalty
18:33
doesn't exist, there is no risk, or the
18:35
risk is very marginal. That's why one of
18:37
the reasons I thought I would reach out
18:38
because you are really well trusted,
18:41
you're really well known, and I think
18:43
it's kind of useful to get it direct
18:45
from you in the way that you have just
18:47
done and made it really clear. You know,
18:49
two things, go deeper, you increase the
18:50
risk.
18:52
Don't do as much deco, you increase the
18:54
risk. Now, those those things shouldn't
18:56
be rocket science, but I you know, I I I
18:58
think going deeper has been normalized.
19:00
I don't know, 20 years ago, 100 m was
19:03
was incredible, wasn't it? But there are
19:05
lots and lots of people doing dives to
19:07
those depths and well beyond.
19:09
Yeah, look, I mean, we're kind of
19:11
getting slightly from the helium
19:13
penalty, but it is worth pointing out
19:15
that
19:16
uh
19:16
your your point is exactly right. Uh the
19:20
way technical diving has evolved is, you
19:23
know, towards deeper dives.
19:25
Uh
19:26
it's also involves in certain locations
19:28
it involves repetitive technical diving.
19:31
So, you know, places like Truk Lagoon
19:32
where people might be doing two dives a
19:34
day, that kind of stuff. A lot of it is
19:36
outside the envelope of what Buhlmann
19:38
actually tested when he developed this
19:40
algorithm.
19:41
And
19:43
uh you know, we need to understand that.
19:44
We're we're extrapolating
19:47
you know, his testing program into
19:49
contexts where it was never tested or
19:53
intended for. So,
19:55
we are we're breaking new ground and uh
19:58
you know, there's risk associated with
19:59
that.
20:00
But yeah, it is important people
20:02
understand there's nothing magical about
20:04
ignoring the helium penalty
20:07
in some that it in some you know, like
20:08
okay, well, the the helium penalty may
20:11
not exist in the kind of diving we do.
20:14
It may be true.
20:15
But if you're going to do less
20:17
decompression than you used to do, then
20:19
you're going to have more risk. It's
20:22
it's very simple. And and the other
20:24
thing I'd quite like to say, Dom, uh
20:27
you know,
20:28
I think it's important to get out there
20:29
from from me. Like I'm a very impartial
20:32
observer in this space. I'm I'm a
20:34
scientist and a diving physician, and I
20:38
I follow the science, right? So, you
20:41
know, you look you look for evidence. I
20:43
don't I don't want to be
20:45
uh seen as
20:47
um
20:49
politically aligned with any particular
20:51
group that's doing one thing or the
20:53
other. I I All I'm interested in is
20:55
safety for me and my colleagues, that's
20:57
you and your audience. I That's my
21:00
primary motivation. It's not This isn't
21:02
a political discussion. Unfortunately,
21:04
these these things sometimes get
21:06
politicized, you know, like for example,
21:08
if a particular group says, "Okay, the
21:10
helium penalty is rubbish." And then
21:12
another group says it isn't. Then you've
21:14
got a political
21:15
kind of conflict. And I don't want any
21:18
part of that.
21:20
I just want to provide objective
21:23
commentary, narrative, evidence where
21:25
it's available to my technical diving
21:28
colleagues. And that's what I'm trying
21:29
to do here. That's understood and and
21:31
really appreciated. I mean, I don't
21:33
think there's any organization that's
21:35
advocating getting rid of the helium
21:36
penalty. I'm certainly not aware of
21:38
them, and I'm not speaking or
21:40
representing any particular organization
21:42
other than I do a lot of diving myself.
21:44
I had four really good mates of mine
21:46
bent last year. One of them is never
21:47
going to dive again.
21:49
And and a few others have been really
21:50
restricted. So, you know, I guess I
21:53
don't want that to happen to me in the
21:55
nicest possible sense. And nobody loves
21:58
deco, do you? You know, no nobody wants
22:00
to do more deco than we than we have to.
22:02
So, I guess there's a bit of
22:03
self-interest there, but also you know,
22:05
it is I think useful for people to get
22:06
the thoughts of someone like yourself.
22:09
Yeah, I look at it at all times. I think
22:11
divers in our cohort, our technical
22:13
diving colleagues, should have
22:15
in mind what David showed in that recent
22:18
study, that 2024 study. So,
22:21
same diver, identical dives multiple
22:24
times, and markedly different bubbling.
22:28
And what that tells you is that you
22:30
can't just say, "I ignored the helium
22:33
penalty once and I was fine. Therefore,
22:35
that's a legitimate strategy."
22:37
Because the next time or the next time
22:39
or the next time you could run into
22:41
problems. It is one of the difficulties
22:44
of
22:45
uh
22:46
the whole area of deep decompression.
22:48
You know, that it would seem
22:51
that the profile, so the time, the
22:53
depth, the decompression stops, how you
22:55
distribute them, what you're doing
22:58
during them, and the temperature of the
22:59
water, which we know has an influence,
23:01
it would seem that that is far from
23:04
the only influence on how much you
23:06
bubble on any one day. And it kind of
23:08
puts into perspective all this debate
23:10
about helium penalties or not, you know,
23:12
because
23:13
that
23:15
you know, you will increase risk by
23:17
ignoring the helium penalty, but that
23:19
might shift the
23:21
the risk needle by a small amount. Uh
23:24
Other things would appear that we don't
23:26
yet understand can shift it by a large
23:28
amount. Anyway, the point is
23:31
uh
23:32
I come back right back to my initial
23:34
point, which was
23:36
if you do less decompression, you've got
23:38
you've got more risk.
23:39
And that and that risk can vary quite a
23:41
lot. So,
23:43
getting away with it once doesn't
23:45
necessarily mean much. Uh you just need
23:48
to not over interpret that.
23:51
Okay. That's That's absolutely fantastic
23:53
and would be a nice way to finish, apart
23:56
from I've just got I just want to pick
23:58
up on one of those points that you just
23:59
made, which is about unknown risk
24:01
factors. Are there any thoughts about
24:03
the sorts of things that may change you
24:05
from a you know, a low-grade bubble to a
24:07
level four bubble? Yeah, it's
24:09
fascinating. It really is fascinating.
24:12
Uh
24:13
there are some thoughts. Uh in fact, uh
24:17
at my own group have just
24:21
received some funding from various
24:23
organizations,
24:25
uh
24:26
including DAN
24:28
uh and the US Navy, to look at some of
24:31
these things.
24:32
Um
24:33
And I might add, uh in our world
24:37
funding for research is extraordinarily
24:39
difficult to come by, and we're very
24:40
grateful to those organizations,
24:43
uh
24:44
groups like DAN, the US Navy,
24:45
Shearwater,
24:47
uh
24:48
very various groups, but those in
24:50
particular um
24:52
have just been amazing with funding.
24:53
Anyway, we uh we are exploring a few
24:56
things, so
24:57
it's possible that what you do
25:01
in the say the 24-hour period leading up
25:03
to a dive might be influential. So,
25:05
things like
25:07
diet, exercise, sleep, various
25:10
parameters that might change your body's
25:13
inflammatory state. They're all
25:16
possibilities and
25:18
and of course
25:20
you know, isolating each one of them and
25:22
individually testing each one of them is
25:24
really challenging because you know, you
25:26
need big numbers and
25:29
you know, and subjects who are engaged
25:31
in the in the process to
25:34
you know, standardize what they do in
25:36
the day leading up to an experimental
25:37
dive. It really is quite a challenge to
25:40
study this kind of thing. But, work is
25:42
underway and our group is working on
25:44
that. We're about to start a
25:47
program for one of our PhD students
25:49
who'll be looking very carefully at at
25:51
one aspect of that. So, largely focused
25:54
on exercise
25:56
day prior to a dive.
25:58
Exercise patterns, what you do in your
26:00
day,
26:01
and how that might influence bubbling.
26:04
So, that's about to start here in
26:06
Auckland. And there are probably other
26:08
things happening around the world as
26:09
well.
26:11
It's not my work, so I won't talk about
26:13
it. But, yeah, I mean, we're working on
26:14
it. But, right now, we don't have the
26:17
answers. I mean, I guess there's a whole
26:19
lot of stuff we know you shouldn't go
26:20
and you know, dive with a hangover or
26:23
body needs to be in the best possible
26:24
state, I guess. But, other than that,
26:25
you can't you can't really offer any
26:27
more thoughts. No, no, I don't think we
26:30
can right now.
26:32
I mean, there are some things that just
26:34
make sense, right? And people talk a lot
26:35
about hydration. Uh
26:38
Actually, you know, hydration as an
26:39
influence on bubbling has been looked at
26:41
a little bit.
26:42
And the evidence isn't particularly
26:45
strong on that. But, but equally, I'm
26:47
not saying you know, so people don't
26:49
over interpret it. I think being well
26:51
hydrated based on first principles alone
26:55
makes sense prior to a big technical
26:57
dive.
26:59
Getting dehydrated during the dive, you
27:01
know, a 4 or 5 hour dive, you can pee a
27:04
lot out and you can become dehydrated
27:07
and that will reduce tissue perfusion
27:09
and then reduce inert gas washout. So,
27:12
being well-hydrated, not over-hydrated,
27:14
but well-hydrated is probably probably
27:16
makes sense. Yeah, all all the things
27:19
that we do tend to focus on say that are
27:22
appropriate or are right, you know,
27:24
well-rested, not hungover, hydrated,
27:26
those kind of things.
27:28
But, objective answers like
27:31
evidence solid evidence-based answers
27:33
are far and few between.
27:35
It is actually all at once frustrating,
27:37
but one of the exciting things about our
27:39
field is that there are still these
27:41
low-hanging fruit questions that are of
27:44
high practical relevance to the
27:45
community. It's exactly the sort of
27:47
thing we love studying because it is of
27:49
such high rate practical relevance. And
27:51
of course, I'm an end-user myself, so
27:54
>> [laughter]
27:54
>> you know, I'm quite I'm I'm very
27:57
invested in getting the right answers
27:59
for us.
28:00
You know, because I'm one of you, right?
28:02
So, and so are the people that work with
28:04
me.
28:05
I kind of view it as really fascinating
28:07
that we've been doing this kind of
28:09
diving for a very long period of time or
28:11
you know, so it seems and yet you know,
28:14
these kind of questions still don't have
28:16
really clear answers.
28:18
Yeah. Well, you know, you're exactly
28:20
right. And and look, part of the reason
28:22
for that is that
28:24
it's
28:25
not child cancer, you know, it's not
28:28
and and so research funding from the
28:31
traditional research funders like the
28:34
big organizations that fund research in
28:35
any country. You go to them asking for
28:38
money to study
28:40
you know, the adverse consequences of a
28:42
discretionary recreational activity
28:45
that's engaged in mainly by what middle
28:47
class males.
28:49
Uh
28:49
They'll just laugh at you. And I guess
28:51
rightly so. I mean, you know, there are
28:53
higher priorities for research out there
28:55
for medical research.
28:57
We're just lucky and I come back to it,
28:59
you know, my gratitude to the various
29:01
organizations that do fund this kind of
29:03
research. We're just lucky there are
29:05
some.
29:06
Uh
29:07
you know, these organizations, various
29:08
philanthropists, um you know, our free
29:11
diving study in Dominica was
29:13
funded by an American philanthropist who
29:16
we're very grateful to. Um all of this
29:19
is is terrific, but it's it's hard to
29:22
get money to study. And that's why these
29:24
questions still exist. Your your point,
29:26
you know, that
29:27
>> Yeah.
29:27
Um research in this area is difficult to
29:30
do and it's difficult to get funding
29:32
for.
29:33
I I guess we should just be grateful
29:35
that the military still have an interest
29:36
in sending uh sending people down
29:38
relatively deep and they haven't got
29:40
round to the idea that it all needs to
29:41
be done by ROVs yet.
29:44
No, well, no. I mean, a lot of what they
29:46
want to do can't be done by ROVs and uh
29:50
yep, they they're still on board, very
29:52
much so. Uh brilliant. Okay, well, thank
29:56
you very much, Simon. That was I really
29:58
appreciate you spending your time to
30:00
kind of go through these questions and
30:02
you know
30:03
you know, be so honest, I guess, and you
30:05
know, straightforward as well, which is
30:07
which is really appreciated. Just to
30:09
kind of conclude, is there any final
30:10
message you want to you want to give
30:11
across? Honestly, Dom, you get me
30:14
talking on a podcast about diving
30:16
physiology and medicine and we could
30:18
talk we could talk all day. I mean, I've
30:21
there are so many things I'm passionate
30:22
about, right? But um no, I'd just say
30:25
that
30:26
uh on this helium penalty question
30:29
when you boil it all down
30:31
it's simple. If you do less
30:33
decompression
30:35
there's more risk.
30:36
And and you have to decide
30:39
given that you can't really quantify
30:41
that change in risk, whether you're
30:42
prepared to accept that. And if you are,
30:45
fine, you know? But,
30:47
if you're not, I'd just do what I do,
30:49
which is stay with the old algorithm and
30:52
be honest with my computer.
30:55
Thank you very much, Simon, for those
30:57
incredible thoughts, for spending so
30:58
much time going through that with us.
31:02
For everyone watching this, I hope
31:03
you've enjoyed it. I hope you've learned
31:05
as much as I have. Of course, if you
31:08
want to leave some comments, uh if you
31:10
want to ask some questions, I will see
31:12
if I can uh get Simon to answer them.
31:16
Otherwise, if you could do all the usual
31:17
stuff, leave us a like, subscribe,
31:21
share it with your friends, all those
31:23
kind of things, it would be brilliant.
31:25
I'm Dom Robinson, deep wreck diver. I
31:28
hope you've enjoyed this, and I shall
31:30
look forward to seeing you on the next
31:31
one.

I Asked Prof Simon Mitchell About The Helium Penalty

Deep Wreck Diver

UFC Edmonton & Magny vs Prates Predictions with UFC vets Jessica Penne and Angela Hill

A Scientist's Take on LiveScope | Outdoor Journal Radio ep.146

Is Trimix the New Nitrox? Why Helium is Going Mainstream

I Changed This One Setting and Became a Safer Diver

PFO & Diving: The Truth About the Hole in Your Heart with Dr Mark Turner

Best CCR Dive Computer 2026: We Tested Shearwater, Halcyon, Garmin & More

Can the Garmin X50i Replace Your Shearwater? My Real World Test

Divers Can't Agree on Safe Depth for Air Diving—Here's Why

Diving 160 Metres to the SS Nemesis Wreck!

What REALLY Happens When You Get Decompression Sickness

2025 NBA Draft Lottery RIGGED for the Mavericks to Land Cooper Flagg? | D.A. Investigates

5 Reasons I Love the Shearwater Perdix 2 Bronze Edition for CCR Diving

My Rebreather Failed on a 90 Metre Dive

OSTC 5 Dive Computer Review: A Serious Shearwater Challenger?

Brandon Graham Retires: Philadelphia Eagles Legend's Emotional Farewell

Up next in 10

I Asked Prof Simon Mitchell About The Helium Penalty

Deep Wreck Diver