<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jul 26, 2016, at 6:16 AM, Robert Helling <<a href="mailto:helling@atdotde.de" class="">helling@atdotde.de</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8" class=""><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi all,<div class=""><br class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 26.07.2016, at 14:30, Robert Helling <<a href="mailto:helling@atdotde.de" class="">helling@atdotde.de</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="" style="font-family: Menlo-Regular; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">I haven’t had time to read in the proceedings of the DAN workshop that was linked before. What I saw that came most closely to a recommendation was a report of a plan to do a study trying to bend subjects in a simulated fly after dive scenario. Which is not much that could be put into software. Maybe one should check the Rubicon Archive for more scientific information on the issue.</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></div></blockquote></div><div class=""><br class=""></div>ok, I did some Rubicon search and follow up reading an the two most relevant papers seem to be </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/6255/SPUMS_V9N3_4.pdf?sequence=1" class="">http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/6255/SPUMS_V9N3_4.pdf?sequence=1</a></div><div class="">and</div><div class=""><a href="http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/5611/DAN_FAD_2002.pdf?sequence=1" class="">http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/5611/DAN_FAD_2002.pdf?sequence=1</a></div><div class="">(in particular the executive summary).</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Upshot seems to be: Very hard to asses given the low number of cases (boarding a place when you already have DCS symptoms seems to be a totally different game, though), but 12-18h limits, maybe 24h seem to be a good idea and there is no model on the marked that is able to predict this.</div></div></div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div>This seems to match my expectations.</div><div>a) made up random shit</div><div>b) semi-scientific algorithms, tuned by random numbers without any scientific basis in order to match pre-conceived notions of "this sounds about right"</div><div><br class=""></div><div>/D</div><br class=""></body></html>