How about this flavor Walter?
I wouldn't risk it.
Posted 12 April 2005 - 07:53 AM
How about this flavor Walter?
Posted 12 April 2005 - 07:56 AM
The regulations are identical (or were the last time I checked).
Edited by drdiver, 12 April 2005 - 07:58 AM.
Posted 12 April 2005 - 07:59 AM
Wenchie just can't stand the idea of not getting wet for 9+ months.How about this flavor Walter?
I wouldn't risk it.
Posted 12 April 2005 - 08:46 AM
Posted 12 April 2005 - 09:26 AM
the EPA requires that tap water be monitored for asbestos, while the FDA imposes no such requirement on bottled-water manufacturers
some standards for bottled water are stricter than for tap, such as those for fluoride and lead. But some are not. Bottled-water companies aren't required to disinfect or test for parasites such as Cryptosporidium or Giardia--a requirement for city tap water.
Posted 12 April 2005 - 09:36 AM
Hey WW... since so little is known about the detrimental effects of diving on the pregnancy and development of the unborn child, and since you have the need for elevated partial pressures of nitrogen and oxygen... why don't you lead a study group for the benefit of development of proper information on the subject... and then we may KNOW if there are really detrimental effects... Maybe it will actually "BENEFIT" the unborn child... once enough science is known over a longer period of time (yeah, right). Reminds me of the movie SLEEPER... smoking was actually found to be good for you... (sure). BTW, those elevated partial pressures will affect the unborn child too... you can help us know in what way!WW wrote: I just want to know what is available and if the best answer is...'we don't know and therefore avoid it' then so be it, however in the lack of real information, I'm still curious.
Posted 12 April 2005 - 10:21 AM
Posted 12 April 2005 - 11:31 AM
Or do I??????????????????????????????????????????????????
Posted 12 April 2005 - 12:03 PM
I wonder if the loving husband/father in the equation would be willing to give up diving for 9+ months to support the baby? Or more realistically the wife????
Posted 12 April 2005 - 12:41 PM
Posted 12 April 2005 - 12:48 PM
Since you raised the question, I'll gladly offer my 2 psi.Or do I??????????????????????????????????????????????????
Well you know one person thinking about it...or at least thinking about the impact of diving on it...and I'm sure other women are curious as well.
I wonder if the loving husband/father in the equation would be willing to give up diving for 9+ months to support the baby? Or more realistically the wife???? Just curious where the male of the species weighs in at on not diving during the woman's pregnancy especially when they are the ones not diving!
Posted 12 April 2005 - 02:09 PM
Thank you babyduck...your perspective is very enlightening. And btw...thanks for being the catalyst for this great topic of discussion! -wwgosh, never expected to start anything! i haven't read the linked articles yet, and i know nothing about the effects of diving on pregnancy, but i bet they all say 'we don't know so don't do it', kinda like has already been said.
i *do* know the medication pregnancy categories, just to give examples of how much isn't known about even common stuff and pregnency. category 'a' meds have been studied and are considered safe. there are a few, but not many, in this category. 'b' meds might have a few human studies or animal studies and nothing bad has happened so far. this also covers a few meds. 'c' are 'gee, we don't have any proof of anything happening to animals' or 'no studies have been done. at all'. this is by far the biggest category and lots of very common meds used during pregnancy are officially here. it's the 'risks & benefits' category - you get to weigh for yourself. 'd' has known risks, and 'x' cause birth defects or fetal death. the main reason for the large 'we don't know' category is that no drug company is stupid enough to set up a study of pregnant women to see what happens.
so personally, while i would drink water and dye my hair and eat non-organic veggies and use my albuterol inhaler, i wouldn't dive, go heavy on high-mercury fish, eat lead paint chips, or go to cocktail hour. it's all in what you can live without doing and live with having done while pregnant.
Posted 12 April 2005 - 04:32 PM
bravoFor that matter, why not also avoid tap water, power lines, city living and snack foods? Where does one draw the line at protection from "all possible factors which could harm the baby"? Sure, the factors you list are the most commonsensical and risky, but let's be honest: millions of healthy babies have been born to women who smoked and drank alcohol/caffeine during their pregnancies (I am one, as are many on this board, I suspect).If pregnant, you should eliminate all possible factors which could harm the baby - diving, smoking, caffeine, alcohol......... It's a small price to pay for a healthy child.
We as a society have gone overboard in the past 20 years trying to eliminate all possible risk from all possible facets of life in the good ol' USA. Hence the lawsuit culture, lengthy warning lables, child-proof lids that adults can't open, and on and on.... Michael Crichton defined this "state of fear" well in his latest book (titled "State of Fear") by calling it a "near-hysterical preoccupation with safety that’s at best a waste of resources and a crimp on the human spirit, and at worst an invitation to totalitarianism."
I realize this post is off-topic, so feel free to ignore me once I step off my soapbox. But Walter's comments struck a chord, and if you know anything about guitar-playing, when you strike a chord, music comes forth! (Or discordant noise, depending on what you think of my opinions.)
p.s. As a general nod toward the direction of on-topic-ness, I do agree that it's more prudent to avoid diving than even cigarette smoking while pregnant, because apparently so little is known about the risks/potential effects.
Posted 13 April 2005 - 08:39 AM
Posted 13 April 2005 - 01:41 PM
There has not been a very intense study on the effects of diving on the fetus. It is my opinion, and only mine, that is is not worth the risk to the child.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users