NaroEscape

My wife asked me last night what's going on with this, and I told her.
She said "didn't you almost fall asleep on grid once before a race?"
Yep. I did.
"As far as we know, you don't have sleep apnea" (though I don't sleep through the night...anyone running a small business will tell you that).
Who knows? But if I did, I certainly would not disclose it now.
Between loading, getting there, unloading, registration, car set up, checking everything and running around getting prepped. socializing the night before, etc.... , when I get in the car and sit on grid, I finally relax. It's quiet, calm (before the storm??) and peaceful. And yes...I've almost fallen asleep a few times.
I hope the good Dr. is not reading this or I'm sure my license will be revoked.

dgrobs

You're gonna be on double secret probation…

Carrera51

What's wrong with resting your eyes on the grid. I've done that dozens of times. LOL

multi21

I didn't want to mention this before, but it's abundantly clear the medical committee has no idea what top top level drivers do to perform the way they do. With Todd's championship and runner-up finish, we mere mortals cannot fully appreciate what a little snooze will do for you in the car. Other top level drivers who do the same...:




Buemi is the best LOL

Mahler9th

I don't think name calling and ad hominem arguments are appropriate. Just my opinion.

It is not yet clear to me when and how PCA adopted a "policy" that prospective racers that disclose OSA must use CPAP or similar therapy and must be able to provide data from an FDA cleared or approved medical device that can document some type of compliance.

What about oral appliances?

It seems to me that when they came to this conclusion, they should have disclosed the requirements clearly and proactively. Not clear to me that they have done this.

The "why" makes no sense to me-- OSA is common chronic medical condition that does not seem in any way to apply to any type of risk management opportunity for racing or DE with respect to "falling asleep whilst driving."

In a stretch, one could imagine issues with long stints in enduros, but that is a pretty big stretch.

I can see how a volunteer medical professional might look for "standards" with respect to chronic medical conditions that might be presented by prospective racers that could affect safety, but to "demand" evidence of Rx seems out of line with all other aspects of the process.

I suspect that from a risk management standpoint, demanding "data" showing some type of "historical chronic condition Rx compliance" is a terrible slippery slope that may not have been carefully considered.

I understand that these folks are volunteers and I have not met them or interacted with them. Perhaps they think they are being vigilant, but what has been presented in this thread regarding their response to inquiry suggests a lack of careful and thoughtful consideration.

Name calling may not lead to more careful consideration.

dan212

I think I read that Jenson Button was so relaxed that he dozed off once on grid.

LuigiVampa

Your email is very much on point in regards to the medical portion and I will also admit that I struggle with the correct tone for this debate. Let me share my thoughts -

This issue regarding my OSA first came about on February 27, and for the first several weeks I respectfully asked questions and even apologized to the medical committee for taking up their time. My tone began to change, not because they didn't agree with me, but because they refused to even engage with me on the facts. "Because we say so" is how I sum up their response, and that began to get my goat. That, and my initial call with Harry Kintzi, where he was patronizing and dismissive, and told me I would fall asleep while racing.

When PCA told me to provide the info or I couldn't race at LRP, I advised the medical committee, as well as PCA leadership, that I was going to explain to PCA membership the arbitrary nature of the medical clearance process. I told them I was going to make this issue public.

How did they respond? We don't like that you made this public. Why didn't you go through our process?

Are you kidding me? You told me to pound sand and now you are complaining that I am making people aware of a situation you created and refused to fix? Look up hypocritical in the dictionary and I am pretty sure this fits the definition.

I have written a lot of well documented emails, where I ask the medical committee, PCA counsel, as well as the PCA president and club race chair, to just respond with facts to my questions. The only answers I have received are:

1. DOT trucking standards is the best standard we could find; we could have used the FAA standard so count yourself lucky.
2. You might be sleepy and that can cause something bad to happen;
3. The medical committee knows better than my doctor
4. Untreated OSA can be a long term health hazard.

I have done research on OSA, PCA bylaws and rules, as well as club racing rules, and how other amateur racing groups handle medical issue, and wrapped all this into what I believe are compelling arguments. I am an attorney and one of the things I know how to do well is research, and distill that research into cogent arguments. It's all been a big waste of time because they don't care about the facts.

More recently I have offered up some good compromises, which were all rejected. Aaron, our PCA president did say he would talk to the executive committee about making changes. He said that next discussion would happen mid-June and that they would not do anything in the intervening time. Nothing. I was told to wait six weeks at the time of our last call and be patient. Six weeks and he refused to even send an email to the executive committee to start the ball rolling. By the time the next discussion happens this problem will have lingered for three and a half months!

I was also told that I could not race at the Watkins Glen race and the only way to make this go away now was to provide my information.

There are two problems here: 1. the rule; 2. the people enforcing the rule.

What might be perceived as an ad hominem attack, is merely me calling out the issue of the people enforcing the rule. The people are a big part of the problem. If a committee is acting like a bunch of tyrants is it wrong to say that? If you provide a group of people with information and they refuse to respond in kind, are they not obstinate? If leadership admits that there is a problem, and they have the power to fix it but are afraid to do the right thing, is it wrong to call them feckless?

The biggest obstacle to reforming PCA club racing's issues is the "machine" that is PCA leadership. If calling them out is an ad hominem attack, than that is the direction this discussion is going to go. My current position is that the PCA president, club race chair, and especially the medical committee and general counsel, should all resign. These people are the problem.

I think the next month is going to become interesting.

TL;DR - PCA leadership are refusing to act in a timely matter, and are circling the wagons, so they are the problem.

GlenL

Set the way-back thread machine and the best option, for all sides, is having the drivers' doctors just approving the driver for racing. I am a bit hesitant in adding the onus for rejection into what is an important relationship and that is possibly long-time.

Makes me wonder.... What conditions are getting drivers rightly rejected when they think they're OK enough to apply?

Veloce Raptor

Todd: Fukkemm. They no longer deserve your respect or consideration.

Mahler9th

Sorry, was not referring to the OP!

I am not an attorney, nor a physician.

I started working with corporate attorneys at 18 at GE Healthcare. Decades ago.

CPAP and similar devices for OSA RX are very well known to me, and like I think nearly 100% of people that posted comments and concerns in this thread, I can follow a basic logic tree.

As I see it, the PCA response is loaded with elements of legal risk.

Some things are still not clear.

One is: If you disclose OSA, then why does PCA require proof of Rx compliance? This question has nothing to do with DOT guidelines for truckers, it has to do with why they would require evidence of RX compliance for anything.

If you disclose OSA, what happens if you are "under the clinical threshold" for med device intervention (Rx), as set by your care provider? Does PCA "set" there "own" threshhold, and require you to be treated with a medical device? That seems like a slippery slope.

Again, what happens if you and your care provider settle on an oral appliance that does not have any "data" collection capability? Do they "just take your word" that your are using it as prescribed? If that is the case, why would those with CPAP or other devices be required to provide more information?

What would happen if the OP now stated that his doctor prescribed an oral appliance? Would the issue be resolved?

Seems like this situation is "if you disclose OSA, and you and your care team have chosen a device that can provide historical information on compliance, then we must have some of that data." But we know that such data is only a "snapshot in time." Seems like a slippery legal slope... in litigation, the PCA argue "best efforts were used," but a plaintiff could argue that best efforts would be to require data that is more time proximal to an actual race weekend.

Based on what the OP has posted, it seems that PCA has compromised their legal risk by "intervening" between the OP and his doctor/care team. Why would PCA do that? And how about other chronic medical conditions? Will or does PCA require prospective racers to show compliance with their various medications and/or treatments for other chronic medical conditions? There seems to be a claim that OSA is somehow different or more of a risk...

I just don't think implications have been carefully considered.

"We don't like that you made this public. Why didn't you go through our process?"

That is probably paraphrasing, but it is nevertheless extremely troubling.

Manifold

This thread is now over 350 posts and it’s noteworthy that not even one person has made a single post trying to even partly defend PCA’s position.

jscott82

Not really... this is the internet echo chamber afterall.


I will say this.... I really don't get why the banter is still going on.... They made their decision, he appealed, they denied the appeal.... What is supposed to happen now?

LuigiVampa

PCA is monitoring this thread but they won't get involved in a public way. You are not allowed to see behind the curtain!

They are "still looking into it."

LuigiVampa

Registered for IGT and SVRA Memorial Day weekend at LRP and just registered for HSR at WGI at the beginning of June.

Lots of other options to race.

The only thing that upsets me is not driving with CVR, but regardless of my feelings toward my local region, I can't stand up in front of a group of drivers and pretend like I support PCA. It is for this reason alone that I hope they eventually come around.

multi21

Reminds me of my favorite team’s radio message “We are checking” 😂. Ironically enough LeClerc’s team race engineer that coined the phrase was relieved of his duties just before his week.