PCA medical committee revoked my race license
06-19-2024, 05:35 PM
#901
Drifting
OSA is different. If you don't use the machine, there is no direct risk of dying or even serious illness. If somebody doesn't use it, nobody can tell and they will be largely fine (at least by appearances). They will be impaired, but many people who are impaired (for any number of reasons) can still be largely functional in their activities. Their choice to not use CPAP is fine for activities that involve only themselves, but not in a situation where their individual impairment can hurt others.
For virtually all other conditions, you're only putting yourself at risk. OSA is unique in that there is no immediate to direct health risk to yourself by not using the machine -- but it can does pose very significant risk for others in the wrong situations. I would argue there is no slippery slope for things that are largely unique.
06-19-2024, 05:43 PM
#902
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: The Swamps of Jersey/WGI/VIR...
Posts: 6,714
Received 1,830 Likes
on
1,219 Posts
There is no slippery slope in my opinion -- OSA is unique and different. For those things you mention, and most serious medical conditions, there is a huge direct self-preservation factor involved. Those conditions will kill you if you don't take your insulin, or your required medication, so there is every motivation in the world for individuals to keep on top of those conditions.
OSA is different. If you don't use the machine, there is no direct risk of dying or even serious illness. If somebody doesn't use it, nobody can tell and they will be largely fine (at least by appearances). They will be impaired, but many people who are impaired (for any number of reasons) can still be largely functional in their activities. Their choice to not use CPAP is fine for activities that involve only themselves, but not in a situation where their individual impairment can hurt others.
For virtually all other conditions, you're only putting yourself at risk. OSA is unique in that there is no immediate to direct health risk to yourself by not using the machine -- but it can does pose very significant risk for others in the wrong situations. I would argue there is no slippery slope for things that are largely unique.
OSA is different. If you don't use the machine, there is no direct risk of dying or even serious illness. If somebody doesn't use it, nobody can tell and they will be largely fine (at least by appearances). They will be impaired, but many people who are impaired (for any number of reasons) can still be largely functional in their activities. Their choice to not use CPAP is fine for activities that involve only themselves, but not in a situation where their individual impairment can hurt others.
For virtually all other conditions, you're only putting yourself at risk. OSA is unique in that there is no immediate to direct health risk to yourself by not using the machine -- but it can does pose very significant risk for others in the wrong situations. I would argue there is no slippery slope for things that are largely unique.
If I’m reading this correctly, a diabetic who doesn’t take his insulin before a race can appear fine at the start of the race, yes?
When he goes into diabetic shock on lap 6 and collects 4 other cars on his way into the wall, that’s self preservation that only affects the diabetic? What about the other 4 drivers he put in the wall? You are ok with that?
Pretty sure I’m misreading your post, so maybe you can clarify?
The following 3 users liked this post by dgrobs:
06-19-2024, 05:57 PM
#903
Rennlist Member
There is no slippery slope in my opinion -- OSA is unique and different. For those things you mention, and most serious medical conditions, there is a huge direct self-preservation factor involved. Those conditions will kill you if you don't take your insulin, or your required medication, so there is every motivation in the world for individuals to keep on top of those conditions.
OSA is different. If you don't use the machine, there is no direct risk of dying or even serious illness. If somebody doesn't use it, nobody can tell and they will be largely fine (at least by appearances). They will be impaired, but many people who are impaired (for any number of reasons) can still be largely functional in their activities. Their choice to not use CPAP is fine for activities that involve only themselves, but not in a situation where their individual impairment can hurt others.
For virtually all other conditions, you're only putting yourself at risk. OSA is unique in that there is no immediate to direct health risk to yourself by not using the machine -- but it can does pose very significant risk for others in the wrong situations. I would argue there is no slippery slope for things that are largely unique.
OSA is different. If you don't use the machine, there is no direct risk of dying or even serious illness. If somebody doesn't use it, nobody can tell and they will be largely fine (at least by appearances). They will be impaired, but many people who are impaired (for any number of reasons) can still be largely functional in their activities. Their choice to not use CPAP is fine for activities that involve only themselves, but not in a situation where their individual impairment can hurt others.
For virtually all other conditions, you're only putting yourself at risk. OSA is unique in that there is no immediate to direct health risk to yourself by not using the machine -- but it can does pose very significant risk for others in the wrong situations. I would argue there is no slippery slope for things that are largely unique.
Almost none of what you said makes any sense to me. I think I hear you saying the following:
1) If there is a risk of immediate harm to the individual, that is enough incentive for the individual to comply and therefore no need to check. I am wondering, who gets to decide what falls into that category and what does not? Also, I bet we've all seen people have diabetic attacks from mismanagement of their insulin. Why do we think that would never happen at a race track when it still happens in other places?
2) You state people with OSA are impaired by the long term effects of the health issue which make them dangerous to be on track with others. I suppose people with a bad diet are also impaired by the long term effects of their decisions. Should we ban fat people from racing? What about drinkers who damage their liver? Or smokers damaging their lungs? Ban them all?
3) You state the long term impairment from OSA puts others at such grave risk that they should never race. While I wear a dental device now for my sleep apnea, I only started wearing it after I stopped racing. I suspect I went 10 years with the condition being undiagnosed. I never felt impaired. My competitors certainly never felt I was impaired. Over 15 years of competition I never got a 13, never hit a wall, and was widely considered a clean racer whom others would be comfortable sharing a corner with. So what impairment did I have that I was apparently unaware of? Why was I unknowingly dangerous?
The following 3 users liked this post by jakermc:
06-19-2024, 06:03 PM
#904
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: The Swamps of Jersey/WGI/VIR...
Posts: 6,714
Received 1,830 Likes
on
1,219 Posts
Wow, maybe I didn’t misread peterp’s post.
The following users liked this post:
CaymanR99 (06-19-2024)
06-19-2024, 06:09 PM
#905
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Mid-Atlantic (on land, not in the middle of the ocean)
Posts: 13,342
Received 4,524 Likes
on
2,576 Posts
I'm trying so hard to bite my tongue and stay silent, but so many of these comments are just moving resolution backwards. I want to preface this comment by saying that I have agreed with the content of virtually all of @Manifold 's posts throughout this thread. But this representation of the impact of OSA ("since the effect is comparable to being tired") is just objectively false. Long-term deprivation of oxygen -- the unambiguous result of not using CPAP regularly -- does not have a binary result of "sleep or no sleep" impact. Those who don't use it are significantly impaired, whether they fall asleep or not. The entire body is deprived of oxygen over a long period of time --- it is totally different than somebody who just didn't get enough sleep the night before. If you don't get enough sleep, you're fine as soon as you get sufficient rest. It takes weeks of consistent CPAP usage to recover from long-term oxygen deprivation. Those two things seem similar, but they are not, at all. To say anything else is only magnify the point that people without medical knowledge should not be making proclamations about medical issues.
Nobody with OSA, who hasn't used a CPAP consistently, should be on track. Period. From that perspective, it's not a bad idea to get data to confirm usage. Is PCA's decision to require data necessary? Should they take the racer's word for it (especially the word of a top driver with years of experience in the series) rather than require the data? Should a doctor's general statement about suitability for racing override their concern for confirming usage? These are all judgment calls -- and we can all debate whether they made the right calls or not in this case. But it moves the resolution backwards to dismiss the seriousness of non-use -- asking for "a pass" on proof of usage, when the entire dialog is trying to portray the issue as non-serious, does not help that request at all (for reasons that should be very obvious).
.
Nobody with OSA, who hasn't used a CPAP consistently, should be on track. Period. From that perspective, it's not a bad idea to get data to confirm usage. Is PCA's decision to require data necessary? Should they take the racer's word for it (especially the word of a top driver with years of experience in the series) rather than require the data? Should a doctor's general statement about suitability for racing override their concern for confirming usage? These are all judgment calls -- and we can all debate whether they made the right calls or not in this case. But it moves the resolution backwards to dismiss the seriousness of non-use -- asking for "a pass" on proof of usage, when the entire dialog is trying to portray the issue as non-serious, does not help that request at all (for reasons that should be very obvious).
.
Last edited by Manifold; 06-19-2024 at 06:11 PM.
06-19-2024, 06:17 PM
#906
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Mid-Atlantic (on land, not in the middle of the ocean)
Posts: 13,342
Received 4,524 Likes
on
2,576 Posts
There is no slippery slope in my opinion -- OSA is unique and different. For those things you mention, and most serious medical conditions, there is a huge direct self-preservation factor involved. Those conditions will kill you if you don't take your insulin, or your required medication, so there is every motivation in the world for individuals to keep on top of those conditions.
OSA is different. If you don't use the machine, there is no direct risk of dying or even serious illness. If somebody doesn't use it, nobody can tell and they will be largely fine (at least by appearances). They will be impaired, but many people who are impaired (for any number of reasons) can still be largely functional in their activities. Their choice to not use CPAP is fine for activities that involve only themselves, but not in a situation where their individual impairment can hurt others.
For virtually all other conditions, you're only putting yourself at risk. OSA is unique in that there is no immediate to direct health risk to yourself by not using the machine -- but it can does pose very significant risk for others in the wrong situations. I would argue there is no slippery slope for things that are largely unique.
OSA is different. If you don't use the machine, there is no direct risk of dying or even serious illness. If somebody doesn't use it, nobody can tell and they will be largely fine (at least by appearances). They will be impaired, but many people who are impaired (for any number of reasons) can still be largely functional in their activities. Their choice to not use CPAP is fine for activities that involve only themselves, but not in a situation where their individual impairment can hurt others.
For virtually all other conditions, you're only putting yourself at risk. OSA is unique in that there is no immediate to direct health risk to yourself by not using the machine -- but it can does pose very significant risk for others in the wrong situations. I would argue there is no slippery slope for things that are largely unique.
The following users liked this post:
ProCoach (06-19-2024)
06-19-2024, 06:20 PM
#907
Nothing happens at the National level that is not highly political. In other words, no one gets selected for any National position that is not part of the political machine. It's cronyism of the highest order. The powers that be know who is going to be selected for a position before the nominations even occur.
06-19-2024, 06:25 PM
#908
There is no slippery slope in my opinion -- OSA is unique and different. For those things you mention, and most serious medical conditions, there is a huge direct self-preservation factor involved. Those conditions will kill you if you don't take your insulin, or your required medication, so there is every motivation in the world for individuals to keep on top of those conditions.
OSA is different. If you don't use the machine, there is no direct risk of dying or even serious illness. If somebody doesn't use it, nobody can tell and they will be largely fine (at least by appearances). They will be impaired, but many people who are impaired (for any number of reasons) can still be largely functional in their activities. Their choice to not use CPAP is fine for activities that involve only themselves, but not in a situation where their individual impairment can hurt others.
For virtually all other conditions, you're only putting yourself at risk. OSA is unique in that there is no immediate to direct health risk to yourself by not using the machine -- but it can does pose very significant risk for others in the wrong situations. I would argue there is no slippery slope for things that are largely unique.
OSA is different. If you don't use the machine, there is no direct risk of dying or even serious illness. If somebody doesn't use it, nobody can tell and they will be largely fine (at least by appearances). They will be impaired, but many people who are impaired (for any number of reasons) can still be largely functional in their activities. Their choice to not use CPAP is fine for activities that involve only themselves, but not in a situation where their individual impairment can hurt others.
For virtually all other conditions, you're only putting yourself at risk. OSA is unique in that there is no immediate to direct health risk to yourself by not using the machine -- but it can does pose very significant risk for others in the wrong situations. I would argue there is no slippery slope for things that are largely unique.
https://document.resmed.com/en-au/do...esmedica14.pdf
What about all the racers that had OSA before 1985? How many race incidents can be traced to OSA pre and post 1985?
The following users liked this post:
jakermc (06-19-2024)
06-19-2024, 08:25 PM
#909
Drifting
Not following you here. Probably my own stupidity, but…
If I’m reading this correctly, a diabetic who doesn’t take his insulin before a race can appear fine at the start of the race, yes?
When he goes into diabetic shock on lap 6 and collects 4 other cars on his way into the wall, that’s self preservation that only affects the diabetic? What about the other 4 drivers he put in the wall? You are ok with that?
Pretty sure I’m misreading your post, so maybe you can clarify?
If I’m reading this correctly, a diabetic who doesn’t take his insulin before a race can appear fine at the start of the race, yes?
When he goes into diabetic shock on lap 6 and collects 4 other cars on his way into the wall, that’s self preservation that only affects the diabetic? What about the other 4 drivers he put in the wall? You are ok with that?
Pretty sure I’m misreading your post, so maybe you can clarify?
That's totally different from CPAP, where there is no direct life-threatening impact if they don't use it. People with OSA can get by without it for long periods of time, or forever even, so it isn't safe at all to presume they are using it.
My non-optimal wording aside, I'm not sure how it isn't abundantly clear Insulin diligence isn't optional, but CPAP usage certainly is optional since the is no direct immediate risk in not using it.
06-19-2024, 08:35 PM
#910
Rennlist Member
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: The Swamps of Jersey/WGI/VIR...
Posts: 6,714
Received 1,830 Likes
on
1,219 Posts
I guess I confused the issue with by saying "self-preservation". What I meant was that people with serious medical conditions, that require keeping up with meds to remain healthy or alive, are going to be doing that every single day (because their life/health depends directly upon keeping up with treatments). If somebody doesn't manage their insulin properly, for example, it will end poorly. They will do that every day because their life depends on it. There is no reason to believe they wouldn't do it every single day, let alone on race days. It isn't optional for because their health can be immediately effected.
That's totally different from CPAP, where there is no direct life-threatening impact if they don't use it. People with OSA can get by without it for long periods of time, or forever even, so it isn't safe at all to presume they are using it.
My non-optimal wording aside, I'm not sure how it isn't abundantly clear Insulin diligence isn't optional, but CPAP usage certainly is optional since the is no direct immediate risk in not using it.
That's totally different from CPAP, where there is no direct life-threatening impact if they don't use it. People with OSA can get by without it for long periods of time, or forever even, so it isn't safe at all to presume they are using it.
My non-optimal wording aside, I'm not sure how it isn't abundantly clear Insulin diligence isn't optional, but CPAP usage certainly is optional since the is no direct immediate risk in not using it.
I’m just gonna respectfully disagree with pretty much everything you said and leave it there.
Thanks for clarifying.
Last edited by dgrobs; 06-19-2024 at 08:37 PM.
The following users liked this post:
ProCoach (06-19-2024)
06-19-2024, 09:12 PM
#911
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Formerly the DPRK, now seeking political asylum in Oregon
Posts: 1,170
Received 597 Likes
on
360 Posts
I'll play Devil's advocate here, and say that peterp has some valid points, relating to the long term effects of OSA.
And some of the 'logic' used to refute them here is downright silly.
I will, however disagree with the need to demonstrate compliance.
OSA sounds pretty unpleasant, and I suspect anyone who knows they have it and controls it with a CPAP is pretty consistent about using it.
A bigger problem might be anyone undiagnosed, but that also goes for a whole boatload of other conditions.
If the PCA is so focused on medical safety, instead of singling diagnosed OSA out for 'compliance check', the appropriate thing is to demand a thorough screening for all possible conditions before every race weekend. Along with a drug and alcohol test before each race...
Not too practical.
The committee's justification citing the danger of dozing off during a race is laughable.
It would be embarrassing to even have that thought, and shocking that anyone could actually voice it.
Alas, they did, and now they'll go to the grave before admitting it was idiotic.
And some of the 'logic' used to refute them here is downright silly.
I will, however disagree with the need to demonstrate compliance.
OSA sounds pretty unpleasant, and I suspect anyone who knows they have it and controls it with a CPAP is pretty consistent about using it.
A bigger problem might be anyone undiagnosed, but that also goes for a whole boatload of other conditions.
If the PCA is so focused on medical safety, instead of singling diagnosed OSA out for 'compliance check', the appropriate thing is to demand a thorough screening for all possible conditions before every race weekend. Along with a drug and alcohol test before each race...
Not too practical.
The committee's justification citing the danger of dozing off during a race is laughable.
It would be embarrassing to even have that thought, and shocking that anyone could actually voice it.
Alas, they did, and now they'll go to the grave before admitting it was idiotic.
The following 5 users liked this post by Nowanker:
BlueBarchetta (06-19-2024),
FunWithFiorio (06-22-2024),
Manifold (06-19-2024),
Matt Romanowski (06-19-2024),
ProCoach (06-19-2024)
06-19-2024, 09:17 PM
#912
Rennlist Member
I guess I confused the issue with by saying "self-preservation". What I meant was that people with serious medical conditions, that require keeping up with meds to remain healthy or alive, are going to be doing that every single day (because their life/health depends directly upon keeping up with treatments). If somebody doesn't manage their insulin properly, for example, it will end poorly. They will do that every day because their life depends on it. There is no reason to believe they wouldn't do it every single day, let alone on race days. It isn't optional for because their health can be immediately effected.
Obviously, PCA racers are a bit of a different subgroup
The following 2 users liked this post by jdistefa:
LuigiVampa (06-19-2024),
ProCoach (06-19-2024)
06-19-2024, 09:23 PM
#913
Rennlist Hoonigan
which cost no drachmas
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
which cost no drachmas
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Rennlist
Site Sponsor
I guess I confused the issue with by saying "self-preservation". What I meant was that people with serious medical conditions, that require keeping up with meds to remain healthy or alive, are going to be doing that every single day (because their life/health depends directly upon keeping up with treatments). If somebody doesn't manage their insulin properly, for example, it will end poorly. They will do that every day because their life depends on it. There is no reason to believe they wouldn't do it every single day, let alone on race days. It isn't optional for because their health can be immediately effected.
That's totally different from CPAP, where there is no direct life-threatening impact if they don't use it. People with OSA can get by without it for long periods of time, or forever even, so it isn't safe at all to presume they are using it.
My non-optimal wording aside, I'm not sure how it isn't abundantly clear Insulin diligence isn't optional, but CPAP usage certainly is optional since the is no direct immediate risk in not using it.
That's totally different from CPAP, where there is no direct life-threatening impact if they don't use it. People with OSA can get by without it for long periods of time, or forever even, so it isn't safe at all to presume they are using it.
My non-optimal wording aside, I'm not sure how it isn't abundantly clear Insulin diligence isn't optional, but CPAP usage certainly is optional since the is no direct immediate risk in not using it.
And I would would argue that sleep deprivation is a major impairment that most people do not understand or realize. There is plenty of evidence showing it https://sleep.hms.harvard.edu/educat...h-education-89 Do we then get to get sleep logs from all racers showing they are sleeping?
I'd say it's a very slippery slope.
06-19-2024, 09:24 PM
#914
Drifting
A person with diabetes or a serious heart condition will die if they don't take their meds every single day.
A person with OSA who does not use CPAP has no direct risk to themselves, and let's not forget that using a CPAP is not as fun to use as it looks
.It's safe to assume that someone with diabetes or serious heart condition will take care of that condition because they immediately harm themselves if they don't take their meds.
It is NOT safe to assume the OSA person is using the machine, because their is no direct harm to themselves for not using it.
OSA is a one-off. I don't see what's debatable about any of the above.
06-19-2024, 09:43 PM
#915
I mean, you kind of have to show your math if your going to say you disagree with everything I said.
A person with diabetes or a serious heart condition will die if they don't take their meds every single day.
A person with OSA who does not use CPAP has no direct risk to themselves, and let's not forget that using a CPAP is not as fun to use as it looks.
It's safe to assume that someone with diabetes or serious heart condition will take care of that condition because they immediately harm themselves if they don't take their meds.
It is NOT safe to assume the OSA person is using the machine, because their is no direct harm to themselves for not using it.
OSA is a one-off. I don't see what's debatable about any of the above.
A person with diabetes or a serious heart condition will die if they don't take their meds every single day.
A person with OSA who does not use CPAP has no direct risk to themselves, and let's not forget that using a CPAP is not as fun to use as it looks
.It's safe to assume that someone with diabetes or serious heart condition will take care of that condition because they immediately harm themselves if they don't take their meds.
It is NOT safe to assume the OSA person is using the machine, because their is no direct harm to themselves for not using it.
OSA is a one-off. I don't see what's debatable about any of the above.
I don’t think you’ll get much argument that not using a CPAP for OSA will lead to impairment, but shouldn’t the level of impairment be measured against a minimum standard?
Otherwise, it comes across like the medical committee is making a mountain out of a molehill of “potential impairment”. Just my $0.02