Talk:Instinctive drowning response

Possible list of evidence

Evidence I've seen in various sources includes far more than the "standard" signs:

• Body in upright position, often facing shore
• Head low in water
• Unable to keep the mouth consistently above water (sometimes "bobbing" low in the water")
• Hands out to the sides pushing downwards against the water
• Unable to talk, shout, or call out
• Lack of leg movement (ie, no leg "kicking" to support the head out of water)
• Absence of expected rescue-directed actions (for instance, failure to recognize or respond to attempts at reaching the victim)
• Inability to take other life-preserving steps (behaviors are automatic at this point).

May be worth sourcing and adding these? Noting for future. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 11:29, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Update: - Frank Pia has responsed to an email and hopes to be able to reviw this article for technical accuracy, missing and useful information, and additional sources. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 23:39, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

The video linked in the article is no longer available on Youtube. "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Water Safety Films Inc. and LSA Productions, Inc.." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.1.111.78 (talk) 16:16, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

There is a short clip of the removed video available on the official site. http://www.pia-enterprises.com/retrieval.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.1.111.78 (talk) 16:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Needs more sources

I added the 'needs additional citations for verification' tag: Almost all citations are from two authors who work together, Vittone and Pia. The other citations link to inaccessible data (e.g., the Irish Times article requires an archive subscription).

As a reader, for all I know it represents a fringe theory that Vittone and Pia are advocating, but not something generally accepted. guanxi (talk) 06:37, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

If it's fringe theory, should it be presented as such or even be present on Wikipedia? WP:fringe should guide how this information is presented, as a theory of two individuals, not as a mainstream, widely accepted phenomenon that the current article makes it appear to be. See also WP:undue weight, WP:RS, WP:NOTE, WP:NOR, WP:secondary sources, secondary sources and WP:NPOV for further guidance. As the article stands now, it could easily end up being submitted for speedy deletion due to its deficiencies in WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, WP:NOTE and WP:fringe.Wzrd1 (talk) 20:29, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

The Irish Times article is behind a paywall. The only non-Pia/Vittone link is to the Red Cross training manual. If I get a chance, I'll see if I can find better references, but I've been pretty busy lately.Wzrd1 (talk) 20:39, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Even the Red Cross manual, at least the excerpts I can access via the citation's link, does not support the existence of Instinctive Drowning Response. All it supports is that people can drown in 20-60 seconds, which could happen with or without IDR. Spreading fringe theory on drowning could be dangerous; OTOH, if it's not fringe, we could do a lot of good by informing people. guanxi (talk) 18:02, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

1) I searched the web for it, and can't find any RS that doesn't come from Vittone/Pia directly or indirectly (e.g., many cite the Coast Guard article, which IIRC comes from Pia/Vittone). 2) Searching the Red Cross manual for "instinctive drowning response" (in quotes) does turn up results; the one I can read cites Pia. But still, that's a good sign. guanxi (talk) 18:13, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

That's why peer review is important. Equally important is replication of results from independent researchers. I'm aware of only a few reflexes that can be triggered by drowning, Vasovagal response and Laryngospasm. Though, Vasovagal response would tend to eliminate any swimming activity or make it halting at best. But, WP:EXCEPTIONAL says it all. Exceptional claims need exceptional sources to support said claims.Wzrd1 (talk) 18:54, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

AVIR Syndrome

Exacly the opposite is stated under Death grip, that a drowning person poses no danger to anyone as he cannot exert real force. Don't know whats right ...--195.169.141.54 (talk) 16:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

I guess it depends on the situation. If someone is in distress, panicking and flailing, they will probably grab onto you, but if somebody is exhausted and seconds from death they may not be able to. I don't really know either. There are many known cases of would-be rescuers drowned by the person they attempted to rescue, but perhaps their targets were only in distress at that point. I'd guess that since most people believe drowning involves flailing that most cases of untrained people attempting a rescue involved them seeing someone in distress - what they recognize as drowning. 73.97.36.216 (talk) 10:54, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

New article in Slate

Quite the interesting read, might have something of value for the article: [1] -- CFCF (talk · contribs · email) 07:13, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Appears to be a contradiction

It says at one point that a person undergoing this response cannot grasp a rope or any other rescue equipment. Then shortly after that it says they will grab hold of any and all solid objects nearby and therefore are a threat to would be rescuers. Can someone look into this because unless I am misunderstanding it seems to be a contradiction.72.75.218.247 (talk) 05:49, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Although the comment is old, since it's still at the bottom of the talk page and relevant (I observed the same contradiction), my understanding is that both cases occur, making it challenging for rescuers to determine when to proceed. Since drowning is imminent, one wants to react as fast as possible, and throwing floating equipment is not guaranteed to be effective (and must be done carefully). So close contact may be required, but since there are cases where recuers have also drowned, it appears recommended by some guides to be ready and wait until the subject appears out of energy. My impression is that the article currently manages to explain this. 76.10.128.192 (talk) 13:26, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Cannot be autonomic

The description does not match functions under the control of the autonomic nervous system! If all mammals can swim, all associated reflexes should be well developed in evolutionary terms. Those "instinctive" behaviors do not favor survival! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.89.198.12 (talk) 09:06, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Although young infants may be able to instinctively swim, this ability is quickly lost when higher brain functions develop, and learned swimming must then be acquired. Also, the instinctive drowning response occurs when the organism is already in a state of shock, is not necessarily related to swimming capability, and the response attempts to keep the head upright in attempt to keep the mouth out of water, to facilitate breathing and slow down drowning. Moreover, evolution is complex, so are organisms, and it is not directed, allowing some heritage to not necessarily always be immediately advantageous. Some inherited features which have been observed in humans but considered of limited utility, may have been important for past ancestors; similarly, we have lost some features which in some scenarios would appear useful to have. On the other hand, if you have a reliable source about research contradicting the article, please point to it, so the article can be improved. 76.10.128.192 (talk) 05:44, 29 January 2017 (UTC)