Re: The Portable HBOT chamber

[Guest guest]

Hello,

You have asked if there is benefit in using the " Portable HBOT

chambers " . I agree with you that you will find your best answers in

asking those who actually have experience using the Mild Portable

Hyperbaric Oxygen Chambers.

As has already been established, if the pressures you seek are at

1.5ATA or lower, then this chamber is very beneficial in treating

all forms of neurological conditions including but not limited to:

Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Stroke, ADD, Hypoxia at the cellular level,

Traumatic Brain Injury, Carbon Monoxide, Crush Injuries of the head,

etc. We have many testimonials of both children and adults that give

credit to the benefits of the Mild Portable Hyperbaric Chamber.

Over the years I have heard various comments about the concerns of

the Portable HBOT chambers and the question generally asked is -

" Are the Portable Hyperbaric Chambers of benefit in treating XYZ

conditions? " [Primarily the neurological conditions].

Based on our experience of treating many children, adults and

seniors the correct answer regarding the value of using Portable

Hyperbaric Chambers in treating neurological conditions is:

A: Yes, Mild Portable Hyperbaric Chambers are of great value.

Can a Portable Hyperbaric Chamber be used in a clinic setting? - and

be profitable?

A: Yes and Yes.

Can oxygen be safely used with a portable hyperbaric chamber?

A: Yes

Training/Certification: Training and Certification can be obtained

in various ways. In your local area the Red Cross has a special

training called " Oxygen Administration " [you need to ask for this]

which will provide both training and certification on how to safely

use oxygen, oxygen tanks and oxygen masks, etc.

Training can also be obtained by taking a *Emergency Medical

Technicians Course* from a local city college or training site.

Then, a person will be trained, certified and prepared for both

emergencies and for oxygen administration on the Professional level.

Not all Portable Hyperbaric Chambers are the same - you will need to

do your research well.

Chamber benefit: Because the Mild Portable Chamber is indeed

portable, it is the only chamber that can truly be transported

easily in a car, airplane or skateboard.

Chamber limitations: Most of the Mild Portable Hyperbaric Chambers

in use today do not go above 1.5ATA of atmospheric pressure. If you

will be using pressures above this you may want to consider a

Sechrist chamber.

In our work of providing hyperbaric oxygen therapy we make use of a

Mild Portable Hyperbaric Chamber, Sechrist Chambers and Multiplace

steel chambers.

Have a nice day,

Lane , PhD

drlanescott@...

Hello everyone:

I'm new to this list. I downloaded, printed and read most of the

introductory material, including Freel's court judgements and

Harch's article in EP, which were excellent.

I have a few questions for which I am hoping to get experienced

answers.

I am trying to finance a portable HBOT chamber to be used by a local

doctor/naturopath. For $21,000 I can purchase OxyHealth's largest

1.3 ATA chamber and get it financed with monthly payments of ~$550.

This seems like a deal to me, but I'm concerned with the efficacy of

portable low pressure HBOT chambers like this one when used with

only ambient air and not pure oxygen. The doctors will be using

these chambers primarily to treat children with neurological

disorders, cerebral palsy, autism, PDD, etc. That is where

the " income stream " is going to come from to finance the continual

use of the chamber.

However, it seems to me that Harch and Neubauer both strongly

recommend 90-100% oxygen at 1.5 ATA for pediatric neurological

diseases.

Does anyone have any credible information in the form of 1) personal

testimonials or 2) journal articles that I can use to bolster my

case that low pressure, ambient air, HBOT would be beneficial to

children with neurological damage?

It would be a shame to buy the wrong chamber and put parents of

damaged children through a grueling two-month, $5,000 treatment

protocol that MAY or MAY NOT help.

If this isn't an appropriate treatment for such children, I'd like

to know up front and get to work on financing the RIGHT chamber.

Which leads to my next question: what is the RIGHT chamber for

pediatric neurological uses?

Any help in this matter is most appreciated.

PS My personal interest in this: I was heavily mercury poisoned by

my childhood dentist (19 fillings by the age of 16). I am 35 years

old and still struggle with depression, anxiety and fatigue. I find

that HBOT treatments make me feel a LOT better.

[Guest guest]

Several states (California, for example) require that hyperbaric

chambers have ASME " U " stamps to be in conformance with state law

(Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code).

No " mild " chambers conform to ASME.

[Guest guest]

>Several states (California, for example) require that hyperbaric

>chambers have ASME " U " stamps to be in conformance with state law

>(Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code).

>

>No " mild " chambers conform to ASME.

>

Steve,

It's my understanding the Oxyhealth chambers do not have ASME because

at the time they sought FDA approval the UHMS and PVHO-ASME didn't

consider anything below 2 ATA to be " Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy " so

ASME approval was waived.

The manufacturer of the Oxyhealth chamber also has a 2ATA chamber

that uses 100% oxygen. FDA mandated it be PVHO-ASME approved in 2000

or 2001, but it's never been approved because the failure point is

still unknown. At PVHO-ASME request, the manufacturer has hooked the

2 ATA chamber to a compressor and it's been inflating and deflating

24/7, 365 days a year for four or five years--with no failure.

The manufacturer has since been put on the " materials "

committee/group of PVHO-ASME because the material his nonfailed

chamber is constructed from has long surpasssed the known failure

points of acrylic and steel chambers.

The Oxyhealth chambers are constructed of the same material as the

nonfailed 2 ATA chamber--which makes the Oxyhealth portables

constructed of materials safer than traditional acrylic and steel

chambers.

Steve--has there ever been an accident with injury involving an

Oxyhealth portable chamber?

--

Freels

2948 Windfield Circle

Tucker, GA 30084-6714

770-491-6776 (phone)

404-725-4520 (cell)

815-366-7962 (fax)

mailto:dfreels@...

http://www.freelanceforum.org/df

[Guest guest]

> Steve--has there ever been an accident with injury involving an

> Oxyhealth portable chamber?

,

Not to my knowledge. But, that's not germane. Nor is FDA. Nor,

the 24/7 testing of a 2 ATA chamber for 4-5 years (but that's less

than it took for Hyperlite to make their code case).

What's germane is that if a state or locality enacts a code that

requires pressure vessels used in that jurisdiction to conform to a

specific construction standard (such as ASME, Section VIII, Div. 2)

then you can't utilize a device that doesn't hold to that standard.

In some jurisdictions there may be mechanisms to gain case by case

approval for non-conforming devices. Depending upon pressure rating

and intended usage, periodic inspection may be required, though few

hyperbaric chambers are inspected.

So, if you're in an " ASME " state, and your chamber doesn't have an

ASME stamp, or has met an alternate criteria (whether or not there

was even applicable ASME code for the device doesn't matter), it

doesn't meet code.

Previously, ASME code did not apply to <2ATA devices, but was

expanded to encompass all chambers operating above 1 ATA a few years

ago.

Will the jackbooted thugs from the local Boiler and Pressure Vessel

Inspector's office swoop down in their black helicopters and come

break down your door and pry your Solace from your cold, dead,

fingers? Probably not.

Have an accident, someone gets hurt, then it's a different story.

[Guest guest]

> > Steve--has there ever been an accident with injury involving an

>> Oxyhealth portable chamber?

>

>,

>

>Not to my knowledge. But, that's not germane. Nor is FDA.

Steve,

How could FDA not be " germane? "

Are you saying that regulations/requirements of the Food and Drug

Administration of the United States Department of Health and Human

Services regarding the use of hyperbaric chambers are irrelevant?

Please explain.

> Nor,

>the 24/7 testing of a 2 ATA chamber for 4-5 years (but that's less

>than it took for Hyperlite to make their code case).

>

>What's germane is that if a state or locality enacts a code that

>requires pressure vessels used in that jurisdiction to conform to a

>specific construction standard (such as ASME, Section VIII, Div. 2)

>then you can't utilize a device that doesn't hold to that standard.

>In some jurisdictions there may be mechanisms to gain case by case

>approval for non-conforming devices. Depending upon pressure rating

>and intended usage, periodic inspection may be required, though few

>hyperbaric chambers are inspected.

>

>So, if you're in an " ASME " state, and your chamber doesn't have an

>ASME stamp, or has met an alternate criteria (whether or not there

>was even applicable ASME code for the device doesn't matter), it

>doesn't meet code.

>

>Previously, ASME code did not apply to <2ATA devices, but was

>expanded to encompass all chambers operating above 1 ATA a few years

>ago.

>

>

>Will the jackbooted thugs from the local Boiler and Pressure Vessel

>Inspector's office swoop down in their black helicopters and come

>break down your door and pry your Solace from your cold, dead,

>fingers? Probably not.

>

>Have an accident, someone gets hurt, then it's a different story.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> " I know the plans I have for you, " declares the Lord, " plans to

>prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you a future and a

>hope. " [ 29:11]

>_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.

>Join the International Hyperbaric Medical Association

>http://www.hyperbaricmedicalassociation.org/docs/JOIN_Friends_Apr04.pdf

>

>Is HBOT at your hospital?

>http://apps.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/directories/index.cfm

>

>EPSDT decisions http://healthlaw.org/pubs/200308.epsdtdocket.html

>

>Unrestricted downloads of 50+ pdf files on HBOT efficacy

>medicaid/files/ ,

> 2/files/ and

>http://www.drneubauerhbo.com/papers.htm

>

>Download your state EPSDT program

>http://www.hcfa.gov/medicaid/stateplan/Map.asp by doing a search on

>the word " ameliorate " . State Medicaid websites

>http://www.medi-cal.ca.gov/RelSites_Oth_States.asp . Medicaid waiver

>programs:

>http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/Villa/1029/medicaid.html

>

>Find a hyperbaric clinic

>http://www.netnet.net/mums/hbolistAK-FL.htm,

>http://www.netnet.net/mums/hbolistGA-NC.htm,

>http://www.netnet.net/mums/hbolistOH-WI.htm

>

>HBOT can save billions of dollars and millions of heartaches.

>Subscribe to by sending a blank email to

>mailto:medicaid-subscribe

>

[Guest guest]

,

> How could FDA not be " germane? "

>

> Are you saying that regulations/requirements of the Food and Drug

> Administration of the United States Department of Health and Human

> Services regarding the use of hyperbaric chambers are irrelevant?

>

> Please explain.

From Dictionary.com:

" Germane: Being both pertinent and fitting "

" Irrelevant: Unrelated to the matter being considered. "

My post was specific to the question of a state or locality enacting

codes or laws pertaining to construction standards of pressure

vessels used in those jurisdictions.

Therefore, since the FDA is an agency of the US government, those

rules are neither germane or relevant to the question at hand, which

was specific to state or local requirements for chambers to hold an

ASME " U " stamp. Unless a state or locality cites conformance to FDA

rules, those rules are irrelevant within the scope of the discussion.

Nowhere have I stated that regulations/requirements of the FDA

regarding the manufacturing or use of hyperbaric chambers are

irrelevant. They are quite relevant, as are ASME/PVHO and NFPA, and

were promulgated for good reason.

[Guest guest]

> > Steve--has there ever been an accident with injury involving an

>> Oxyhealth portable chamber?

>

>,

>

>Not to my knowledge. But, that's not germane. Nor is FDA. Nor,

>the 24/7 testing of a 2 ATA chamber for 4-5 years (but that's less

>than it took for Hyperlite to make their code case).

>

>What's germane is that if a state or locality enacts a code that

>requires pressure vessels used in that jurisdiction to conform to a

>specific construction standard (such as ASME, Section VIII, Div. 2)

>then you can't utilize a device that doesn't hold to that standard.

>In some jurisdictions there may be mechanisms to gain case by case

>approval for non-conforming devices. Depending upon pressure rating

>and intended usage, periodic inspection may be required, though few

>hyperbaric chambers are inspected.

>

>So, if you're in an " ASME " state, and your chamber doesn't have an

>ASME stamp, or has met an alternate criteria (whether or not there

>was even applicable ASME code for the device doesn't matter), it

>doesn't meet code.

>

>Previously, ASME code did not apply to <2ATA devices, but was

>expanded to encompass all chambers operating above 1 ATA a few years

>ago.

>

>Will the jackbooted thugs from the local Boiler and Pressure Vessel

>Inspector's office swoop down in their black helicopters and come

>break down your door and pry your Solace from your cold, dead,

>fingers? Probably not.

>

>Have an accident, someone gets hurt, then it's a different story.

Steve,

How does the state of California define a " pressure vessel? "

How do other states and localities that require an ASME stamp define

a " pressure vessel? "

>

>Previously, ASME code did not apply to <2ATA devices, but was

>expanded to encompass all chambers operating above 1 ATA a few years

>ago.

>

Why did the ASME " expand " the range to include anything operating above 1 ATA?

Was there some sort of danger that arose that was not evident before?

Thanks.

--

Freels

2948 Windfield Circle

Tucker, GA 30084-6714

770-491-6776 (phone)

404-725-4520 (cell)

815-366-7962 (fax)

mailto:dfreels@...

http://www.freelanceforum.org/df

[Guest guest]

> > Steve--has there ever been an accident with injury involving an

>> Oxyhealth portable chamber?

>

>,

>

>Not to my knowledge. But, that's not germane. Nor is FDA. Nor,

>the 24/7 testing of a 2 ATA chamber for 4-5 years (but that's less

>than it took for Hyperlite to make their code case).

>

>What's germane is that if a state or locality enacts a code that

>requires pressure vessels used in that jurisdiction to conform to a

>specific construction standard (such as ASME, Section VIII, Div. 2)

>then you can't utilize a device that doesn't hold to that standard.

>In some jurisdictions there may be mechanisms to gain case by case

>approval for non-conforming devices. Depending upon pressure rating

>and intended usage, periodic inspection may be required, though few

>hyperbaric chambers are inspected.

>

>So, if you're in an " ASME " state, and your chamber doesn't have an

>ASME stamp, or has met an alternate criteria (whether or not there

>was even applicable ASME code for the device doesn't matter), it

>doesn't meet code.

>

>Previously, ASME code did not apply to <2ATA devices, but was

>expanded to encompass all chambers operating above 1 ATA a few years

>ago.

>

>Will the jackbooted thugs from the local Boiler and Pressure Vessel

>Inspector's office swoop down in their black helicopters and come

>break down your door and pry your Solace from your cold, dead,

>fingers? Probably not.

>

>Have an accident, someone gets hurt, then it's a different story.

Steve,

How does the state of California define a " pressure vessel? "

How do other states and localities that require an ASME stamp define

a " pressure vessel? "

>

>Previously, ASME code did not apply to <2ATA devices, but was

>expanded to encompass all chambers operating above 1 ATA a few years

>ago.

>

Why did the ASME " expand " the range to include anything operating above 1 ATA?

Was there some sort of danger that arose that was not evident before?

Thanks.

--

Freels

2948 Windfield Circle

Tucker, GA 30084-6714

770-491-6776 (phone)

404-725-4520 (cell)

815-366-7962 (fax)

mailto:dfreels@...

http://www.freelanceforum.org/df

[Guest guest]

> How does the state of California define a " pressure vessel? "

In the California Code of Regulations, Section 8, Unfired Pressure

Vessels Safety Orders

http://www.dir.ca.gov/Title8/453.html

" Pressure Vessel: An unfired container, including cylinders, used

for the storage or accumulation of any gas or liquid under pressure.

This definition is not intended to include pressure chambers that

are integral parts of such devices as pumps, motors, engines,

clothes presses, flatwork ironers, tire molds, etc., where the

pressure-containing part is subjected to severe mechanical stresses. "

> How do other states and localities that require an ASME stamp

define

> a " pressure vessel? "

>

Virginia: " " Pressure vessel " means a vessel in which the pressure is

obtained from an external source, or by the application of heat from

an indirect source, or from a direct source, other than those

boilers defined in Part I (16VAC25-50-10 et seq.) of this chapter. "

or see Wisconsin definition at

http://www.legis.state.wi.us/rsb/code/comm/comm041.pdf, also note

that COMM 41.42 (3) specifically requires human occupied chambers to

comply with ASME PVHO-1 (though they do allow other pressure vessels

to comply with other accepted standards, [see {1} in the same

section] such an execption is not allowed for human-occupied

chambers.

You can look up the rest. Just Google " boiler and pressure vessel

code "

> Why did the ASME " expand " the range to include anything operating

above 1 ATA? Was there some sort of danger that arose that was not

evident before?

Don't know, but if I was to make a conjecture, it would be because

there was concern for the safety of end users posed by use of non-

conforming chambers. Feel free to pose that question to ASME.