6 ms·

A woman who can descend into the sea on one breath

20 points by arkj 5y ago

lurquer 5y ago
> Scientists once thought humans could swim to a maximum depth of 30m on a single breath. Amber Bourke has gone deeper than 70m and physiology alone can’t explain why The Men’s record is over 100m. The article makes it sound like she broke some ‘human’ record. She didn’t. Strange wording.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- bennysomething 5y ago
  This really struck me as well, the mention of the men's record is a few paragraphs in. I stopped reading afterwards as it seemed misleading
  - samokhvalov 5y ago
    Women's record is mentioned a bit earlier: > Bourke reached a depth of 73 metres – a world record – ... All the facts are correct and provided. But I agree, how they present facts looked weird to me too.
- samokhvalov 5y ago
  Women's CNF record currently is 73m (AIDA version, see https://www.aidainternational.org/WorldRecords/History/ConstantWeightWithoutFins https://www.aidainternational.org/WorldRecords/History/Const..., switch to Women). She is not WR holder, but current record is 73m and going deeper 70m without fins is close to it. Here is her WR attempt (73m CNF, red card – probably the episode described in the article) https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2285865554973859 https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2285865554973859
- aliswe 5y ago
  Agreed, and the article says some can even keep their breath for 11 minutes, but how she keeps breath for four minutes is a mystery?
  - samokhvalov 5y ago
    11 minutes is STA – static breath-holding. Of course, without movements, you can hold breath much longer. Here are current AIDA STA WR numbers: https://www.aidainternational.org/WorldRecords/History/StaticApnea https://www.aidainternational.org/WorldRecords/History/Stati... – legendary Natalia Molchanova still holds the record. If you don't know about Natalia, and her son Alexey (who currently holds several WR records, including 131 CWT mentioned in the article) I highly recommend reading about both of them. For example, here: https://www.gq.com/story/freediver-alexey-molchanov-profile https://www.gq.com/story/freediver-alexey-molchanov-profile.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- robertlagrant 5y ago
  Some elements of the Guardian audience require that sort of wording. They won't read the rest and find out she isn't a human record breaker.
jsnodlin 5y ago
- simion314 5y ago
  For me this is an interesting story, the comments sections already have some more interesting links to follow and if you can please add more that you think are even better then this article. In weekend we see more such stories on HN, and IMO we need a pause from yet another framework or toy shit in that language.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- Jansen333 5y ago
- WalterGR 5y ago
  She’s nowhere near the record From the article: “Bourke reached a depth of 73 metres – a world record – but a split second blackout once she reached the surface disqualified her.” is this here just because she’s a woman? Yes, it must be some anti-man pro-woman conspiracy. That’s the obvious explanation.
- john567 5y ago
  There's nothing wrong about writing about women doing stuff. It's the way they do it that's annoying. Write a good article. Don't bend the truth. Be honest! What she is doing is still impressive.
McHankHenry 5y ago
Tsss. I can do that too. Just not very deep!
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
reactspa 5y ago
I wonder if there are "Bajau Nomad" women who can dive for longer durations. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/bajau-sea-nomads-free-diving-spleen-science https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/bajau-sea...
avereveard 5y ago
As every other competitive diver. Can't wait for the article on the woman who can ski. What's next, women riding bycicles?
ykevinator2 5y ago

20 points by arkj 5y ago

> Scientists once thought humans could swim to a maximum depth of 30m on a single breath. Amber Bourke has gone deeper than 70m and physiology alone can’t explain why The Men’s record is over 100m. The article makes it sound like she broke some ‘human’ record. She didn’t. Strange wording.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
bennysomething 5y ago
This really struck me as well, the mention of the men's record is a few paragraphs in. I stopped reading afterwards as it seemed misleading
- samokhvalov 5y ago
  Women's record is mentioned a bit earlier: > Bourke reached a depth of 73 metres – a world record – ... All the facts are correct and provided. But I agree, how they present facts looked weird to me too.
samokhvalov 5y ago
Women's CNF record currently is 73m (AIDA version, see https://www.aidainternational.org/WorldRecords/History/ConstantWeightWithoutFins https://www.aidainternational.org/WorldRecords/History/Const..., switch to Women). She is not WR holder, but current record is 73m and going deeper 70m without fins is close to it. Here is her WR attempt (73m CNF, red card – probably the episode described in the article) https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2285865554973859 https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2285865554973859
aliswe 5y ago
Agreed, and the article says some can even keep their breath for 11 minutes, but how she keeps breath for four minutes is a mystery?
- samokhvalov 5y ago
  11 minutes is STA – static breath-holding. Of course, without movements, you can hold breath much longer. Here are current AIDA STA WR numbers: https://www.aidainternational.org/WorldRecords/History/StaticApnea https://www.aidainternational.org/WorldRecords/History/Stati... – legendary Natalia Molchanova still holds the record. If you don't know about Natalia, and her son Alexey (who currently holds several WR records, including 131 CWT mentioned in the article) I highly recommend reading about both of them. For example, here: https://www.gq.com/story/freediver-alexey-molchanov-profile https://www.gq.com/story/freediver-alexey-molchanov-profile.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
robertlagrant 5y ago
Some elements of the Guardian audience require that sort of wording. They won't read the rest and find out she isn't a human record breaker.

jsnodlin 5y ago

simion314 5y ago
For me this is an interesting story, the comments sections already have some more interesting links to follow and if you can please add more that you think are even better then this article. In weekend we see more such stories on HN, and IMO we need a pause from yet another framework or toy shit in that language.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Jansen333 5y ago
WalterGR 5y ago
She’s nowhere near the record From the article: “Bourke reached a depth of 73 metres – a world record – but a split second blackout once she reached the surface disqualified her.” is this here just because she’s a woman? Yes, it must be some anti-man pro-woman conspiracy. That’s the obvious explanation.
john567 5y ago
There's nothing wrong about writing about women doing stuff. It's the way they do it that's annoying. Write a good article. Don't bend the truth. Be honest! What she is doing is still impressive.

McHankHenry 5y ago

Tsss. I can do that too. Just not very deep!

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

reactspa 5y ago

I wonder if there are "Bajau Nomad" women who can dive for longer durations. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/bajau-sea-nomads-free-diving-spleen-science https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/bajau-sea...

avereveard 5y ago

As every other competitive diver. Can't wait for the article on the woman who can ski. What's next, women riding bycicles?

ykevinator2 5y ago