1377 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Craig's avatar

Well, this is insane. I am a DOT medical examiner not FAA and I have refused to medically clear big rig truck drivers for EKG's that the FAA will now tolerate. Not looking forward to flying.

Expand full comment
Wilhelm Tell's avatar

Don't worry; it's going to change for all industries 👉 it's medically unsafe to inject experimental stuff on pilots. They must wait for at least 1 year after the commercial public passengers have proven its safe for flying.

Expand full comment
Roman S Shapoval's avatar

Thanks for the perspective here Craig - maybe followers of Steve can pitch in and we can all start chartering flights.

Expand full comment
Debra J.'s avatar

My flying days are over Craig....

Expand full comment
Danno's avatar

Well, there's 2 pilots in the cockpit, so that reduces the risk of untimely SADS leaving a passenger flight pilotless by quite a bit. There's also the fact that planes equipped with newer autopilots can take care of keeping the plane stable during a simple landing approach, so a passenger who has spent a fair amount of time on a realistic PC-based flight simulator has a reasonably good chance of safely landing a commercial jet, provided they can establish communication with the control tower. Considering the cockpits have been heavily secured since 9-11, however, maybe the FAA should go back to the 3 man crew requirement.

Expand full comment
Kerry A's avatar

Not two pilots anymore. They've been cutting back on costs, and if you check it out you will find many routes on many airlines, which had 2x pilots pre-2021, now have only one

Expand full comment
Jwm4ever's avatar

So glad to hear the DOT didn’t change its parameters. After this article it was something I was wondering about.

Expand full comment
Vaximilian's avatar

Before, it made no difference for first degree AV Blocks, whether your PR interval was >200ms or >300 ms. Now it does and if you fall into the latter category, you now require additional tests than before.

The regulation only has become more stringent.

The definition of a first degree AV Block has not changed: PR interval >200 ms and no additional symptoms or concerns.

If you meet this definition AND your PR interval is >300 ms, you now require additional tests to be cleared.

How on earth is that bad from a safety perspective?

Expand full comment
GoodGrief-239's avatar

The gap between the change of no fly >200ms to ok to fly >200ms but <=300ms is the problem. It is my understanding that pilots were never approved >200ms. Now they will be approved up to 300ms.

Therefore it is less stringent.

Additionally there is now an allowance for further testing to accommodate approval >300.

Therefore it is less stringent.

Expand full comment
Vaximilian's avatar

That’s what the article suggests but it is not what the new regulation says.

Between 200 and 300 ms things remain essentially unchanged. Before, it only said to submit additional tests “if deemed appropriate”, no matter how long your PR interval is.

Now, it has become mandatory to submit specific tests if your PR interval is > 300 ms.

Given there were no other symptoms and concerns, you used to be good to fly, even with a PR > 300 ms.

Now, with a PR > 300 ms, you need additional diagnostics must be performed and submitted.

I concede that dropping “if deemed appropriate” for additional tests for > 200 ms and < 300 ms may be considered more lenient.

More importantly though, such tests are now mandatory and specified.

Overall, thus strikes me as more stringent when you consider that even with a PR > 300 ms, additional tests used to be at the discretion of the examiner.

Expand full comment
GoodGrief-239's avatar

Ah yes, I agree. You’re right in that I interpreted from what the article was purporting. In actuality the way you describe it is correct. And I would consider it more stringent. Thank you.

Expand full comment
Seeking Truth!'s avatar

Wow!! Thank you for keeping our roads safe!

Expand full comment
Heterodox Introvert's avatar

Thank you for your service to humanity. Very sad for your patients’ livelihoods, but they, and others on the road, will be safer re the big rigs. They, and everyone else with heart injury, discovered or not yet so, will continue to drive non commercial vehicles though. Flying, yep, frightening. The scale of this human tragedy defies belief. How will we heal from the collective trauma let alone physical ailments? Rhetorical. 😢

Expand full comment