ausdoc, you say;
"QUOTE if you want to change the rules, you need good evidence QUOTE"
We had a suite of long running rules that permitted CVD pilots to fly and this was recently reversed. It would then seem that CAsA changed their own rules, but has refused to give the "good evidence" that the rules were flawed in the first place. Nothing I've seen cancels the historic work of Dr Pape.
Rather than blather on about what happens in NZ or anywhere else, we should perhaps acknowledge that Australians have some very good history in the fields of medical research that the rest of the World either already follow or should do.
This may be the exception to the "peculiar Australian" rules that besot us in regulatory matters. Some here would see your obstruction in deference of good medical evidence as seriously alarming, and tantamount to scaring little kids and adults, even bordering on alarming the poor bloody paying airline passengers that are subject to certain security concerns at the best of times.
On the balance of probabilities, I concur with Kharon.
Creampuff: It is well documented that 97.852% of aircraft accidents happen when the pilot has no CVD.
CONCLUSION: CVD pilots have only a 2.148% chance of ever having an accident. Again, on the balance of probabilities.
Last edited by Frank Arouet; 3rd Jul 2014 at 08:56.
Reason: And another thing!