Effects of the storage conditions on the stability of natural and synthetic cannabis in biological matrices for forensic toxicology analysis: An update from the literature

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Canoeing and Kayaking (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canoeing and Kayaking, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Canoeing and KayakingWikipedia:WikiProject Canoeing and KayakingTemplate:WikiProject Canoeing and KayakingCanoeing and Kayaking articles Fisheries and Fishing Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

My contributions to this article are taken from the node I wrote (of the same name) on Everything2. My homenode is here.

I made some corrections in this update. The previous version was incorrect in stating that survival suits are designated as PFDs by the USCG, and also misclassified type 5 PFDs as inflatables only.

-Etoile

This page lumps together most flotation devices as "lifejackets". As I understand it, this term should only be used when the device in question has been proven to turn an unconscious wearer face-up, plus some other requirements. Most other things, particularly the foam vests used for dinghy sailing, waterskiing, etc, are "bouyancy aids". PeteVerdon 22:39, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I very much agree with PeteVerdon and the two are very different. Perhaps someone could help out creating a different article? I would do it but I am flat out getting the Kayaking WikiProject on the way. Bennyboyz3000 10:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually from what I have been reading in various forums, the USCG is coming around to the viewpoint that PFDs should be called lifejackets again if for no reason than name recognition. As an example, see the table at http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/mse4/mse4home.htm where PFDs are in parenthesis and Life jacket is the main item.--- Safemariner 21:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You'll find there is sometimes confusion between European standards and US standards. Under CE approval there are clearer classifications of what a PFD, Lifejacket, and buoyancy aide are. Europe does have a standard for all of these. In this section a Type III is listed as a "buoyancy aide" the Underwriters Laboratory (UL), USCG, and Code of Federal Regulations (CFR's) do not use buoyancy aide in any of their vocabulary and no standard exists for buoyancy aides. Traditionally a Type III is referred to for Recreational use. In a nutshell, a lifejacket in this section should refer to anything that holds the mark of the appropriate approval body specifying its intended use. Floattech 20:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard an urban legend that the "old" lifejackets made of cork or kapok used to lose buoyancy after being immersed in water for a long (many hours?) period of time? Can anyone confirm or deny this? Mieciu K 14:08, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually almost all old life jackets eventually lose their bouyancy, even if not immersed in water. Foam disintegrates and becomes useless also. --- Safemariner 03:06, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recently, I was leading on a camp in Bairnsdale, Victoria, not too far from Melbourne. We went into the canoe, and the leaders in charge stressed that we not tell the kids to put their "life jackets on", but to put their "PFD's on, or their BV's, because apparently they're not allowed to call them "life jackets" anymore, becuase they dont have a 100% chance of saving your life.. They do however have a 100% chance of keeping you floating, or buoyant.. Anyone know about this outside Victoria? --Deon555^talk_Review 03:23, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am an Australian (Melbourne bred) living in New Zealand. I can tell you that the PFDs in question must have been, specifically, Buoyancy aids, made for kayaking or canoeing. I am a whitewater kayaking instructor and all instructors will stress their difference for safety reasons. They will not save your life neither should they be relied on absolutely to keep one afloat, hence the name "Buoyancy aid" (i.e they are to aid buoyancy, not ensure it - they DO NOT have a 100% chance of keeping you bouyant). Bennyboyz3000 10:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing is 100% except death and taxes and every sane person knows this. The Type I vests are intended to "usually" turn an unconscious person face up. I would say "usually" means approximately greater than 50% of the time for people with ordinary proportions and weight. Whether or not they will remain face up is unknown. Whether or not this includes extreme water conditions is unknown. Even wearing scuba gear cannot guarantee 100%. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.149.142.199 (talk • contribs) 21:17, 20 March 2007

We (in Qld) were told that only 'Type 1' PFDs could be called lifejackets (they have a collar to support the wearer's head, to keep it above water when unconscious, and use bright colours). 'Type 2' PFDs are usually used when canoeing / sailing away from the coast.

"Only the PFD Type 1 is acceptable as a life jacket – Types 2 and 3 are buoyancy vests and are intended for sports such as sailing and water skiing." [1]

--RobBrisbane (talk) 06:52, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Australia has traditionally used types 1-3, but are now changing to AS4758, using ratings from 50S (buoyancy garment) to 150 (high performance life jacket, suitable for offshore). NMSC

Where are the existing ratings mentioned in the article (50N - 275N) from? An international standard? the USA? The article should clarify this, and list alternate rating systems used.

--RobBrisbane (talk) 07:02, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just finished reading a Sherlock Holmes story, the Case of the Bruce-Partington Plans. A character in the story uses a weapon called a "life-preserver" to kill someone; from context it seems likely to mean a short club or billy stick of some sort, but might also be a sap. this should probably be researched, and the life preserver redirect changed to a disambig. -- Akb4 01:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did James F. Boyle do it or Andrew Toti do it? It says "The B-4 was invented by James F. Boyle." and then goes on to say "Andrew Toti related that his mother was the inspiration for the invention of the Mae West life vest."

So who invented it first? It is kind of confusing.

Reply: Peter Markus actually did as the referenced two articles at the bottom indicate, one from the New York Times. But someone keeps undoing my edits correcting this. (C22) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.155.94.63 (talk) 20:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Germans think it was Johann Bachstrom 1741.

German.Knowitall (talk) 16:06, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever did it, please do not remove tags if they are true without discussion. --UltraMagnus (talk) 08:42, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Better picture of child's life vest needed to show understrap, and headrest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Impassissum (talk • contribs) 22:19, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Found the article Lifebuoy. Merge? 63.87.189.17 (talk) 20:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure that is going to add clarity. That article will need expansion though. Argybargybob (talk) 14:30, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering whether a Buoyancy Compensation Device could be used to replace lifejackets. Not sure whether BCD's have the same float strength and durability as lifejackets. Also not sure whether they allow a person to attain a suitable hight above the water surface (as divers generally stay below the water surface, eg nose just below it) and whether they allow to keep a person on the back when fully blown up. Also, only a small bottle (pony) can be used. However if possible, could allow to reduce costs as a lifejacket is always required on a vessel anyhow, thus eliminating double costs. KVDP (talk) 14:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are very compact and reliable self-rescuers for experienced swimmers and children on the neck, which inflate when threatened and prevent a person from drowning. The head remains afloat. The only ones are industrially manufactured in South Korea and are called Helpers. Helper - a compact Personal flotation device for providing first aid to a swimmer in case of a drowning threat. https://www.helper100.com/about-helper/ Vismutster (talk) 19:33, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This section is written mainly as a focus for one type of pet pfd and talks too much about bulldogs. It is almost blatant advertising and needs a re-write or maybe just deletion. PieBeast (talk) 03:23, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to propose that the article on the lifejacket be merged into this one. The two are essentially the same thing, and their text has so much overlap that having two separate articles seems redundant. The lifejacket article has information on codes and regulations in the US and UK for different jackets which might be worth retaining, but other than that, this article is more thorough than that one and the lifejacket article contains nothing that this article does not. KDS4444^Talk 13:52, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And on second read of the lifejacket article, the lists of jacket types and Coast Guard codes for them is neither interesting nor terribly useful (and none of it is sourced). A complete redirect might be a better idea than any attempt at a merge. KDS4444^Talk 18:53, 13 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All three are used and what is the best option? Why? Rauterkus (talk) 12:39, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The correct term used by the US Coast Guard is Personal Flotation Device. I recommend using that correct terminology. If you are trying the create a metaphor for something else to create an allusion in a cute book title, then I recommend using the spelling used in what ever dictionary you used when proof-reading your text. If you didn't use a dictionary in writing your book, then you are on your own.

Taram (talk) 19:30, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Personal flotation device. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080224033022/http://www.jhsum.org/asp_pages/collections_recent_treasures.asp to http://www.jhsum.org/asp_pages/collections_recent_treasures.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050305213105/http://www.tc.gc.ca/acts-regulations/GENERAL/C/CSA/regulations/070/csa076/csa76.html to http://www.tc.gc.ca/acts-regulations/GENERAL/C/CSA/regulations/070/csa076/csa76.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:27, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The current lead "Personal Flotation Device.. also known as.. life jacket" seems to be should be reworded as "which includes a life jacket".

As a case in point, in this image (used as top image) I don't see any life jackets, just swim rings. The rings might be called "devices" but hardly count as "jackets". --Kiyoweap (talk) 10:33, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs to be completely redone, it's confusing, disorganized and vague; I have troubleing belive it is even B class. There is a article called Buoyancy aid with overlapping information. And life preserves are talked about in this article (and even are the main picture) even though nobody considers them a form PFD and they have there own article. Same goes for Survival suit and immersion suites which have there own article and information about Buoyancy compensator (diving) which also have there own article. There seems to be a lot of confusion over what a Life jacket is vs a PFD that needs to be cleared up.

In Canada a Life jacket is officially considered any Buoyancy Aid that intends to keep one's head out of the water when unconscious. This can either be the keyhole/Buoyant vest design with flotation only on the front and a strap around the back or a full vest with head support such a rafting life jacket or small vessel life jacket. Anything that will not keep head of a unconscious individual out of the water is considered a PFD and refers to all other worn flotation devices. A important thing to note is that in this definition a life jacket is not a type of PFD, (unlike this article tries to state), but rather a separate type of flotation device. The U.S definition say a type I flotation device is a lifejacket while and all other types are PFD's including Type II buoyant vests, (which are considered lifejackets in Canada). Generally in both countries surveil and Immersion suites are considered a secret type of flotation device, just like buoyancy compensators. A life ring/life preserver is not a PFD in any definition and already has it's own article. For this reason all information alluding to Life Preservers should not be included in this article what so ever, the picture at the top with the life per-sever will need to be replaced. The term Buoyancy Aid, which is another article relating to only what Canadians would call a PFD exist as well and had significant overlap. I think that a Buoyancy Aid is anything that keeps a swimmer afloat including both Life jackets and PFDs, but also things like flutter boards, water wings, pool rings and life preservers.

Since the Canadian definition is the clearest I think that should be the one used. Buoyant vests are in the grey area between life jackets (Canadian definition) and PFD's (American Definition) and therfore should be mentioned in both articles.

In my opinion all the information related to this subject matter should be arranged like this

-This article should keep it's title Personal Flotation Device, but all information surrounding life jackets should be transferred to a new article, all information about immersion suites should be transferred to the immersion suite article and information surrounding life preservers should be removed.

-A new article titled life jacket should be created to contain the information related specifically to that subject. Since Buoyancy Compensators and Immersion suites have there own article, it makes sense for life jackets to have there own as well.

-The current article Buoyancy aid should be keep it's title, but refer to to Lifejackets, PFD's, Life Rings, Buoyancy Compensators and any other device that qualifies as a Buoyancy Aid including objects such as flutter boards. A buoyancy Aid id anything that keeps a swimmer afloat.

If is is decided that a new separate life jacket article is not created, I still propose the movement of immersion suite, boyancy compensator and lifebuoy information to there respective articles since they are not PFDs and completely change the buoyancy aid article — Preceding unsigned comment added by IDrive201 (talk • contribs) 05:37, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My first thought is, don't do anything until there has been a thorough discussion with experienced editors. My second is that you also have to look beyond North America, and if there are differences in terminology, this all needs to be included in the article and cited. I don't have time to look at this right now, but here are a few Australian ones, some of which refer to other countries' standards:[2], [3], [4]. Not necessarily the best sources, but they lay out the standards and terminology in this part of the world. (And please remember to sign your comments comments with four tildes.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 09:13, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For such a big change, it may be worthwhile creating the new version of articles in the Draft namespace? — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 09:23, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that such a major edit or rearrangement should first be thoroughly discussed. However I am wondering if there is a general recognition that information on this subject matter needs a major reorganization. So much information is missing and unclear, while information about other Flotation devices seems to have gotten mixed in.

According to the Oxford dictionary the official definitions are what follows

A Lifejacket is : a sleeveless buoyant or inflatable jacket for keeping a person afloat in water. A PFD is : a personal flotation device, a life jacket or similar buoyancy aid. A Buoyancy Aid : is a sleeveless jacket lined with buoyant material, worn for water sports. A Flotation Device is : an object used to provide or maintain buoyancy in water: A Life Belt : a ring of buoyant or inflatable material used to help a person who has fallen into water to stay afloat. A Life ring/buoy is another term for Life Belt.

However every country seems to have it’s own way of describing what a life jacket is vs a PFD or Buoyancy Aid. For example in Canada a life jacket is different from a PFD while according to Oxford definition a life jacket is a type of PFD. Another example of such confusing is that in Canada, the term Buoyancy Aid is never used.

Based on that I think PFD is the general term for what this article is describing and I will agree to that definition rather than the Canadian terminology. However just as this article has links to the different types of PFD’s, such as buoyancy aids, survival suites and Buoyancy compensators, I believe life jackets should have it’s own new article as a type of PFD.

Therefore this was I propose should be done.

This article needs minor rewording to be less confusing and needs to explain that the definitions vary from country to country. It should also provide the USCG classification I-V system as a example.

A new article titled Life Jacket (two words is official), should be created to deal specifically with that type of PFD.

Repetitive information should be cut back, while more unique detail is added to articles such as Buoyancy Aid.

Better pictures for all the articles on this subject matter.

Articles about submarine escape devices should be linked in a organized manner rather than being mixed with the survival suite section.

A new possible article and section about Buoyant vest (which are between lifejackets and PFD’s), could also be considered at a later time

A life ring/preserver qualifies as a flotation device, but not a Persona Flotation Device according to the Oxford definition. A flotation device is anything that helps keep somebody afloat such as a fluter board or swim ring. While a PFD specifically has to be like a lifejacket or Buoyancy Aid according to the definition. It also not in the common vocabulary of Canada or the U.S.A to refer to life rings as PFDs. For this reason the picture at the top of the article showing life buoys or "flotation devices", should be changed immediately to something that shows “Personal Flotation Devices” matching the name of the article.

Any thoughts? -IDrive201

— Preceding unsigned comment added by IDrive201 (talk • contribs) 02:32, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply] 

draft caption text: "An inflatable lifejacket inflated using a self-contained carbon dioxide cartridge".

Xyxyzyz (talk) 12:20, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://whitewaterology.com/is-white-water-rafting-dangerous-part-3/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Tuckertwo (talk) 09:14, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]