Florida Will Sue...

[jfunk138]

1 minute ago, jtwind said:

See, that's where you got it wrong.  You HAVE to watch an episode of Jude Judy.

Sounds exactly like the logic around masks.  Cases go up... "people didn't wear masks", cases go down... "masks worked".  Magic just like Judge Judy. 

 

I'm not saying ending the mask mandates is directly responsible for drops in cases.  But the correlation is just as weak whether you believe they are "working" or "actively harmful".  It's also possible, just like Judge Judy, they don't do either and are just superstition.

 

[jfunk138]

7 minutes ago, jtwind said:

 

The real reason cases in Texas went down during that period was Spring Break.  We need more Spring Breaks!

 

OK.  I'll stop.

You do realize you could have just said: correlation does not mean causation.  

To which I would counter, causation without correlation while not impossible is exceedingly unlikely.

Edited March 31, 2021 by jfunk138

[jtwind]

4 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

You do realize you could have just said: correlation does not mean causation.  

To which I would counter, causation without correlation while not impossible is exceedingly unlikely.

 

Great.  Tell me what's wrong with concluding that Texas Spring Break caused cases in Texas to go down?

[jfunk138]

Just now, jtwind said:

 

Great.  Tell me what's wrong with concluding that Texas Spring Break caused cases in Texas to go down?

It's not necessarily wrong, it is correlated.  But there's not enough data to say its the "cause".

[jtwind]

4 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

It's not necessarily wrong, it is correlated.  But there's not enough data to say its the "cause".

So every health agency with any kind of accountability, around the world, saying that masks help reduce the spread of the virus isn't enough data?  That's rich. 

Edited March 31, 2021 by jtwind

[jfunk138]

Just now, jtwind said:

So every health agency with any kind of accountability, around the world, saying that masks help spread the virus isn't enough data?  That's rich. 

Every health agency?  Not the Swedish.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sweden-cases/sweden-says-no-need-for-face-masks-as-covid-19-deaths-top-7000-idUSKBN28D1TH

And no it's not data.  Data would be the result of the Danish mask RCT.  Which concluded that masks do not protect the wearer.  We still have no RCT data on masks as source control for Covid.

[broberts]

On 3/27/2021 at 8:21 AM, phoneman69 said:

I hope they go threw with the suit. It sure looks like the only way we will be able to cruise this summer. ...

 

The quickest way to get cruising restarted is to convince everyone you know to get a vaccination as soon as possible. It would also help to encourage them to properly wear masks where appropriate, maintain proper distancing and keep public interaction to a minimum.

 

29 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

Sounds exactly like the logic around masks.  Cases go up... "people didn't wear masks", cases go down... "masks worked".  Magic just like Judge Judy. 

 

I'm not saying ending the mask mandates is directly responsible for drops in cases.  But the correlation is just as weak whether you believe they are "working" or "actively harmful".  It's also possible, just like Judge Judy, they don't do either and are just superstition.

 

 

There is no correlation unless you can show that other factors are not at play.

[jfunk138]

Just now, broberts said:

 

The quickest way to get cruising restarted is to convince everyone you know to get a vaccination as soon as possible. It would also help to encourage them to properly wear masks where appropriate, maintain proper distancing and keep public interaction to a minimum.

 

 

There is no correlation unless you can show that other factors are not at play.

You are confusing correlation with causation.  A correlation might very well have other factors in play.

Proving causation requires controlling the "other factors"

[donaldsc]

27 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

You are confusing correlation with causation.  A correlation might very well have other factors in play.

Proving causation requires controlling the "other factors"

 

Check out this site on very strange spurious correlations - https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations.

 

DON

[broberts]

1 hour ago, jfunk138 said:

You are confusing correlation with causation.  A correlation might very well have other factors in play.

Proving causation requires controlling the "other factors"

 

I expressed myself poorly. What i was trying to say is that the two are not related, regardless of the coincidences.

[ldubs]

32 minutes ago, donaldsc said:

 

Check out this site on very strange spurious correlations - https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations.

 

DON

 

This was a fun read, thanks for sharing.   But I have to say the number of people who die from getting tangled in their bedsheets is kind of a shocker to me.    

 

 

[ilikeanswers]

Some people clearly live very charmed lives that they can spend all day arguing why masks don't stop respiratory illnesses🙄. 

 

The untold origin story of the N95 Mask

[jfunk138]

6 hours ago, broberts said:

 

I expressed myself poorly. What i was trying to say is that the two are not related, regardless of the coincidences.

I agree, they are not related.  

However, the commentary at the time the mandates were lifted was claiming that these "neanderthals" would see more cases and deaths directly because of the changes.

[jfunk138]

2 hours ago, ilikeanswers said:

Some people clearly live very charmed lives that they can spend all day arguing why masks don't stop respiratory illnesses🙄. 

 

The untold origin story of the N95 Mask

Some people clearly live very charmed lives where they link to stories about N95's while simultaneously claiming that random pieces of cloth and flimsy blue things with warnings on the box saying they "Does not provide protection against Covid-19" are effective against respiratory illnesses.

[Joebucks]

11 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

Do not try to trivialize COVID by comparing it with the flu.  Those “...tens of thousands...” two or three “tens”  (usually twenty to thirty thousand -  with one year in the past sixty approaching sixty thousand) are in no way comparable to the 55 “...tens of of thousands...” SO FAR in this pandemic.

 

And the flu was somewhat “understood” - but a majority of the US population did not get the vaccines which were available.

 

This is a different situation - people failing to understand that are perpetuating the toll. 

 

When COVID numbers are said to be small in the grand scheme of things "every life matters"

 

When the flu deaths are brought up, the every life matters goes away and the large scale of COVID death is brought up

 

Obviously, there are differences between the two. Anyone can see that. There are clear double-standards that just recently got invented. We use whichever one we want to get our point across. A fraction of a percent is not a small number, but a quarter of that number, is not an issue.

[cruisemom42]

22 hours ago, jfunk138 said:

Citing an arbitrary high number is not useful to the discussion. 

 

If you want to talk about large numbers how about?
-685 million norovirus cases per year? 
-200,000 norovirus deaths per year?

And that's every year, not just one particular year.  We seem to have a "passive acceptance" of norovirus...

 

I just wanted to come back to and clarify one thing above that I did not have time to look at yesterday.

 

If you want to talk comparisons, you have to talk about the same parameters.

 

While there may be ~200,000 norovirus deaths annually WORLDWIDE due to foodborne illness, not ALL of them are due to norovirus. The figure includes other causes including E. coli, salmonella, and campylobacter.

 

Importantly, for purposes of comparison, there are only about 900 deaths in the US from norovirus.

 

Burden of Norovirus Illness in the U.S. | CDC

 

Now set that 900 against more than half a million COVID-19 deaths. It's just not in the same ballpark.

 

Edited March 31, 2021 by cruisemom42

[ilikeanswers]

2 hours ago, jfunk138 said:

Some people clearly live very charmed lives where they link to stories about N95's while simultaneously claiming that random pieces of cloth and flimsy blue things with warnings on the box saying they "Does not provide protection against Covid-19" are effective against respiratory illnesses.

 

Huh😳?༼ ºل͟º ༽ 😂

Edited March 31, 2021 by ilikeanswers

[Globehoppers]

On 3/27/2021 at 9:10 AM, Hlitner said:

Threatening to sue is a jump away from actually filing a Federal Law suit.  But moving a case through the Federal courts can be a very time consuming exercise often measured in years rather then days.  So lets consider what might happen.  Florida and the CLIA file a joint motion asking for an injunction vacating the incomplete "framework" and allowing the cruise industry to resume operations.  The Federal Judge would then, at best, give the CDC a period of time (at least a month) to respond to the motion.   Many Federal Judges do their best to be a referee in this sort of thing so the Judge so there would be a delay while the Judge considered both sides and probably tried to get the matter resolved behind closed doors ("lets work this out).   Eventually, after many weeks or months the Judge might find in favor of one of the parties and then the other party could simply appeal to the Court of Appeals, etc. etc.   Meanwhile the clock continues to tick.

 

So let us just hope that Dr. Wollensky, now being aware there is an issue, will get her agency to work out a deal with the cruise industry.  This is a better solution, could save a lot of time. and might get the ships cruising again without wasting many months working through the legal process.  I do think the cruise lines have a plan (apparently there have been some quiet talks between various industry folks and the CDC) and it would likely look something like the restarts happening out of Nassau and St Maarten.   It has become obvious that there is some internal resistance, within the CDC, about allowing cruises to resume.  Dr. Wollensky is the one person who has both the power and opportunity to mitigate this "resistance" and light a fire under some butts within her agency.

 

Hank

 

 

Much better solution is to have the cruise companies follow CDC guidance and the Conditional Sail Order which set the path to return to cruising.  Cruise lines have been negligent in responding to the CSO and must be held responsible for their own intransigence.

[Hlitner]

5 minutes ago, Globehoppers said:

Much better solution is to have the cruise companies follow CDC guidance and the Conditional Sail Order which set the path to return to cruising.  Cruise lines have been negligent in responding to the CSO and must be held responsible for their own intransigence.

You sound like a propaganda machine for the CDC.  So lets be very clear, since the CDC has neglected to issue any technical guidelines for phase 2 of their CSO there is no to path to the return to cruising.  The ball has been in the CDC's court since November and as of now they have dropped that ball into a very deep hole.     Perhaps you might be better enlightened to read this Travel Weekly article published back in January....and nothing has changed since that publication:

Is the CDC dragging its feet when it comes to cruising?: Travel Weekly

 

So what you have is just what you want, the cruise lines are following the CDC CSO and will not be using US Ports for any cruises in the near-future (and even the distant future is in question).  So the cruise lines are now following the only path open to them which is to look for new embarkation ports outside the USA.

 

Hank

 

[Globehoppers]

15 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

I totally disagree with you.  First of all, Florida is very diversified.  Agriculture, international trade, and aerospace are huge industries in Florida.  However, Florida's number 1 industry is tourism, and rightfully so.  It generates over 100 billion dollars annually.  It's a big reason why residents don't have to pay a state income tax and sales tax remains relatively low.  Floridians need tourism, which includes cruising, for their economy to continue thriving it way it does.  There's nothing wrong with that.

 

Floridians don't "need" cruising.  Cruising is a relatively new phenomena as is Florida as a cruise port.  Floridians need sanity and safety in returning to "normal" or to a new normal following the end of the pandemic.  It is not close to an end.  Medical and scientific guidance needs to be followed.  Super spreader events need to stop.  People need to get vaccinated against COVID-19.  Only then can things like cruising be safely restarted.  The federal government stopped airlines from flying the 737Max because it wasn't safe.  Same applies to cruising.

[Globehoppers]

35 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

You sound like a propaganda machine for the CDC.  So lets be very clear, since the CDC has neglected to issue any technical guidelines for phase 2 of their CSO there is no to path to the return to cruising.  The ball has been in the CDC's court since November and as of now they have dropped that ball into a very deep hole.     Perhaps you might be better enlightened to read this Travel Weekly article published back in January....and nothing has changed since that publication:

Is the CDC dragging its feet when it comes to cruising?: Travel Weekly

 

So what you have is just what you want, the cruise lines are following the CDC CSO and will not be using US Ports for any cruises in the near-future (and even the distant future is in question).  So the cruise lines are now following the only path open to them which is to look for new embarkation ports outside the USA.

 

Hank

 

Quoting a travel magazine that lives off selling fantasy to people who wish to travel (FYI I have traveled the world) is disingenuous.  

 

Welcome a link showing how cruise lines have achieved all the points laid out on the CSO.  And remember, the CSO itself is the product of collaboration between CRG and NRL with the CDC.  If they cannot even follow their own recommendations there is little hope they will follow guidance enhancing the safety of cruise passengers.  The onus is on the cruise lines to prove they can safely welcome guests.  Its like the 737Max which was grounded (by the US and other countries) until Boeing fixed the problems and it was certified safe to fly.  

[broberts]

1 hour ago, Hlitner said:

You sound like a propaganda machine for the CDC.  So lets be very clear, since the CDC has neglected to issue any technical guidelines for phase 2 of their CSO there is no to path to the return to cruising.  The ball has been in the CDC's court since November and as of now they have dropped that ball into a very deep hole.     Perhaps you might be better enlightened to read this Travel Weekly article published back in January....and nothing has changed since that publication:

Is the CDC dragging its feet when it comes to cruising?: Travel Weekly

 

So what you have is just what you want, the cruise lines are following the CDC CSO and will not be using US Ports for any cruises in the near-future (and even the distant future is in question).  So the cruise lines are now following the only path open to them which is to look for new embarkation ports outside the USA.

 

Hank

 

 

The cruise industry doesn't seem that concerned about the state of the CSO. 

 

[Cruzaholic41]

3 hours ago, Globehoppers said:

Floridians don't "need" cruising.
<snip>

 The federal government stopped airlines from flying the 737Max because it wasn't safe.  Same applies to cruising.

That’s a terrible example. Grounding 1 type of plane does not compare to an entire industry getting shut down. 
 

I’m a Floridian. I’m a former partner of a large cruise travel agency. I and many people I know “need” cruising. So you’re also wrong in that regard. 

[SelectSys]

7 minutes ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

I and many people I know “need” cruising. So you’re also wrong in that regard. 

Reminds me of that old joke attributed to Harry Truman  - What's the difference between a recession and a depression?  A recession is when someone else loses their job and a depression is when you lose your job.  Substitute business for job as well.

[Globehoppers]

11 minutes ago, Cruzaholic41 said:

That’s a terrible example. Grounding 1 type of plane does not compare to an entire industry getting shut down. 
 

I’m a Floridian. I’m a former partner of a large cruise travel agency. I and many people I know “need” cruising. So you’re also wrong in that regard. 

I live in Florida, as well.  Have no fiduciary connection to travel agencies or the cruise industry.  People "need" food, shelter, etc.  We have gone over a year since cruising stopped do to what many consider non-US cruise lines callous safety and security treatment and behavior towards customers.  I have been "cruising" since what I remember as 1949 and transiting the Atlantic from NYC to Rotterdam.  Even before that, crossing the eastern Pacific Hawaii (where I was born) to San Francisco.  Thirty years in the US Navy, many at sea on "big grey boats" to a include a circumnavigation of the world on USS Enterprise.  The sea is in my blood, so to speak.  However, we have lived the past 14 months without "cruising" and we disembarked Reflection on 2 March just as the pandemic was starting.  We were very fortunate to not have caught COVID-19.  I can relish life without "cruising."

 

The example is very valid.  The 737Max was grounded by the US and other national aviation organizations do to safety reasons.  Cruising was stopped by the US and other countries do to safety and health reasons.  The countries "grounding" cruising are going through critical review processes to insure its safe in the future for their citizens to cruise and safe for the cruise lines to resume operations.  Once that determination has been achieved, cruising will return although likely a bit different than the mass market experience pre-pandemic.

 

We have to let the the government, the many different governments involved, health and safety professionals do their jobs to insure the safety of their citizens.  The process we are in right now.  It would benefit all of us if people followed proper protocols and used PPE instead of partying during what becomes super spreader events.

 

As I learned during my 30 years in the Navy, safety comes first.  We need to let the experts do their jobs and refrain from insinuating that they are only interested in raining on our cruising parade.