Is it time to restart cruising from US Ports and join the UK, Europe, Asia and the Caribbean?

[ldubs]

3 hours ago, Mary229 said:

 

there is a broad spectrum of educational levels in our country and there are many whose first language is not English.    We need to vaccinate them all including the semi-literate, the highly educated and the second language speakers

 

I'm still not convinced that these are significant reasons folks are not getting the message.  

[Mary229]

21 minutes ago, ldubs said:

 

I'm still not convinced that these are significant reasons folks are not getting the message.  

I think they are getting the message but just like people here on this forum they are getting mixed messages that muddy the waters.    I think the message has to be straightforward “get the vaccine to protect yourself and the community”.  Not that you might still be contagious or might need a booster, enough with the mights and the  outlier possibilities. Discuss those when they are knowns not suppositions.     For those that want to delve deeper by all means, I enjoy a good statistical read myself but that should not be the headliner 

[Knights on the Beach]

7 hours ago, Mary229 said:

@cruisemom2  I just came away from the FDA website.  Here is a link to their vaccine page addressed to the consumer.  It is clear and unambiguous.  It does not state what they don't know, it does urge caution and gives great reasons for vaccinating.  It is not muddled which I think provides ammunition to the anti vaccine argument.

 

 https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/learn-more-about-covid-19-vaccines-fda

I believe you tagged me in error because I have not been involved in this discussion.

[ldubs]

1 hour ago, Globehoppers said:

Your biases are coming out with the term "second language speakers."

 

FYI - not all US citizens speak "American English" as a first language.  And, IMHO, those who profess that "American English" must be the only language are not well traveled or educated.

 

I'm not sure I'm following.   I thought the argument, which I still don't agree with, is that those without knowledge (education) or language comprehension would have a problem understanding scientific jargon.   Maybe I have it wrong.  IDK.  

 

1 hour ago, Globehoppers said:

 

One of the challenges we have is that fully one-third of so called "educated" Americans believe the world is flat.  Thirty-three (33) percent.  Is that the result of our education system?  Result of "fundamentalism?"  Result of the absence of travel? 

 

 

I think it has been shown to be the result of the internet jumping on a very inaccurate and misleading survey result.   And, people believe what they see on the internet.  

[Mary229]

20 minutes ago, cruisemom2 said:

I believe you tagged me in error because I have not been involved in this discussion.

Sorry

[ldubs]

51 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

I think they are getting the message but just like people here on this forum they are getting mixed messages that muddy the waters.    I think the message has to be straightforward “get the vaccine to protect yourself and the community”.  Not that you might still be contagious or might need a booster, enough with the mights and the  outlier possibilities. Discuss those when they are knowns not suppositions.     For those that want to delve deeper by all means, I enjoy a good statistical read myself but that should not be the headliner 

 

I agree mixed messages is a huge factor.   

[ilikeanswers]

2 hours ago, Mary229 said:

I think they are getting the message but just like people here on this forum they are getting mixed messages that muddy the waters.    I think the message has to be straightforward “get the vaccine to protect yourself and the community”.  Not that you might still be contagious or might need a booster, enough with the mights and the  outlier possibilities. Discuss those when they are knowns not suppositions.     For those that want to delve deeper by all means, I enjoy a good statistical read myself but that should not be the headliner 

 

I get what you are saying but I look around the world and one thing that has become clear is countries that did well controlling Covid-19 were those that were fully transparent and gave all the information. The public when polled say they trust their public health system as a result. The problem is when you don't tell people about a possibility and it becomes reality like in the Philippines you get a massive drop in confidence. The Philippines went from an 88% vaccine rate down to 32% and with COVID19 only 66% say they might get vaccinated. To get people to vaccinate they need trust in the system and if you omit information you will just be feeding the fears that the government isn't telling everything. 

[2wheelin]

7 hours ago, Mary229 said:

I think they are getting the message but just like people here on this forum they are getting mixed messages that muddy the waters.    I think the message has to be straightforward “get the vaccine to protect yourself and the community”.  Not that you might still be contagious or might need a booster, enough with the mights and the  outlier possibilities. Discuss those when they are knowns not suppositions.     For those that want to delve deeper by all means, I enjoy a good statistical read myself but that should not be the headliner 

If everyone only got the message you want them to have, why would any of them even consider continuing vigilance? No need for a mask. No need to avoid large groups. No need for any precautions because “I am vaccinated and I and my community are fully protected”. Do you think the vaccines are 100% effective?

If you only want a simple message by all means read the FDA piece. But please don’t assume the rest of us can’t handle a little more information. I read the scientific articles as well (40 years in medical research) but I don’t have the time to read everything and if someone intelligent can condense it for us we can either accept it or do more research on our own.

[Mary229]

4 hours ago, 2wheelin said:

If everyone only got the message you want them to have, why would any of them even consider continuing vigilance? No need for a mask. No need to avoid large groups. No need for any precautions because “I am vaccinated and I and my community are fully protected”. Do you think the vaccines are 100% effective?

If you only want a simple message by all means read the FDA piece. But please don’t assume the rest of us can’t handle a little more information. I read the scientific articles as well (40 years in medical research) but I don’t have the time to read everything and if someone intelligent can condense it for us we can either accept it or do more research on our own.

I think that is exactly what they are trying to avoid.  I also think a little more transparency in that message instead of cloaking it in concerns about the vaccine itself would be the proper way.   Scaring people into submission does work but in an open society we should be transparent

[Globehoppers]

14 hours ago, Mary229 said:

You are way off base. Perhaps my grammar was faulty but I was trying to avoid listing all of the possible first languages.  You are making wild assumptions, very wild.    The CDC Is not the final or only source of credible information if you had even bothered to read the FDA link you could see a very good discussion for  the consumer.  The CDC is a quasi government organization receiving funding from both the government and industry.  Get your facts straight and do not assume you can read someone’s minds.  You are the one show your prejudice, if someone is not in lockstep with you they are somehow off 

Prejudice?  Against whom? The CDC?  The American people?  COVID-19 Safety?  We had our Pfizer vaccinations in January.  Wild assumptions?  Nope - "Just the facts, Ma'am."  You have an obvious dislike for the CDC and its mission.  We get that.  However, other than innuendo and supposition, you haven't said why.  Because you can't cruise?  Well after over 550,000 Americans have died from COVID in a year there is reasons to follow and accept CDC guidance.  Everyone should be following their guidance be it cruising or daily activities.  It is the only way to stay safe. 

[Mary229]

9 minutes ago, Globehoppers said:

Prejudice?  Against whom? The CDC?  The American people?  COVID-19 Safety?  We had our Pfizer vaccinations in January.  Wild assumptions?  Nope - "Just the facts, Ma'am."  You have an obvious dislike for the CDC and its mission.  We get that.  However, other than innuendo and supposition, you haven't said why.  Because you can't cruise?  Well after over 550,000 Americans have died from COVID in a year there is reasons to follow and accept CDC guidance.  Everyone should be following their guidance be it cruising or daily activities.  It is the only way to stay safe. 

I don't care what you think of my observations about the CDC but you implied I was a bigot and a luddite and that is what I find objectionable. 

[2wheelin]

1 hour ago, Mary229 said:

I think that is exactly what they are trying to avoid.  I also think a little more transparency in that message instead of cloaking it in concerns about the vaccine itself would be the proper way.   Scaring people into submission does work but in an open society we should be transparent

You criticize the CDC for too much information. Then you advocate for more transparency. Glad to see you are agreeing that more transparency is better, as we have been saying. Let people have the information and draw their own conclusions. 

Like I said, people need to understand that getting the vaccine does not immediately end all caution. BTW, that does not mean that I continue to wear a mask where it is not required. I continue with intelligent choices as I have for the past year..

[Globehoppers]

1 hour ago, Mary229 said:

I don't care what you think of my observations about the CDC but you implied I was a bigot and a luddite and that is what I find objectionable. 

Implied no such thing.  That is a perception, same as with the efficacy and mission of the CDC.

From my observations, and that is 42 years of data management sifting hard facts from in essence, fiction, the CDC does a wonderful job is helping the safety and well being of the American people, home and abroad.  A career in intelligence givens one the ability to differentiate between innuendo and balderdash with the relevant facts.

 

Welcome your hard facts on why the CDC is wrong in its assessments under the current leadership of Doctor Walenksy.

[navybankerteacher]

17 hours ago, Globehoppers said:

Your biases are coming out with the term "second language speakers."

 

...

Let's no go overboard with the political correctness.   There are many for whom English is their second language, and the fact that most information in the US comes out in English -- means that the less  fluent one is in English, the less informed they are likely to be.

 

Simply recognizing facts is hardly showing bias.

Edited April 5, 2021 by navybankerteacher

[clo]

30 minutes ago, Globehoppers said:

Welcome your hard facts on why the CDC is wrong in its assessments under the current leadership of Doctor Walenksy.

 My first job out of school was in a lab at CDC and I've always, well there was a brief stint last year when I didn't, held them in high esteem. But they, along with the FDA and others, tend to be very conservative. Erring on the side of caution which I think is the correct way.

[SelectSys]

1 hour ago, Globehoppers said:

From my observations, and that is 42 years of data management sifting hard facts from in essence, fiction

Huh?  Sifting hard facts from fiction (aka pure noise) simply creates more fiction (aka pure noise) per classic information and signal processing theory.  Were you trying to say something else? 

 

53 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

Let's no go overboard with the political correctness. 

I guess CC is a reflection of a larger world.

 

53 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

Simply recognizing facts is hardly showing bias.

Remember that in today's world that factual relativism suggests that facts themselves contain bias and are relative to the norms of the observer:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factual_relativism#:~:text=Factual relativism (also called epistemic,proving or falsifying the proposition.

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy summarizes that "Relativism has been, in its various guises, both one of the most popular and most reviled philosophical doctrines of our time. Defenders see it as a harbinger of tolerance and the only ethical and epistemic stance worthy of the open-minded and tolerant. Detractors dismiss it for its alleged incoherence and uncritical intellectual permissiveness."

 

I am sure many people around the world laugh at the traditional the US or at least shake their heads in wonder!

 

At least the French seem to be recognizing the foolishness of importing cultural nihilism.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/09/world/europe/france-threat-american-universities.html

The threat is said to be existential. It fuels secessionism. Gnaws at national unity. Abets Islamism. Attacks France’s intellectual and cultural heritage.

The threat? “Certain social science theories entirely imported from the United States,’’ said President Emmanuel Macron.

French politicians, high-profile intellectuals and journalists are warning that progressive American ideas — specifically on race, gender, post-colonialism — are undermining their society. “There’s a battle to wage against an intellectual matrix from American universities,’’ warned Mr. Macron’s education minister.

Emboldened by these comments, prominent intellectuals have banded together against what they regard as contamination by the out-of-control woke leftism of American campuses and its attendant cancel culture.

Edited April 5, 2021 by SelectSys

[ilikeanswers]

11 minutes ago, SelectSys said:

At least the French seem to be recognizing the foolishness of importing cultural nihilism.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/09/world/europe/france-threat-american-universities.html

The threat is said to be existential. It fuels secessionism. Gnaws at national unity. Abets Islamism. Attacks France’s intellectual and cultural heritage.

The threat? “Certain social science theories entirely imported from the United States,’’ said President Emmanuel Macron.

French politicians, high-profile intellectuals and journalists are warning that progressive American ideas — specifically on race, gender, post-colonialism — are undermining their society. “There’s a battle to wage against an intellectual matrix from American universities,’’ warned Mr. Macron’s education minister.

Emboldened by these comments, prominent intellectuals have banded together against what they regard as contamination by the out-of-control woke leftism of American campuses and its attendant cancel culture.

 

A developed country that doesn't even have an age of consent and where people complain if there are too many black people in a TV show should have a deeper look at their own culture rather than blaming America for their issues😂.

Edited April 5, 2021 by ilikeanswers

[SelectSys]

1 hour ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

A developed country that doesn't even have an age of consent and where people complain if there are too many black people in a TV show should have a deeper look at their own culture rather than blaming America for their issues😂.

I would suggest you can find people in any country - including yours and mine - were people have views that we don't ascribe to personally.  This doesn't create an excuse for ignoring everything that is said by the leaders there.  That would be taking the idea of cancellation to a whole new level!

 

It looks like the law is now being changed 15, which would be the midpoint of Europe.  I would suggest this would be a good import as opposed to "over the top" political correctness.

https://www.france24.com/en/france/20210316-french-lawmakers-back-bill-to-set-age-of-sexual-consent-at-15

Members of the lower house of parliament voted unanimously to bring France's consent laws in line with most other Western countries, following a wave of allegations of sexual abuse and incest described as France's second #MeToo movement.

The draft law was initiated by members of the Senate, who had suggested the age of consent be set at 13, which would have been one of the lowest in Europe. 

But President Emmanuel Macron's government pushed for it to be set higher.

[Toofarfromthesea]

On 4/4/2021 at 9:17 AM, ontheweb said:

Yes, that sort of name calling only reflects back on those doing it.

 

But calling people who have been vaccinated for many things over their life but are hesitant about a vaccine developed with a never before used technology and an abbreviated testing period "anti-vaxxers" is just fine.

[capriccio]

6 minutes ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

But calling people who have been vaccinated for many things over their life but are hesitant about a vaccine developed with a never before used technology and an abbreviated testing period "anti-vaxxers" is just fine.

How do they describe their hesitancy about the J&J vaccine?  From https://www.wcvb.com/article/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-candidate-developed-with-previously-tested-technology/35551163#

 

It uses an older technology, an adenovirus vector to package the vaccine and this is something that's been used in other types of vaccines," said Dr. Helen Boucher, chief of the division of geographic medicine and infectious diseases at Tufts Medical Center.

 

Boucher said this type of vaccine has been in use for years, most recently during Ebola outbreaks. The adenovirus causes the common cold. In this case, researchers added genetic codes for SARS-CoV-2 to that cold virus. When it's delivered via vaccine, it teaches the body how to make antibodies, priming the immune system against future infection.

 

Boucher said these kinds of vaccines have been studied extensively and are safe.

 

"It's a virus but it's not an active virus that could infect you," Boucher said.

[Toofarfromthesea]

Just now, capriccio said:

How do they describe their hesitancy about the J&J vaccine?  From https://www.wcvb.com/article/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-candidate-developed-with-previously-tested-technology/35551163#

 

It uses an older technology, an adenovirus vector to package the vaccine and this is something that's been used in other types of vaccines," said Dr. Helen Boucher, chief of the division of geographic medicine and infectious diseases at Tufts Medical Center.

 

Boucher said this type of vaccine has been in use for years, most recently during Ebola outbreaks. The adenovirus causes the common cold. In this case, researchers added genetic codes for SARS-CoV-2 to that cold virus. When it's delivered via vaccine, it teaches the body how to make antibodies, priming the immune system against future infection.

 

Boucher said these kinds of vaccines have been studied extensively and are safe.

 

"It's a virus but it's not an active virus that could infect you," Boucher said.

The testing period was very abbreviated.  You cannot spend a year telling people that a vaccine cannot be developed and tested in less than 3-5 years and then expect people to believe you turned on a dime and now have 100% confidence in a vaccine that was developed and tested in less than a year.

[Mary229]

6 hours ago, 2wheelin said:

You criticize the CDC for too much information. Then you advocate for more transparency. Glad to see you are agreeing that more transparency is better, as we have been saying. Let people have the information and draw their own conclusions. 

Like I said, people need to understand that getting the vaccine does not immediately end all caution. BTW, that does not mean that I continue to wear a mask where it is not required. I continue with intelligent choices as I have for the past year..

I think you haven’t read the entire flow.  I criticized the CDC for putting out haphazard guesses which might convince those on the fence not to get the vaccine.  Look at the FDA link I provided as a fine example.   I am not anti anything, I just think the CDC is confusing the issue for people

[SelectSys]

So far the poll remains at about 2/3 for and 1/3 against.  Almost everyone believes cruising should require vaccinations.

 

I believe all against in the poll suggest we should simply just wait for the CDC.  In the meantime, cruise lines will seek more work arounds and start cruising anyways in North America - simply just outside the US.  

 

Yesterday I listened to a blogger/influencer from the US - younger guy, former cruise employee - and his take was that the CDC simply didn't want to be wrong if anything happens and be blamed.  I guess this is typical of most governmental agencies - better to say no than yes with a risk.  He thought the cruises in the Caribbean might ultimately satisfy the CDC test cruise requirement.   Made a final point about the health emergency expiring on the 25th of the month and whether or not it would be reinstated.

 

Maybe it will be July as that was the date of normalcy previously announced by Dr. Fauci.  

 

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

But calling people who have been vaccinated for many things over their life but are hesitant about a vaccine developed with a never before used technology and an abbreviated testing period "anti-vaxxers" is just fine.

Fine if getting Covid is fine with you, go for it.

 

And as was pointed out, the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is not a brand new technology. And the Pfizer & Moderna vaccines both piggybacked on precious research on Sars vaccine.

 

You are just looking for an excuse. 

[Toofarfromthesea]

6 hours ago, ontheweb said:

Fine if getting Covid is fine with you, go for it.

 

And as was pointed out, the Johnson & Johnson vaccine is not a brand new technology. And the Pfizer & Moderna vaccines both piggybacked on precious research on Sars vaccine.

 

You are just looking for an excuse. 

Then why were the same "experts" who are demanding we get vaccinated now, saying that it would take 3-5 years to get and test a vaccine as recently as 3 or 4 months ago?  Were they stupid when they were saying it?  We're they not aware of the new technology?  Did they think that even the J&J vaccine did not require the serious testing that caused previous vaccines to take 3-5 years?  When a narrative makes a 180 degree U-turn it is never science.

And I live in a world where there are more possibilities than your dichotomy of you either get the vaccine or you get COVID.  So yeah, if I don't get the vaccine I am fine with the (low probability) possibility that I could become infected.

You may think that your position that if I don't get the vaccine I'm  going to get infected so nanny nanny boo boo, is compelling but I find it pathetic.