Health & Age Restrictions

[Saint Greg]

On 7/17/2020 at 3:39 PM, fyree39 said:

It's all us old people ruining it for the young brave ones. lol I remember when the Swine flu, SARS, and others came through. I was much younger and completely unconcerned.  I didn't fall in a risk group. If I were in my 30s again, I'd probably be secretly hoping for a "no old folks or young kids" cruise so those of us not at risk could at least go have some fun. I'm in a risk group, so I'm stuck ashore. 😞

 

Nah you need a diverse group of ages on the ship. Imagine how crowded it would be at night without the group that goes to bed by 6pm.

[Earthworm Jim]

On 7/18/2020 at 12:54 PM, fyree39 said:

Hold harmless agreements rarely hold up in court. As one judge told me, "They aren't worth the paper they're written on."

 

 

But how many potential litigants read that hold harmless clause and give up the idea of suing? They probably reduce the number of lawsuits filed significantly. In that regard, they are worth something.

Edited July 20, 2020 by Earthworm Jim

[sprint180]

On 7/18/2020 at 7:04 PM, Bostwick girl said:

The average age where I live for positives is 35. Early on in March, the average age was around 65, so just shows who practices social distancing and wearing masks!

 

You can put my in laws in that catagory.  My MIL complains about the "young people"  But twice a week goes to a town where there are quite a few cases, doesn't wear a mask.  Goes to the chiropractor, grocery store and estate auctions and then tools around our town, again, without a mask.  Yep, it's the young people.

[Bostwick girl]

Just goes to show no matter what age you are (I’m 73, no health problems to speak of so far, had cancer twice when I was younger) by not wearing masks you just can’t fix stupid!

 

[jakeT]

It dose not look good. And or , does not do any good ,  if people get sick and died on there ships.  

[TravelGirlinDallas]

What about younger people with underlying (but well-controlled) health issues?

[crewsweeper]

Recent increases in CV19 infections are on younger (under 50 people)  They tend to be easier "superspreaders". Primarily because many are pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic and have no clue they are in the contagious stage.

Those folks of any age with co-morbities are at biggest risk for hospitalization,  but most everybody is at risk of contracting CV19.  Similar to the risk of contracting the flu or a cold.  

 

Thus placing age restrictions won't work.  Temperature checks are only point in time specific. Testing is only as good as the day of the test., so no way of knowing if you or the person in line with you have CV19 when you reach the cruise terminal.

[ezd222]

On 7/17/2020 at 5:36 PM, ontheweb said:

Let's see what happens when more and more young people catch the virus. Also there are long term effects to consider.

 

There is already a statistically significant level of infections that dictate the level of near-term deaths. You don't need more data to tell you that older individuals have a 10x fatality vs younger folks. Long-term impacts are  TBD though obviously.

[coevan]

18 hours ago, ezd222 said:

 

There is already a statistically significant level of infections that dictate the level of near-term deaths. You don't need more data to tell you that older individuals have a 10x fatality vs younger folks. Long-term impacts are  TBD though obviously.

 

not even close to accurate stats. 10X where did you get that number?

 

[ProgRockCruiser]

2 hours ago, coevan said:

 

not even close to accurate stats. 10X where did you get that number?

 

Not sure about that poster, but this website has some interesting graphs and data:

 

https://ourworldindata.org/mortality-risk-covid#case-fatality-rate-of-covid-19-by-age

 

See attached image.

 

Mortality rates are easily 10x worse for the older age groups (say, 70 and up) vs younger (say 20 to 49).

 

So yeah, the older folks are more vulnerable, probably due to underlying conditions, but maybe COVID-19 is also able to attack certain "features" of older humans more efficiently that aren't present in younger folks.

[Joebucks]

On 7/20/2020 at 8:41 AM, sprint180 said:

You can put my in laws in that catagory.  My MIL complains about the "young people"  But twice a week goes to a town where there are quite a few cases, doesn't wear a mask.  Goes to the chiropractor, grocery store and estate auctions and then tools around our town, again, without a mask.  Yep, it's the young people.

 

Because the news told us everyone across the world is responsible. Only young Americans are spreading it by going to pools and beaches. Everyone knows that.

[ezd222]

On 7/21/2020 at 10:08 AM, coevan said:

 

not even close to accurate stats. 10X where did you get that number?

 

Or this.

 

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/

 

Where do you get your age stats because I'd love to see them.

Alot can be disputed regarding the covid, but the age breakdown is probably the most sound and universally accepted.

Edited July 23, 2020 by ezd222

[coevan]

simple calculation % of positive to deaths. 4,000,000 positive and 145,000 deaths is .036% 

[ProgRockCruiser]

3 hours ago, coevan said:

simple calculation % of positive to deaths. 4,000,000 positive and 145,000 deaths is .036% 

Um, no, it is 3.6%.  You are off by a factor of 100.

 

And that is the average across all age groups. As shown, it is far worse as age increases.

[ezd222]

4 hours ago, coevan said:

simple calculation % of positive to deaths. 4,000,000 positive and 145,000 deaths is .036% 

I asked for age breakouts...not an aggregate. An average is just an average of extremes (and it's 3.6%).

 

Here's another one for you specific to Canada.

https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/COVID-19-Cases-by-Age-Group.aspx

 

 

[coevan]

14 hours ago, ProgRockCruiser said:

Um, no, it is 3.6%.  You are off by a factor of 100.

 

And that is the average across all age groups. As shown, it is far worse as age increases.

 

 

I meant that, sorry, it was right on my iPhone, missed a couple of decimal points.

[glrounds]

On 7/17/2020 at 4:40 PM, 1025cruise said:

At this point, any restrictions are pure speculation. Until something gets announced, don't believe anything.

 

EXACTLY ! Cruise lines doing something like this, they do at their own peril. Over 70 (I'm 80) is a major demographic for them and many in this demographic cruise BECAUSE they can't travel with their conditions in other ways. I'm fortunate in that I'm enjoying excellent health (all things considered), but many can't utilize other means of travel so easily.

[Chrystine5]

I think restrictions should have more to do with health than age. I’m 48 perfectly healthy, and take no prescriptions. I know plenty of people younger than me in poor health with co-morbidities that would be more adversely affected by the virus. I also know people older (my mom) who are in perfect health. Health is, however, harder to prove than age.

[ray98]

14 hours ago, Chrystine5 said:

I think restrictions should have more to do with health than age. I’m 48 perfectly healthy, and take no prescriptions. I know plenty of people younger than me in poor health with co-morbidities that would be more adversely affected by the virus. I also know people older (my mom) who are in perfect health. Health is, however, harder to prove than age.

 

 

....but all things are still not equal.  Even if you look at a cross section of patients who all havewith comorbidities , those over 50 are dying at a much higher rate than below.  Comorbidities certainly increases the impact but those younger than 50 still rarely die.

[RocketMan275]

On 7/18/2020 at 7:01 AM, ontheweb said:

Is it, or do they have to follow various civil rights laws that prohibit discrimination including discriminating for age?

  It isn't discrimination if the line can show there are practical and reasonable reasons for the policies.  Clearly, that is the case here.  If you doubt that, then perhaps you can explain why some jurisdictions can require eye tests for driver's licenses for people over a certain age or even deny licenses for those under a certain age.

[ontheweb]

Just now, RocketMan275 said:

  It isn't discrimination if the line can show there are practical and reasonable reasons for the policies.  Clearly, that is the case here.  If you doubt that, then perhaps you can explain why some jurisdictions can require eye tests for driver's licenses for people over a certain age or even deny licenses for those under a certain age.

My state requires an eye test for everyone for a driver's license, makes sense to me.

 

The statistics also show a higher morbidity rate for non-whites. Would your logic allow them to discriminate against people of color? I believe I have also read that the virus seems to affect some blood types more than others. would your logic allow them to treat people differently if they do not have blood type O?

[ray98]

36 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

My state requires an eye test for everyone for a driver's license, makes sense to me.

 

The statistics also show a higher morbidity rate for non-whites. Would your logic allow them to discriminate against people of color? I believe I have also read that the virus seems to affect some blood types more than others. would your logic allow them to treat people differently if they do not have blood type O?

 

While true, the disparity is not even in the same league as the age factor.

 

These stats are from Alabama where those over 65 make up 13.1% of the population.

 

"Eighty-percent of COVID-19 fatalities involve people age 65 or older."

 

 

[Roz]

I just checked TN's stats, and people 61 and over acct. for 13% of the diagnosed cases, but 80% of the deaths. 😨  Those are sobering statistics. 

[TNcruising02]

25 minutes ago, Roz said:

I just checked TN's stats, and people 61 and over acct. for 13% of the diagnosed cases, but 80% of the deaths. 😨  Those are sobering statistics. 

This is a very dangerous disease for older people with underlying conditions.  My relatives who fall into this category have basically sheltered at home since this began.  They can't afford to let their guards down.  Thankfully, treatments seem to be much better than they were in April.  Still, until there is a vaccine the high risk people really need to use extreme caution and social distancing.

[RocketMan275]

2 hours ago, ontheweb said:

My state requires an eye test for everyone for a driver's license, makes sense to me.

 

The statistics also show a higher morbidity rate for non-whites. Would your logic allow them to discriminate against people of color? I believe I have also read that the virus seems to affect some blood types more than others. would your logic allow them to treat people differently if they do not have blood type O?

Does your state require a minimum age to get a driver's license?  Is that age discrimination or is justifiable?

 

It's not my 'logic'.  It's commonly accepted legally that if it can be shown that there are logical reasons for a policy then that policy isn't discrimination.  You know as well as I how age (with comorbidities) effects the impacts of CV.  While we may not like that, it is a fact which must be recognized despite our wishes otherwise.