AP: seniors shouldn’t fly

This topic headline is misleading and a little irresponsible. The actual article says something different.

Carol. I’m trying to keep it from being political. Apparently some at the CDC wanted stronger language to alert seniors to not fly.

We'd have to ask the person who used the phrase what he or she meant to be sure of accuracy, but my interpretation is that "elderly and physically fragile" refers to two separate (but intersecting) groups of people. If I meant just elderly folks who are also physically fragile, there would be no "and" in that phrase; there would instead be a comma.

If you read farther into the article, there is this:

"On Friday, the CDC quietly updated its website to tell older adults and people with severe medical conditions such as heart, lung or kidney disease to “stay home as much as possible” and avoid crowds. It urges those people to 'take actions to reduce your risk of exposure,' but it doesn’t specifically address flying."

It is clear that the guidance in that paragraph is being directed at both older folks and those with severe medical conditions.

Too late now...unless we decide to stay on Maui until it’s over.

I thought the phrase was seniors with underlying medical problems. At 78, I will be traveling regardless of federal government warning since I have no underlying medical problems.

The first sentence says it all. I’m not sure if there are any elderly without some underlying condition either known or unknown.
We could all argue as to how old is elderly! 😀

I think they're talking about older folks with other medical issues. DH and I are both over 70, but have no medical issues whatsoever. When people talk about the elderly being vulnerable, I keep looking over my shoulder to see who they're talking about.

My Dad is 92, and other than some hearing problems and edema, he also has no medical problems. Well, not many, and not serious. He just returned from a trip to Phoenix to visit my sister, and did just fine. Had this covid-19 scare been as prevalent, he might have been prevented from flying.

There are plenty of elderly folks who have virtually no underlying medical condition AFFECTED BY COVID-19 - these are lung and heart issues. i am 67, wife is 70. We are both slightly over-weight, but without lung issues. I smoked 45 years ago. Neither of us have lung, heart, diabetes, circulatory, or other conditions. So we wouldn't worry.

Ex- or current smokers should be concerned, since COVID-19 results in ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome) - this is an inflamation of the interface between the alveoli and blood vessals. Asthma sufferers and others with congenital lung issues should be very cautious. My son has a serious asthma problem which is intermittent. He should be very cautious.

Everyone’s immune system weakens as they age. It’s why most flu deaths are people over 65. I think it’s wiser for us over 60s not to fly right now and I’m not planning any travel. But will I go someplace if the airfares are a super deal ? Heck yes!

Sorry, folks, but I think there's some wishful thinking going on in this thread. Forgive me for repeating myself, but how can this statement be interpreted not to include all elderly people?

"On Friday, the CDC quietly updated its website to tell older adults and people with severe medical conditions such as heart, lung or kidney disease to 'stay home as much as possible' and avoid crowds. It urges those people to 'take actions to reduce your risk of exposure,' but it doesn’t specifically address flying."

That quote is straight out of the article Diane originally linked to. It does not say "older adults with severe medical conditions".

Thanks acraven. I was concerned when I read the article.

Everyone’s immune system weakens as they age. It’s why most flu deaths are people over 65.

Exactly right. Years ago, my best friend's mother was in great health, had no "underlying health conditions." But she caught the flu, developed pneumonia and died. That is the kind of scenario we are being warned about now with coronavirus.

Those of you who are over 60 and believe you are completely healthy and thus immune from getting seriously sick from the coronavirus are fooling yourselves. That is why the recommendation quoted earlier indicates that people over 60, regardless of whether or not they have any health problems, are more vulnerable and need to take more precautions than younger people.

This is so depressing that I hesitate to post it, but maybe folks need to be a little more frightened. This is a series of tweets by a doctor working in northern Italy:

https://twitter.com/jasonvanschoor/status/1237142891077697538?s=21

Quoting from the fifth numbered point: "Patients over 65 or younger with comorbidities are not even assessed by ITU. I am not saying not tubed, I'm saying not assessed and no ITU staff attends them when they arrest."

No one wants those people to die, but resources (I assume especially ventilators, but I'm only guessing) are inadequate to meet current needs. So the people least likely to survive are not treated. Now, I ask you, if pure age were not a factor in producing bad outcomes, why would they not treat otherwise-healthy 65 year olds along with the 45 year olds and 55 year olds? The over-taxed doctors and hospitals in northern Italy are making a rational decision, based on their experience with the prognosis for different categories of patients.

I am not saying this is going to happen in the US. I hope we have enough ICU beds and high-tech equipment, and I hope the infection rate will not reach a level as high as Italy's. But I'm 68 years old, and I'm not counting on it.

I heard we have approximately 60,000 ventilators in the US. Some are already in use with current flu patients. Not enough!
Then there are the supplies needed for medical staff!
It’s truly mind boggling.

https://api.nationalgeographic.com/distribution/public/amp/science/2020/03/us-america-has-fraction-medical-supplies-it-needs-to-combat-coronavirus

Definitely age related (worse > age) mortality categories in the charts I've seen.

And I've also seen a lot of people like a friend's Mother (I think ~ 80) who "is not going to let that virus nonsense interfere with her trip". (sigh)

I’m trying to search for other tweets and info from the Jason Van Schoor whose unnamed “friend” describes such a horrifying scenario in Northern Italy. Almost no tweets until the last 24 hours. Why a photo of ORs being emptied, but no photos of the ORs with patients as described? Why would this overworked MH friend take a photo of an empty OR but not one of the OR filled with beds?
Is there any way to verify this is real and not someone’s rarely used account being hijacked by trolls to scare the sh*t out of people.
Why only one unnamed sourced from an unverifiable account describing people over 65 or anyone with an underlying problem being left alone to die?

Why do people automatically assume that if they travel they are going to catch the virus but if they stay home they will be fine?

Are you going to barricade yourself indoors and never go outside? Virus does not understand borders. You can catch it from someone in the supermarket just as easily as you can from someone on a plane.

Am I taking more precautions----yes. I wash my hands much more often. I carry hand sanitizer. I wipe down seats, armrests, tray tables, shopping carts etc. I try not to touch my face which is easier said than done. I no longer shake hands or touch other people.

The CDC has suggested that over 60's not travel. They also think they should stay home and not go out. How realistic is that? I'm over 60 and have some health concerns. But I have to travel soon for reasons that cannot be cancelled. So I'm going. I'm taking precautions and I'm going.

I'm not telling people what they should do. We all have to make decisions that are right for us. And respect the decisions that others make for themselves.

Frank, I suspect the primary concern is not catching the virus, though the stress and confined nature of air travel hardly bolster the immune system. The real concerns are likely traveling to a place where museum and popular sites are closed, being quarantined in a strange country, or being quarantined in the US because of visiting a foreign country.

The issue is people with underlying health issues which often includes older individuals. In this case it's specific to getting oxygen from your lungs to your organs. This virus gets into your lungs. Between the virus inflaming your lungs and your body's defenses further inflaming your lungs, it can be serious for anyone who has oxygen/lung issues. A diabetic has reason to be concerned as would anyone with chronic heart or lung issues - or a long term smoker, for that matter.

As I get older, I know I'm not as young as I used to be. I'm reminded, however, of a scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, "I'm not dead yet." I feel I've got a decade or two before I fall completely apart.

The smoking angle in interesting. I've been to China and it had one of the highest rates of smokers I've ever seen (half of adult males, and 62% of Chinese men smoked at some point), so that could explain the high death rate there. Italy has also got a large elderly smoking population (no data, just observation), and 30% of men of all ages smoke.

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200226/coronavirus-top-targets-men-seniors-smokers

https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-cases-why-more-men-than-women-2020-2

Are you going to barricade yourself indoors and never go outside?

Actually, Frank II, I have a friend whose elderly (92) aunt is doing just that. Of course, it means my friend now has to run all her errands and do all her shopping, possibly encountering more exposure herself, then taking all that to auntie.

My dad, also 92, takes the opposite approach. Part his grief recovery routine since my mother died last fall is to get out of the house and go somewhere every day. And no, no virus is liable to change his mind.

Does this mean Trump will stop using Air Force One and take the train?
(sorry if this breaks the non-political rule, I couldn't resist).

A few weeks ago as we looked over options, we were trying to decide if we were considered “elderly” when we decided that if we had to wonder then the answer was “yes”.

Brad: Yes, it is just being "elderly". No, you don't have to also have a health problem and be elderly. Though no doubt that makes it worse. As an example of plenty of other reports out there:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/03/10/coronavirus-is-mysteriously-sparing-kids-killing-elderly-understanding-why-may-help-defeat-virus/

"Coronavirus is mysteriously sparing kids and killing the elderly. Understanding why may help defeat the virus."

Bets, I encountered information online a few days ago from someone else working in northern Italy, reporting a similar situation, though it wasn't as graphic. If I can find it again, I'll post the link here later today. It may be much later, because I have a long dental appointment this afternoon.

And yes, Frank, I see a big difference in my exposure to public germs here at home vs. when I'm traveling in Europe.

I think everyone has the right to make their own travel decisions and we can only hope those are informed, educated choices. I also hope those choices take a more global view...as in it’s not just about me but every single person I will come in contact with during and following said travel.
I’m early 60’s and in what I consider excellent health. I had a flu shot in October, traveled domestically in December, and in early January was down for 3 weeks with an upper respiratory virus unlike anything I’ve ever experienced. At that time, my doctor explained that secondary infections like pneumonia are what’s killing people. That was pre Covid 19. She also reminded me that like it or not, I am in a higher risk group and should take that seriously. I took her words to heart; I’m not traveling, a decision made for me, my family, friends, and complete strangers. But, that’s my choice to make and others, for now at least, are free to do the same.

We're elderly.
We're in France.
We're getting on the plane and coming home early, after 2.5 weeks instead of 6.
My husband doesn't want to get caught up in a potential lockdown. The only positive about flying home is how empty the planes are right now before the airlines start reducing flights.

At 78, I will be traveling regardless of federal government warning since I have no underlying medical problems.

Well, there's the ballgame, if everyone views it this way. 'I'm healthy so I'm gonna do what I want' is not a good way to stop/slow or flatten the curve on a new (this ain't the flu, folks) virus that we know precious little about. And Frank, I do apologize if I come off as abrupt; I suspect that I do. However, If someone flies to Europe, picking up Coronavirus in the airport, on the plane, or wherever, and then proceeds to galavant around Europe for two weeks, they could potentially be infecting many people, though they don't know who. So, while our traveler feels he's fine, he cannot prevent himself infecting elderly and or compromised people. It's not like we get to choose who we infect...

The best thing to do right now, across the Country, and for this Country, is stay put and reduce social contact. Travel is not what we should be doing.

I commend this podcast to the attention of anyone who prefers a realistic look at the problem and some steps we can take to slow it:

https://samharris.org/podcasts/190-respond-coronavirus/

I agree with you Dave. We need to buy time to get plans in place for how we are going to handle this. If cutting back on travel for the next couple of months buys us time, then let’s postpone travel. Europe will be there 4 months from now and if conditions get worse, we may have to postpone our travels then as well. Sometimes it takes more courage to say no than to go.

WHO has just published some sensible advice to protect your mental health during the outbreak. Including:

• "Seek information updates at specific times during the day once or twice. The sudden and near-constant stream of news reports about an outbreak can cause anyone to feel worried".

Well, I'm going to Europe AND I'm not bringing an IDP. So there.

People die from economic downturns, also.

Well, I'm going to Europe AND I'm not bringing an IDP. So there.

The inhumanity of it all....... :)

Please read this. It is from a Canadian infectious disease doctor:

http://archive.vn/79AWo

As the adult daughter of elderly parents (83 and 91) yes they are staying home and not going out. I am doing their grocery shopping until I can set them up on Instacart and errand running. They live in a beautiful community where they can take walks and hang out. Even if they are exposed to the delivery person that is one person, not hundreds they would have encountered doing their own grocery shopping. Mom and I had a trip planned this weekend, and I canceled that, just a road trip with a hotel stay.

Unless someone is the LEADING authority on infectious diseases, I pay no attention to news articles of TV talking heads. The CDC and WHO are the leading health organizations in the world. Everyone else is just speculating. Just because someone is an MD, doesn't make them a LEADING authority, especially on social media.

Each individual has to make his or her decision based on their own feelings about travel and this virus.
1. Do you want to be quarantined in another country?
2. Do you want to be away from your health caregivers if you get sick from this virus?
3. Can you wait and travel some other time?
4. Do you want to depend on healthcare givers when there is a language barrier?
5. Should I postpone my trip and save more money and upgrade my travel in the future?
...........and many more questions to ask yourself.

DON'T PANIC, BUT DON'T DOWNPLAY THE SITUATION EITHER.

DON'T PANIC, BUT DON'T DOWNPLAY THE SITUATION EITHER.

It's good advice, unfortunately the leader of this Country just said that "the consumer has never been in a better position than they are right now"

Me thinks he's downplaying it and is endangering lives and sober, honest discussion by doing so. If I hear another person say 'it's like the flu' I'm going to scream. We know a ton about the flu; we know jack about Coronavirus and Covid-19.

no virus is liable to change his mind

If you're 92 and are able to get out and go somewhere every day, you should continue to do so while you're healthy. If I make it to 92 and am able to get out and go places, I'll be amazed, but probably very happy.

I suppose I am in the "elderly" category, 70 years old with none of the "issues" (ie, lung, heart problems ) listed above, not overweight, lost ca. 30 pounds, my BMI is almost where it should be. But I am on prescription meds which I need to take daily. Other than that does this elderly definition apply to me?

Sorry to say it, but you are elderly and so am I but I’m in denial. My mind is 30.

Following up on my promise to find some additional support for the bone-chilling comments in the twitter string I linked to earlier...

The (UK) Daily Mail has picked up the story: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8095835/Overwhelmed-Italian-hospitals-running-200-cent-capacity.html

Here's a link is to another series of tweets by a doctor working in northern Italy (Bergamo in this case), laying out a grim tale of an overwhelmed medical establishment with insufficient resources to help all patients: https://twitter.com/silviast9/status/1236933818654896129

And this is a newspaper article (in Italian), with the title "We cannot intubate everyone. We must avoid the over-60s": https://www.ilgiornale.it/news/cronache/coronavirus-medico-choc-non-potendo-intubare-tutti-scegliamo-1838162.html

I have not personally translated that article; this is a machine translation of one paragraph:

"Then, the dramatic crossroads for doctors: 'They told us that from these days we will have to start choosing who to intubate, so we favor young people and those without other pathologies. At Niguarda, that the other large hospital, they no longer intubate beyond 60 years, which is really young as an age ... ' . The cardiologist says that currently in Italy there are 3 thousand fans and if in the same second 10 thousand patients needed to be intubated, 7 thousand would die not being able to receive treatment."

I rest my case. It is not only people with underlying health concerns who are at risk.

acraven- please stop confusing people by providing them with facts. Sadly, many can’t handle “the truth”.
70 is elderly? Duh! Early Social Security starts at 62. Welcome to the club. Sorry everyone but 60 is the new 30 in name only.

Some people in their 60s are extraordinarily fit and often more so than those 20 years younger. Anyone been to Wal Mart and seen some of the younger people? Not good.

Late 70s and 80s is perhaps a different story.

Should the criteria be strictly age or fitness and health, too?

It's both. Fitness and age. The mortality charts say both make a difference. How much? Don't think they've nailed it down that well yet.

I want to encourage those posting on this thread to avoid personal attacks on other posters. It is clear that there are differences in people’s response to this new challenge. I think it is fine to share one’s perspective and supporting data or facts. It crosses the line when judgement is pronounced on others.

Carol, while I completely understand and support the concept, it truly feels like a moment where more direct communication is required. People who travel will both spread the virus around their destination and presumably bring it home to their loved ones.

It has to be said:
Personal, non-essential travel will make the situation worse, and there is zero chance it will make anything better-save for the persons enjoyment of their own trip.

In Bergamo they are not intubating persons over 60 years of age as they are at 200% capacity and have to make some difficult choices. This is anecdotal, from an Italian physician's Twitter post, but we must stop and take notice. A tourist who breaks an ankle or falls and smacks their head will need to see a doctor. Doctors are busy. It is not right to do pleasure travel at this time, it's irresponsible.

Thank you, Carol.

Dave, exactly and well said! Sadly a lot of people don’t agree. So much information has been shared on these forums that I would hope some would be able to read the writing on the wall.
I’ve worked the SARS, H1N1 and MERS outbreaks from the Public Health side. We had a very large H1N1 outbreak of university students, mostly, and one MERS patient from the Middle East who had a possible case requiring follow up testing. SARS was just a matter of locating airline passenger contacts, so not so bad.
State and local Public Health Departments need each of us to do our part to help control the spread of this virus. Unfortunately that means we all need to curtail our way of life for awhile. Yes, some will lose a lot of money on lost vacations, the stock market, or lost hours from work. We may have a global recession too. It’s a bitter pill to swallow. I know I’ve taken a hit this week in the market.

How many lives must be lost? A lot fewer if we all do our part to mitigate the spread of this virus. Containment may not be possible.

Well, what defines "elderly?" Simply age, a number, or a metric involving health, fitness, and age? I've seen people "old" at 40 and some that have great vitality at 70. There needs to be a more definitive explanation on who and who shouldn't travel.

In some cases it's a no-brainer in that those with health issues or (perhaps) 80-plus shouldn't travel, because let's be honest here, at some point your immune system is not what it was, regardless of whether grandma can really get around. I have doubts that since gramps is one tough cookie he's OK to travel to certain regions or an enclosed environment enroute. My grandpa was tough as nails until he died.

BigMike, the direction from the medical people is clear: This thing is a serious risk for older folks (60 and up) even if they are otherwise healthy. I understand that many people don't want to believe that. Heck, I'm 68 and I'm not thrilled about it. But this is what the doctors have said. That the information is uncomfortable doesn't make it untrue.

Just take a look at the links already posted in this thread.

One of the articles I read listed hypertension as an "underlying health issue" that increases mortality. The article didn't state that hypertension is less of a factor if its controlled by medications. Flying does not appear to have been as risky as I would have thought, but I would never ever get on a cruise ship in the future. I still don't understand why the CDC is not quarantining people coming back from Italy, since that is the source most often mentioned in many of the current cases.

AP: seniors shouldn’t fly

The AP is entitled to their opinion, even if the CDC disagrees

James E.
I think the CDC and the AP agree. It’s the WH that doesn’t.

When people think the advisories and precautions apply to everyone else and not to them, that is not good.

Are we being inconvenienced? Will we have to use extra discipline? Will be have to forgo things we otherwise enjoy? Yes, Yes, and Yes.

Can that make a difference? Yes.

If ONE person does not follow the advisories and precautions, will it make a difference? Maybe not, but maybe.

Lots of one persons can add up to 100s and 1000s, and on and on.

We all need to do what is right and not just try to justify our actions.

Diane, I couldnt find that statement at the CDC website. This is an important enough topic to stay to the facts. The facts, in my opinion, are those published by the WHO and CDC. Of course I could have missed it on their page and if I am wrong I will say My Bad. Show me where.

Here is the story as reported by CNN. I Googled to find more when our local station WSMV twice reported that those over 60 are advised to stay at home....at first I thought...HUH? What? You gotta be kidding? Did I hear that correctly? Then on a later newscast, yep I heard it correctly.

Dr. William Schaffner at Vanderbilt, who is quoted at the end of the article is world-respected, and you likely have seen him quoted several times on national news .....he gives his take on how his family is interpreting (and practicing) such warnings. I am guessing when Vanderbilt University recently decided to cancel in-person classes thru (at least) March, he was likely consulted. Apparently some students had contact with another student (in New York) who has the virus. So, precautions are being taken at Vanderbilt, including canceling all on-campus activities (except oddly athletic).

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/06/health/coronavirus-older-people-social-distancing/index.html

Who is at risk? States older adults. (then see the precautions for such). Sadly, yep, it has happened those of us over 60 are older....even though I still think of older as 80+, for this interpretation, yep it is us....over 60 :(

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/specific-groups/high-risk-complications.html

What is my household doing? Staying away from crowds, shopping at off-peak times, two-three weeks of canned/dry food on reserve (just in case), and sadly staying home from certain loved large gatherings/activities. Spending much more time with outdoor, fresh-air activities. Trying to get better at washing hands and using sanitizer (like when filling car up, grocery cart, touching credit card terminals, etc.....it does take reminding oneself).

Dont listen to CNN or any news outlet for this sort of thing. Go to the horse's mouth.

Found it!

Not on their travel page, but on the page directed to high risk individuals it does state:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/specific-groups/high-risk-complications.html

If you are at higher risk of getting very sick from COVID-19, you should:

Stock up on supplies.
Take everyday precautions to keep space between yourself and others.
When you go out in public, keep away from others who are sick, limit close contact and wash your hands often.
Avoid crowds as much as possible.
Avoid cruise travel and non-essential air travel.
During a COVID-19 outbreak in your community, stay home as much as possible to further reduce your risk of being exposed.

It further defines the high risk this way

Who is at high risk

Early information out of China, where COVID-19 first started, shows that some people are at higher risk of getting very sick from this illness. This includes:
• Older adults
• People who have serious chronic medical conditions like:
o Heart disease
o Diabetes
o Lung disease

It is my understanding that 80%+ of the victims have been over 80 years of age. So, I am going to define “Older Adults” as being closer to 80 than 60. But that’s my subjective thinking.

Here's another point:

Let's say you decide to travel to Country X. Then you get sick and need aggressive treatment, including intubation.

You would then have some problems. You may be taking a resource that a local would need. Your insurance may not cover the costs. The foreign hospitals may have difficulty understanding you.

So, I am switching from a "possibly travel" to a "no travel" position. In fact, I have just decided to not attend a meeting in 1 month that I had considered attending.

80+ = denial. Thank goodness for journalists. The AP article says it all.

So what they are hearing is that if you are 59 and 11 months, you are fine but if you are 60---you are going to get the virus and die?

What the "experts" are saying is that if you are over 60 you are more susceptible. It doesn't say no one should travel or go out. These are guidelines not hard and fast rules.

I'm a bit of an aviation geek. I sometimes look at the website/app Flightradar24. It shows every flight in the air at any one time. There are thousands of them even after airlines have dropped flights due to less demand. On every one of those flights are passengers and flight attendants. Strangely, considering the way some of us are acting, we dont' hear about too many flight attendant getting sick. Oh, there have been some, but only a handful.

Let's take Germany for example. As of my writing this, they have 1656 cases. OMG. But they have a poulation of 82,790,000. And that doesn't include visitors.

Going to the supermarket off hours? Great. Except the virus can live on surfaces for days. So that can you pick up now may have been touched by someone who has the virus a few hours earlier. Or that person standing in line behind you who just sneezed...oops.....you got the virus!!!!

This logic that if you travel you will get sick but if you stay home you will be fine makes absolutely no sense. Sure, traveling to an area under lockdown is silly. Large group gatherings may not be wise. I have a doctors appointment in a couple of weeks. The doctors office (specialist) is in a buiding owned by a hospital and full of different practices. Next to the office I'm going to is the Respiratory practice. They share the same waiting area and it is always busy. I'm going to reschedule to a later date.

If you are in the group that is considered more vulnerable to this virus, or are a caregiver to someone in this group, or deal with people in this group, then yes, you need to give your actions a second thought. But others should not feel they have to lock themselves in. Take sensible precautions and you should be okay. But nothing is guaranteed.

Stop listening to the news. Stop listening to politicians. Heed what is said by the CDC and WHO and neither said do not travel in general. They have suggested that certain individuals should take extra precautions. They have suggested to stay away from certain areas. That's it. Everything else is being blown out of proportion.

I'm still surprised that no one here is fearing zombie apocalypse.

James (and edited to add Frank), even though the CDC link under Who is at Higher Risk" clearly states older people

and then the next (separate) category is those with chronic health conditions,

it is obvious to me not one of us is ever going to change your mind or your interpretation.

The recommendation to stay at home as much as possible, obvious includes not taking non-essential flights. Duh! Airports are crowded. I know, I have made multiple trips to Europe and then traveled to all 7 continents. Airports were the least favorite part of my travels, next were planes..

Italy is mandating people stay a minimum of about three feet from each other(or risk arrest), how does one stay three feet from one on a plane?)

Just like trying to change the mind of those who voted a certain way in the last election. Some people can be convinced...some just cannot be...regardless of 4 years of being able to observe/see.

Maggie, I agree. The blind can not see. Disappointing as it may be, vacation travel should be curtailed per original sources. Colleges are sending kids home in my area. Meetings are cancelled. ETC.

Age 60 is the new elderly, not 80, per cdc, etc. I might not like to hear this, but...

If the CDC thinks “ anyone” over 60 should not fly then they should be able to say it. They’ve been told not to say that by our government, according to the AP article. You can choose to believe the article or not. You can chose to travel or not.
I’m reading between the lines and will error on the side of caution.
I would think we would like more transparency from our government.

Hopefully younger people stay healthy. The elderly are dependent on it.

I guess at some point we have to agree to disagree. But, to everyone saying “I’m not worried about getting sick”...please understand you potentially put countless others at risk.

Oh please, this is the same news media that said guns killed 150,000,000 Americans over the last decade (that would be half the US population) Or that Bloomberg spent the equivalent of $1,000,000 per US citizen on his campaign for president (the real math worked out to about $1:15). I think I will trust the CDC and the WHO over someone with a journalism degree.

The fact that it's the "same news media" that made an assertion, according to you, about gun deaths has no bearing on questions of imminent pandemic, sir. Denigrating the media does not result in personal travel is the right thing to be doing right now.

Hey Dave from Ventura.
Sadly it is now officially a Pandemic.

Shhhh! I choose to live in the past ;-)

But, personal travel is the not the wrong thing to be doing right now according to the experts on the subject. I dont ask my plumber, teacher or mechanic for health care advice; I defer to the experts at the CDC and WHO.

At 70 in denial, why not, provided that one's "numbers" (wgt, BMI. LDL, HDL, A1C, etc) range from excellent to good with no "issues"... these results of the blood tests.

Great, it's just that the ongoing broad-brush denigration of media in the world and in this country in particular, becomes a real issue when there is a public crisis, when one of media's roles is to give accurate information. If they don't always give accurate information it should rightfully be pointed out, but when the "leader" of the Country has his thumb on various scales (including CDC/press conferences/etc) due to his own insecurities, talk like that is unhelpful. Guns? That's a red herring.

I'll leave it there, thanks James.

Thanks for the discussion. This will be locked as requested by the OP.