Rebel Heart's Contribution to the Cruising Community

[SV THIRD DAY]

Originally Posted by Delfin

More hyperventilation. I said "what they wrote" or what people with direct contact with them said, not what CNN wrote. What was that about you being big on 'reality'?

Ah...maybe you are not understanding how the game is played. I throw out hyperventalating posts and then people nibble. Then we get 3-4 posts and if we are lucky maybe a whole page going after me rather than guessing and making **** up about RH or trying to read too much into a blog post. Consider it a public service as a way for people to vent. Easy....what to keep playing....someone has to bring a reality check to this thread, might as well be me done with sarcasm and a touch of humor.

Besides, I'm worn out after the Oakland boat Show, so I'm avoiding all the work I should be doing and since we know nothing new than we knew in what....5 days...we need something to chat about right?

[atoll]

Originally Posted by Delfin

More hyperventilation. I said "what they wrote" or what people with direct contact with them said, not what CNN wrote. What was that about you being big on 'reality'?

from face book comment by charlottes sister

Sariah Kay English What I was told about Lyra was that she had a rash all over, a fever, vomiting and diarrhea. She had been on antibiotic for five days and was not responding. That is when they sent the distress call.
4 April at 20:57 · Like · 1

funny how this was never mentioned in their blog posts on the 31st,or the 1st of april,if you count back a few days

[SV THIRD DAY]

What we are seeing here, or perhaps not understanding properly, is that a BLOG is a STORY. Sure it has elements of truth in it...but Blogs are Story lines that the writers want to tell. Blogs are not a ships log or an acurate account of what's happening aboard ship. Once you realize that you can move on an accept that Eric's blog paints a different image of the trip than Charlets, and reality may...just maybe...be somewhere in between.

All the time my wife would read our blog as ask...

"hey...who are those SV THIRD DAY cruisers...their blog sounds cool and I would like to meet them one day, sure wish our cruise was like that."

It may be a little exaggeration to make the point, but people who write popular cruising blogs have in a way a persona, maybe not as bad as "reality shows" but a blog persona none the less. I've seen it first hand meeting Cruiser/Bloggers etc. Sure the good blogs have a knack of coming off as "real people" without the persona...but that just means they are better writers than the ones that don't.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

Analyze what? What exactly? Do you KNOW what EXACTLY happened?

I think we know about 90%, and we'll only ever know 95%. Every narrative is going to come flavored by perspective. Charlotte's perspective, rescuer's perspective, Eric's perspective, Cruiser Forum perspective, unwashed masses who watch CNN perspective (which we can clearly discount). I think there will be a difference in the recollection provided by even the more knowledgeable perspectives. That's why there was a Charlotte's blog and an Eric's blog.

Eric's perspective would valuable, but we don't have that one. Even Eric's perspective from two weeks ago would likely be different from Eric's perspective now.

I think you make a good point, however. Some of the conversation about a few of the fine details is mostly conjecture. The steering discussion is in that category -- the information is incomplete. I'm still getting something out of the resulting discussion (on the other thread) though.

There is plenty to be learned from this story.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by atoll

from face book comment by charlottes sister

Sariah Kay English What I was told about Lyra was that she had a rash all over, a fever, vomiting and diarrhea. She had been on antibiotic for five days and was not responding. That is when they sent the distress call.
4 April at 20:57 · Like · 1

funny how this was never mentioned in their blog posts on the 31st,or the 1st of april,if you count back a few days

I have great sympathy for them as it is clear they've been through quite a lot, but piecing together what the heck happened is not easy because of apparently contradictory or confusing information the Kaufman's are the source of.

It would be useful for other cruisers to understand what their experience was, but even though Eric seems interested enough to be on the thread as an observer, he isn't apparently interested in letting us know what he learned from the experience. Of particular interest to me is that since medical help is available by sat phone, SSB or Ham, did they avail themselves of that, or did they find it useless if they did? A lot of people would like to know that because medical emergencies happen. They said they gave antibiotics now, and if so, what kind and how did they know what to give if they weren't able to contact the mainland for advice? And if they couldn't so contact someone, why not? What failed that they lost all communication?

Personally, I doubt whether we'll ever know the answers to any questions, in the which case the Rebel Heart experience goes into the WTF folder with nothing much to learn at all that can help anyone else.

[atoll]

i know that myself and any of my children will develop a serious rash ,fever, vomiting,diareah,within hours of taking amoxycillin,lasting 24 hours or so,with no ill effects afterwards if discontinued.

could it be two self centered people,who would have suffered the condemnation of the sailing community if they had chosen to abandon their boat because of a simple issue like losing the self steering,after publicly criticising others for just that, chose to spin a sick child story to get recognition,and rescue whilst keeping the moral high ground with enough controversy to promote their blog and a book

Münchausen syndrome by proxy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[SaltyMonkey]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

I think we know about 90%, and we'll only ever know 95%.

you DONT know 90 or 95% because you NEED 100% to be able to say you HAVE 90+ %

Its like you guys are snorting rabbits.

EDIT: Getting something out of the story: I think it would be better to get something out of some specific subjects that aren't tied to RH and the nuances of evidence -- again additional threads.

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

you DONT know 90 or 95% because you NEED 100% to be able to say you HAVE 90+ %

Its like you guys are snorting rabbits.

Even if you DID know 100%, unless you are referencing a subject that can be easily quantified, how would you expect to even go about accurately defining what 90% knowledge of a topic as subjective as this looked liked?

Except for accidentally snorting some pepper from laughing too hard at the dinner table I've never snorted anything so I'll have to depend on those who are more familiar with the finer points of snorting to explain what the above post means.

[letsgetsailing3]

Originally Posted by SaltyMonkey

you DONT know and you certainly DONT know 90 or 95% because you NEED 100% to be able to say you HAVE 90+ %

Its like you guys are snorting rabbits.

More like swatting cheeky monkeys.

There are a few outstanding questions, but none that change the basic chain of events or the outcome, which are fairly-well established.

To insist that we can't discuss any subject on this forum without perfect knowledge on everybody's part would end the forum.

[SaltyMonkey]

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

More like swatting cheeky monkeys.

There are a few outstanding questions, but none that change the basic chain of events or the outcome, which are fairly-well established.

EHHHH! Wrong again! Nothing is established. Its all hearsay and conjecture. Nothing is well established.

Originally Posted by letsgetsailing3

To insist that we can't discuss any subject on this forum without perfect knowledge on everybody's part would end the forum.

EEHHHH! Wrong again! Discuss what you want. Its a question of the context which I believe strongly, just as politics, should be limited.

[Ocean Girl]

Yes, Atol that is what I thought, but did not have reliable source that the baby was on antibiotics to really comment.
The thing with babies is they can be very resilient. But, and it is a doozy, babies can change direction and go down hill dramatically fast. I've assisted operations on full term and premature infants. Through experience I've learned that they are very unpredictable, and when things go south, they go south in minutes, darn scary.
If I was aboard with a baby that was on antibiotics and developed a rash with vomiting and diarrhea. I'd get doc on sat phone AND hit the Come get me now! button, (if I cannot make it to shore faster then they can get to me.) At that moment, you must treat it like a life and death situation to get ahead of the deteriorating situation. She could be fine, and symptoms clear up after discontinuing the AB, or she can start to have breathing trouble, turn blue and struggle for air. The last place a nurse, doctor, rescuer, mom, dad, anyone, would want to be is NOT in a hospital with all the needed bells and whistles to help during respiratory arrest, major organ shut down etc, it some bad s**t!
Babies are not like older kids or adults, they can be very challenging to treat.

I would be very hesitant to treat a baby with antibiotics when real modern medical help is not within easy reach. Even an antibiotic they have been on before can cause an allergic reaction. This must of been very scary for Charlotte and Eric. Plus the original illness is getting stronger because the abrupt stop in ABs

This post is based on the reliable source (sister) that the baby was on antibiotics, they were 900 miles from land, baby had rash, vomiting and diarreaha. Though I'm sure I will have to eat crow after my rant or two.

Erika

PS
They did the right thing

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

Even if you DID know 100%, unless you are referencing a subject that can be easily quantified, how would you expect to even go about accurately defining what 90% knowledge of a topic as subjective as this looked liked?

Except for accidentally snorting some pepper from laughing too hard at the dinner table I've never snorted anything so I'll have to depend on those who are more familiar with the finer points of snorting to explain what the above post means.

Its difficult to explain to one that can not sail, nor owns a boat a percentage of any knowledge.

[Sandero]

I can't waste my time reading and debating what was right and what was wrong about this entire "project" of Eric and his family.

I am struck by the fact that he for some reason has chosen to remain silent, but reads the threads about his misadventure. To me this is very bizarre behavior on his part. What is served by people discussing what happened when they don't KNOW what happened because the information is second and third hand coming out in bits and pieces... and Eric not stating the facts?

I am wondering if the ocean crossing was not such a great idea and perhaps cruising coastal or Island hoping would have been more prudent??? If some long passages were required why not get help to the long ocean passages and then have the family fly to the boat and do "island hoping or coastal cruising?

I only have questions and no opinions about this adventure.

[sneuman]

Originally Posted by atoll

i know that myself and any of my children will develop a serious rash ,fever, vomiting,diareah,within hours of taking amoxycillin,lasting 24 hours or so,with no ill effects afterwards if discontinued.

could it be two self centered people,who would have suffered the condemnation of the sailing community if they had chosen to abandon their boat because of a simple issue like losing the self steering,after publicly criticising others for just that, chose to spin a sick child story to get recognition,and rescue whilst keeping the moral high ground with enough controversy to promote their blog and a book

Münchausen syndrome by proxy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Something tells me the thought process was probably a bit more prosaic.

[3000]

Originally Posted by Ocean Girl

Yes, Atol that is what I thought, but did not have reliable source that the baby was on antibiotics to really comment.
The thing with babies is they can be very resilient. But, and it is a doozy, babies can change direction and go down hill dramatically fast. I've assisted operations on full term and premature infants. Through experience I've learned that they are very unpredictable, and when things go south, they go south in minutes, darn scary.
If I was aboard with a baby that was on antibiotics and developed a rash with vomiting and diarrhea. I'd get doc on sat phone AND hit the Come get me now! button, (if I cannot make it to shore faster then they can get to me.) At that moment, you must treat it like a life and death situation to get ahead of the deteriorating situation. She could be fine, and symptoms clear up after discontinuing the AB, or she can start to have breathing trouble, turn blue and struggle for air. The last place a nurse, doctor, rescuer, mom, dad, anyone, would want to be is NOT in a hospital with all the needed bells and whistles to help during respiratory arrest, major organ shut down etc, it some bad s**t!
Babies are not like older kids or adults, they can be very challenging to treat.

I would be very hesitant to treat a baby with antibiotics when real modern medical help is not within easy reach. Even an antibiotic they have been on before can cause an allergic reaction. This must of been very scary for Charlotte and Eric. Plus the original illness is getting stronger because the abrupt stop in ABs

This post is based on the reliable source (sister) that the baby was on antibiotics, they were 900 miles from land, baby had rash, vomiting and diarreaha. Though I'm sure I will have to eat crow after my rant or two.

Erika

PS
They did the right thing

Well, you do make an excellent case why infants shouldn't sail trans-Pac...