Time to write those letters - Head and Neck Restraints

[dickita15]

Honestly, its worrisome that a CRB member will be guiding the decision based on his feelings, when empirical data exists.

For the record the CRB never voted or recommended that the H&N devices be mandatory. That was a 100% BOD decision.

[jdrago1]

For the record the CRB never voted or recommended that the H&N devices be mandatory. That was a 100% BOD decision.

While it was not something the CRB voted on, I also don't hide behind it was a bod decision. I agree with the mandate.


As for this...

Originally Posted by lateapex911
Honestly, its worrisome that a CRB member will be guiding the decision based on his feelings, when empirical data exists.


Empirical data exists the other way as well, just doesn't fit in to your agenda of slamming my opinions or credibility.

[lateapex911]

3) choice..Mostly the Isaac debate. That has been debated for a long time, I am pretty neutral on that device, meaningI don't think it is near as good as many of you say, nor as bad as many others say.

Originally Posted by lateapex911

Honestly, its worrisome that a CRB member will be guiding the decision based on his feelings, when empirical data exists

.


Empirical data exists the other way as well, just doesn't fit in to your agenda of slamming my opinions or credibility.

See, Jim, I responded to what you wrote. NOW you claim there is contrary data. That's QUITE a bit different than "I think" and "People say", isn't it.
MY agenda has nothing to do with slamming you...my agenda is to not have to spend vast sums of money to go backwards in my safety. Why is that hard to understand?

[lateapex911]

For the record the CRB never voted or recommended that the H&N devices be mandatory. That was a 100% BOD decision.

Understood. But I have been told in the past, by people in positions to know, that they make their recommendations to the BoD in regards to this subject. As such, I would think the BoD would consider their input, along with other inputs, in their vote.

I fully understand that that is different than an official 'recommendation" from the CRB, inasmuch as they are not charged with making one.