hftmrock

think about this in the opposite way. if they did not book key west in hopes that they will eventually open, then when it opens..they will not be able to go there for months, if not a year because all cruise itineraries would be set already for all future cruises.

so if they say that March 1st they will allow cruises to go to key west, and Royal has all of its cruises set until after new years, they could not go to Key West until 2023

the logical thing is to put it on the itinerary and hope that they open sooner rather than later

keep in mind that diabetics need low carb , not necessarily low calorie. they are very different. I have been a diabetic for 7 years and control my diabetes by living a ketogenic lifestyle and do not need medication. It will be hard to find low carb 'FrooFroo' drinks. Most of those come from fruit or sugar which doesnt lend itself well to a low carb diet.

While most diabetics will not go the the extreme that I do, I choose to do it so that I will never need medication. Carbs = sugar so all carbs need to be looked at carefully,

Straight alcohol is ok and mixed with diet coke or a flavored water (0 calorie) will work but its not froofroo

Just food for thought.

Good luck and enjoy your cruise!

8 hours ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

Are you referring to a non US sailing?

I think this is for all US sailings.

• NCL mandates all passengers have had the covid vaccine (double vax card)
• Having the negative Covid test in your hand taken within 72 hours will allow them to retest you if you get a positive covid result at the pier

9 hours ago, KAYKAY121 said:

 And whether I am vaccinated or not is my business to share not yours to ask. It is my opinion, not the law...

 

but was told by someone at work who happens to be HR that she didn't have to tell me why she was out due to HIPAA and I took her word. Wish I had known better at the time. 🙂 Thanks for being so gentlemanly and correcting me. 

 

you have an absolute right to determine if you want to share your vaccine status or not. you are 100% free to not tell anyone ever. The downside to that is that private companies (like NCL) is also free to make rules to not allow you on board. They will ask, and you are 100% free to not disclose your status. They will then stop you from boarding and that also is 100% legit.

Regarding the HR person , that's sorta a grey area. As an HR person , she is not allowed to disclose anyone's medical reasons for anything. that would be a HIPAA violation on the part of HR. Having said that, she would not be breaking ANY HIPAA rules if she disclosed her own medical situation. you cant break HIPAA rules when you are telling others your own medical situation

Example - HR rep Karen tells you Joe has cancer. that is a HIPAA violation

                   HR rep Karen tells you that she has cancer. that is NOT a HIPAA       violation

1 minute ago, Formula280SS said:

 

Nope.

I appreciate your opinion... I have mine

agree to disagree.. apologies for going off topic regarding cruising.. Im done with this line of thought.

Hopefully cruising starts sooner rather than later with the proper protocols

1 minute ago, Formula280SS said:

 

Bingo.

 

Respondents chose not to simply put it in the correct context, that for early virus therapeutic purposes (such as the examples 1-4, and specifically not for 5, severe stage cases in hospitalization) it was medically valuable; but not, the conscious and planned decision was to taunt and require a dogma that "it was completely and totally bad."  That was the mentality; and that mentality, which possibly let tens of thousands of people suffer and die at the earlier stages 1-4, "for their own sick and demented purposes (and enjoyment)," is disgusting.

 

A note from memories of not really that long ago, the goal and ambition of the control and correction of the mentality of the populace is not really a good thing.

I dont think they went to try to make it completely and totally bad. They needed people to know it was not the miracle cure others were touting so in order to get to the middle , then needed to stress that NO proven studies proved this medication helped at all. So they kept saying that.

if it had not been for them stressing that no scientific study proved any effectiveness , there would have been a shortage of HQC and people who needed it for proven cures (not covid), would now not be able to get it causing more issues and not helping the people with covid even if they took it (According to proven scientific studies).

1 minute ago, DCGuy64 said:

OK, but we're getting farther afield here. Maybe this isn't how you meant it, but "the son of a high political figure" isn't the same as the political figure himself. Regardless of who said it, if Patient A takes a particular drug and it works for him, it's not for me to question him. Does it mean it'll work for everyone? No. But does it mean I can discredit him because it might not work for everyone? Again, no.

It's none of my business. People are allowed to make their own health decisions (or should be, anyway). That's how I see it.

 

and as I said... if a hospital wanted to prescribe it they should but because of people claiming it was a sure fire cure... many scientists went to the media to stop that rhetoric and had to publicly say that there was no proven studies that was shown any effectiveness. The scientists and the media had to set the record straight once political figures touted it as a sure fire cure.

if someone wanted it and the hospital wanted to provide it.. Im sure it was provided and people on this thread said they know it was prescribed many times

9 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

. I don't know of any political figure who said HCQ was a miracle drug and, as you say, "could cure everyone." I only know of one political figure who related stories he'd heard from people who claimed that hydroxychloroquine that personally helped them

The son of a high political figure (the highest), posted a video of someone claiming it was a 'sure-fire cure' and his tweet was 'MUST WATCH'. Twitter and YouTube took it down for false claims

these are more than just his opinion

4 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

I'm going to tread lightly here because I know the rules about discussing politics on this site. I'll just say I think it's a pity when promising drug treatments take a backseat to politics because some people in government and the media have a vendetta against a certain former president.

I'm also of the opinion that any human being with a terminal illness ought to have access to any drug he/she can afford, regardless of how many (or how few) studies have been done on it. That kind of thing makes me very angry. I heard people over and over again poo-poo HCQ because "it's not proven to be safe." Yeah, well if my father were dying of COVID and HCQ was the only thing available, then I don't give a damn about whether someone else thinks it's unsafe. It's not their decision!

 

I could be wrong but I don't think anyone banned its use. it was just publicized that there is no approved double blind study (gold standard) that said it showed any improvement whatsoever and there was a few studies done. I assume if a hospital wants to prescribe it, they could have. but I assume no one should feel this will significantly help.. if it does... great

there was a political figure that said that HCQ was a miracle drug that could cure everyone and I think most others were trying to do damage control to make sure that mentality was corrected

that's how I saw it from the scientific documentation I saw. I certainly could be wrong

18 minutes ago, NikiPinkston said:

In my opinion, there’s indeed a lot of shady stuff going on in the world’s governments, but it’s a shame that this virus became politicized.  Again, just my opinion, but based on what my husband the medical guy tells me, hydroxychloroquine could have saved many, many lives & shortened this pandemic had it not been demonized by the media.  My BIL took it for many years for an auto-immune disease.  It’s a medication that’s been used for decades with almost zero side effects, but most doctors were afraid to or prohibited from prescribing it for treatment of covid.  Thankfully, the vaccine, which was based on previous on-going research, was created in record time and offers us some hope.  I know there have been an extremely small percentage of people who have had severe reactions even, sadly, death, after receiving the vaccine (although no direct cause has been established), but most people do just fine and I think my chances with the vaccine are better than if I caught the virus.  You just don’t know if you’ll be the one who ends up on a ventilator or with lasting damage, or worse.

I believe hydroxychloroquine was not shown effective in any double blind case studies. I do not believe it had anything to do with the side effects. If you found a documented proved double blind study that shows that its effective, I would certainly want to know because as far as I know, there isn't one. This drug has saved lives for other issues and has helped many people but just not for covid that I have seen so far

Also, this might be happening due to the change in administration coming. The CDC wanted to prolong the cruise ban longer and the current administration put pressure on them to open it up quicker. With the administration changing, maybe the CDC feel comfortable going back to their original thoughts on cruising

10 minutes ago, boatseller said:

 

I pointed out previously, of 100 people, it doesn't matter if 20 or 75 test positive.  It only matters that 1 person (who may not have been tested IRL) requires intervention (a hospital bed or other higher care).

 

 

thats a slippery slope.

for every person that has it... they 'can' infect a person that is elderly or compromised or in some cases healthy people that will need hospitalization.

so the more cases... the more likelihood people with compromised immune systems can get it and that will lead to more hospitalizations and more death

most states have seen a rise in cases, followed in a few weeks by a rise in hospitalizations followed a few weeks later by a rise in deaths. 

this is why the percentage of infection at any given time is important

if you disagree... thats fine. Im done with this conversation. Most experts are saying this over and over and if it didnt matter about the spread, no experts would tell people to wear masks. if the percentage is no big deal.. then why are the experts telling people to social distance and wear masks or are you one of those that believe this is all a hoax?

34 minutes ago, boatseller said:

Except no.  The more you test, the more you find, that's actually the point of testing. 

no its not if you are talking percentage which is the only way to judge it

1000 people in a town

100 people tested

10 people test positive

10% of people tested are positive

if you test 200 people

20 people are positive

10% of people tested are positive.

the percentage is the same and we can start to see that about 10% is the positive case load. no matter how many people you test, the percentage should stay the same if you have a handle on the disease

1000 people in a town

100 people tested

10 test postive

10% of the people are positive

if you test 200 people

50 people test positive

25% of the people are positive

then you do not have a handle on the disease and you have no clue how infectious it is. If the percentage goes up, you are not in control of the disease.

more cases does mean more positive results but percentage should remain the same if you are in control.

5 minutes ago, Formula280SS said:

 

 

 

NYC positive rate are surely down

 

 

ALL my point was that NY has a high number of test... and a low number of positivity rates..

thats all I was saying and your quote here proves you agree.

Just now, Formula280SS said:

 

First, that is an opinion.  Today, globally, you can find reputable, high integrity professionals 'take one side or the other.

 

Second, nice puerile social media try; I did not agree with you.

 

 

The current testing ratio in NYC, at this current date, has everything to do with NYC decisions since March, and the consequential epic, and later to be epoch, economic destruction.  Enjoy.

 

no...

their decision to close businesses when they did, open them when they did , etc had to do with the economy

the testing in and of itself has NOTHING to do with the economy..can you say that today if they stopped testing but kept all the other enforcement's in place the economy would be better? would you say if they doubled the testing the economy would be worse? Nope

the amount of testing in and of itself only proves that more testing does NOT mean more cases. thats all

4 minutes ago, Formula280SS said:

 

NYC positive rate are surely down.  Also, NYC is consequently economically dead; now and for decades.  To defeat the virus the city was killed.  Brilliant.  Rinse and repeat in a major urban area near you similarly governed.

all I was doing was proving the statement "It’s simple the more you test, the more you find. " is 100% false. thanks for agreeing that it is indeed false.. the other part of your statement has NOTHING to do with the point I was making and has nothing to do with the fact that the more you test DOES NOT mean more positive results.  the testing ratio in NYC has nothing to do with the economic impact so my point is made.

3 hours ago, Trimone said:

It’s simple the more you test, the more you find.

the how do you explain the current situation in NY that tests more than just about anyone and has one of the least positive rates (less than 1%)

if the more  you test, the more you find, NY would have one of the most daily positive cases in the country right now

On 8/20/2020 at 6:32 AM, PATRLR said:

Showing symptoms is different than testing positive.  I don't recall seeing anywhere that it takes 3-14 days post exposure to test positive.  I may be wrong though.

 

my son is a RD at a college and he was a 'close contact' with someone who tested positive. He was told by the state that he had to quarantine for 14 days because it could take that long to show a positive test result. in that time he was tested 4 times and all 4 times was tested negative but the 14 days is the time they believe a positive test could happen

33 minutes ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

I don’t disagree with anything you said.  But the cruise lines would be happy if they could say there weren’t any breakouts on our ships.  

but would meemaw , after she contracts it from her children after they went on this cruise?

(And there would still be breakouts unless you dont think people get the virus under the age of 60. They get it and some show symptoms... they just usually dont die. there would be outbreaks regardless)

2 minutes ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

 

So what do all these have in common? Opening creates spikes. As I stated earlier, it isn't going away. Spikes are going to be with us until a vaccine is developed. We just need to learn how to manage to live our lives and open up as well. It's trying. It's hard. But it's also necessary. We just have to learn as we go and be smart about it. 

not if done right MANY MANY countries have FIRST gotten the curve down and then managed the outbreaks. NY has NOT gotten spikes. If you followed the CDC and government guidelines , you could manage the spikes with contact tracing but not if its still out of hand

what they have in common is that they didnt follow the guidelines

16 minutes ago, Wine-O said:

Maybe everyone needs to read the New England Journal of Medicine’s report where they say that masks outside of the medical profession absolutely do not help lessen the spread. But hey, they’re not experts either, are they?  🍷

maybe you need to read this

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2020836

We understand that some people are citing our Perspective article (published on April 1 at NEJM.org)¹ as support for discrediting widespread masking. In truth, the intent of our article was to push for more masking, not less. It is apparent that many people with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic or presymptomatic yet highly contagious and that these people account for a substantial fraction of all transmissions.^2,3 Universal masking helps to prevent such people from spreading virus-laden secretions, whether they recognize that they are infected or not.⁴

24 minutes ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

 

You're assessment is not correct. If 6/28's test count were performed on 4/5 this picture would look different. More testing will give you results of a 'less' of a percentage of positive tests, but there is no doubt that the more you test, the more total positive test counts will be found.

 

then explain why florida went from 4% - 20% infection rate

2 minutes ago, NancyIL said:

 

I don't recall that California "opened too soon'' - yet they are having the same issues as Florida and Texas. Time will tell if New York's cases spike again when the quarantines and travel restrictions are lifted.

California did NOT follow the CDC and government guidelines on when to open which included 14 consecutive days of downward movement in cases and other qualifications

they opened too soon

21 minutes ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

 

 

So... informed one, why do you suppose that Florida was flat lined forever and then all of a sudden shot up like a rocket? 

lets look at the charts...

May 15: DeSantis announces that on May 18, Florida will enter what he calls “full phase one” of reopening. That includes allowing gyms and restaurants to operate at 50% capacity.

June 3: DeSantis announces that Florida will enter phase two of reopening starting June 5. That means bars, tattoo parlors and other establishments will be able to reopen

12 minutes ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

 

 

 

So... informed one, why do you suppose that Florida was flat lined forever and then all of a sudden shot up like a rocket? 

they opened too soon. that is the most obvious answer. Just like Texas. You cant control this virus when you have too many cases and you open up everything. Thats why NY is handling it with more testing... They got the numbers down and followed the CDC and government guidelines and it worked. I wish all states followed the CDC and government guidelines