Abandon hope all ye who enter here:

[llawrence]

I agree.  We have cruised for 50 plus years.....at 70, our cruising days may be over.  Our doctors are not likely to give us a permission to cruise note....we both have many of the health problems most older Americans have......if a doctor gives you a note , would that mean he or she is then liable if something happens?

[zitsky]

This isn’t just about age.  It also includes anyone immuno compromised including HIV etc?

[Ride-The-Waves]

9 hours ago, Happy Cruiser 6143 said:

 

The doctor's note only says he/she found you to be healthy on the date you were examined.  Which could be a month before you attempt to board a ship.  The whole thing is unworkable.

Negative!  Obtaining a health certificate from a doctor offers the knowledge that you are healthy enough to cruise since you have no underlying conditions which could cause hurt to yourself or others.  Should wheelchair bound people cruise since they cannot easily get to a lifeboat?  Should someone with cancer cruise?  Should anyone with an infectious disease cruise? Etc.  

 

Hurtigruten expedition ships, and I expect other expedition lines, require a doctors certificate which is sent to the ship's doctor who has the final say on whether you are healthy enough to spend 2 weeks away from ashore medical facilities.  All cruise ship medical facilities are very limited in what they can provide in care.  

 

From what I have seen of some fellow passengers, especially on long trans-oceantics , many of them should not be on the ship for their own health and the safety of others.

Edited April 8, 2020 by Ride-The-Waves

[TeeRick]

19 hours ago, markeb said:

 

I'm sorry,, but we don't know that yet. Antibodies may or may not be indicative of long term immunity. Cell mediated immunity tends to dominate in viral infections and assays for that are still at best imperfect.They will be the accepted assays by the FDA, CE, etc. (because I don't know where the UK is going with that on at the end of the year) because of years of precedent. You may have lifelong protection from natural infection, but an antibody assay may not indicate that fact.

 

And the tests being used right now are still being used to screen, not to detect long term immunity. I've given up on trying to figure out who's testing for what as it all gets reported as "testing"; there are different purposes for diagnostic testing, different sensitivities, different positive and negative predictive values, etc. The serological test being used in the US apparently looks for a combination of indicators of acute infection as well as longer infection and/or recovery. Don't know if the testing in UK is the same.

markeb,

I agree with your answer.  Antibodies, either from natural immunity (previous exposure) or from a vaccine approach might or might not protect against SARS-CoV-2.  Nobody knows yet.  However here is the nice thing about our immune system.  It produces a highly amplified response against the pathogen if it was previously primed by an infection or by the correct vaccine approach.  Viruses need to replicate inside cells and even a few viruses cause cells to present antigen to our immune system cells to start the amplified host response.    This response is generally a mixture of humoral immunity (antibodies) and cellular immunity (T-Cells and cytokines).  We just don't know yet what will be effective for protection against SARS-CoV-2.  But the world is hoping (fingers double crossed) that previous exposure to the virus, even in non-symptomatic people, gives natural protective immunity- even broad enough to protect against minor variations (strains and mutations) of the current virus.  If so, vaccines still might be needed down the road to "boost" this natural response.  

[markeb]

5 minutes ago, TeeRick said:

markeb,

I agree with your answer.  Antibodies, either from natural immunity (previous exposure) or from a vaccine approach might or might not protect against SARS-CoV-2.  Nobody knows yet.  However here is the nice thing about our immune system.  It produces a highly amplified response against the pathogen if it was previously primed by an infection or by the correct vaccine approach.  Viruses need to replicate inside cells and even a few viruses cause cells to present antigen to our immune system cells to start the amplified host response.    This response is generally a mixture of humoral immunity (antibodies) and cellular immunity (T-Cells and cytokines).  We just don't know yet what will be effective for protection against SARS-CoV-2.  But the world is hoping (fingers double crossed) that previous exposure to the virus, even in non-symptomatic people, gives natural protective immunity- even broad enough to protect against minor variations (strains and mutations) of the current virus.  If so, vaccines still might be needed down the road to "boost" this natural response.  

 

This was from FDA's press release on serological tests yesterday. One thing I found interesting is they've only approved one EUA, and are basically threatening compliance action against others marketing tests...

 

"Serological tests can play a critical role in the fight against COVID-19 by helping healthcare professionals to identify individuals who have overcome an infection in the past and have developed an immune response. In the future, this may potentially be used to help determine, together with other clinical data, that such individuals are no longer susceptible to infection and can return to work. In addition, these test results can aid in determining who may donate a part of their blood called convalescent plasma, which may serve as a possible treatment for those who are seriously ill from COVID-19." (Emphasis added.)

 

As you know, most revaccinate schedules are based on antibody titers, even if the best science says CMI, so at some point someone will come up with an accepted minimum and that will be the booster level. Even though antibodies have also been one of the problems with making a successful coronavirus vaccine. Which is the extent of the technical discussion I'd ever have on a non-technical forum!

[zitsky]

How do we explain people who have recovered and become ill again?

[markeb]

6 minutes ago, zitsky said:

How do we explain people who have recovered and become ill again?

 

Can't yet. May not have cleared the virus, maybe incomplete immunity, maybe the virus sequestered and came back. Totally different virus, but Ebola sequestered and survivors (males) could transmit in semen months after apparent recovery. The science has been largely aimed at reducing transmission and finding treatment options for the seriously ill. The kinds of things TeeRick and I are talking about are the hard science studies that will look at the hard problems. Those will be very long term studies. 

[WrittenOnYourHeart]

19 minutes ago, zitsky said:

How do we explain people who have recovered and become ill again?

 

Even people who have had chicken pox - which you supposedly can only get once - have gotten it multiple times. There is never a guarantee.

[hcat]

4 minutes ago, WrittenOnYourHeart said:

 

Even people who have had chicken pox - which you supposedly can only get once - have gotten it multiple times. There is never a guarantee.

That's me!  

Had it as a child and then as an adult when my child had it.

Hope my shingles shot works well but we need the upgraded one.

[cgolf1]

I will play. We are hoping to go ahead with our 2021 and 2022 cruises. We had paid off half of our APEX cruise, but in roughly 3 weeks we will be getting all but our deposit back. We are willing to risk the deposit on the two cruises, unfortunately only one was booked onboard. 

 

The Apex is an amazing room, and with the way things are going we may be some of the first paying customers on the APEX like the Edge. The Constellation cruise was just an amazing deal, that if we cancel it, we are unlikely to get a deal like that again. IMO worth the risk. 

 

I also expect that if they go bankrupt they wouldn't eat everyones money, it would be honored somehow unless the line goes away completely. If they ate everyones money, there would be absolutely zero trust with the line and they would have to allow people to pay like we do for hotels, no more paid in full dates.

[zitsky]

If they did go bankrupt I would think trip insurance would cover that?

[cgolf1]

4 minutes ago, zitsky said:

If they did go bankrupt I would think trip insurance would cover that?

That is a good point. Normally I wouldn’t by the insurance this early, but maybe it pays to now. 

[Babr]

3 hours ago, cgolf1 said:

That is a good point. Normally I wouldn’t by the insurance this early, but maybe it pays to now. 

No, trip insurance does not cover financial default of the carrier. If you are thinking about buying for that possibility, don’t. 

[zitsky]

13 minutes ago, Babr said:

No, trip insurance does not cover financial default of the carrier. If you are thinking about buying for that possibility, don’t. 

 

Are you sure about that?  Because I think you can get a policy.

[drakes2]

14 minutes ago, Babr said:

No, trip insurance does not cover financial default of the carrier. If you are thinking about buying for that possibility, don’t. 

I have cancellation insurance through my CC provider but am finding it to be quite useless. For my upcoming cruise that I cancelled embarking in Italy debarking in Spain next month hotel won't refund only offer travel credit which I won't use. Upon calling insurance was told they will not reimburse as credit has been offered. Under current circumstances service has been nothing short of disgusting.  Not risking my life to use a travel credit and no vaccine for 18 to 24 months. 

 

[Babr]

23 minutes ago, zitsky said:

 

Are you sure about that?  Because I think you can get a policy.

Pretty sure. It is true of policies that I’ve looked at. Read the certificate of any policy you are considering, not just the summary. Look under “Exclusions” or language to that effect which lists all the things specifically not covered.

[Babr]

20 minutes ago, drakes2 said:

I have cancellation insurance through my CC provider but am finding it to be quite useless. For my upcoming cruise that I cancelled embarking in Italy debarking in Spain next month hotel won't refund only offer travel credit which I won't use. Upon calling insurance was told they will not reimburse as credit has been offered. Under current circumstances service has been nothing short of disgusting.  Not risking my life to use a travel credit and no vaccine for 18 to 24 months. 

 

What you are describing is pretty standard. Insurance will not pay unless you have a loss. If you have been offered a credit or some other form of compensation, they don’t count it as a loss.

 

Does the credit expire? Could you claim a loss after it expires since you aren’t likely to use it?

[cgolf1]

26 minutes ago, drakes2 said:

I have cancellation insurance through my CC provider but am finding it to be quite useless. For my upcoming cruise that I cancelled embarking in Italy debarking in Spain next month hotel won't refund only offer travel credit which I won't use. Upon calling insurance was told they will not reimburse as credit has been offered. Under current circumstances service has been nothing short of disgusting.  Not risking my life to use a travel credit and no vaccine for 18 to 24 months. 

 

 

I am with @TeeRick and think working on treatment vs a vaccine is the way to go (pretty sure I read that earlier in this thread). I never used my science degree in research, but am in an industry that supports research. This will likely be around for awhile and we will have to deal with it. 

 

I am still stunned at all the hatred for the cruise lines out there. They are being demonized because the results are visible because people are in the same space for a week or more. Airlines on the other hand that have probably spread this the most, but it has been hard to prove. Though I did see one airline have 100 cabin attendants test positive, so maybe that will take the heat off the cruise lines at least for a little bit.

[Big_G]

Given the numbers are coming in under projections and the country's brain thrust (not the government) is hard at work developing treatments and vaccines, I'm going with cautiously optimistic. We have the Allure booked in November and the Apex in January. My wife is laid off but that won't last long and I'm still working. Can't dwell on the negatives so we'll just keep chugging along and let the cards fall where they may.

[TeeRick]

17 hours ago, cgolf1 said:

I will play. We are hoping to go ahead with our 2021 and 2022 cruises. We had paid off half of our APEX cruise, but in roughly 3 weeks we will be getting all but our deposit back. We are willing to risk the deposit on the two cruises, unfortunately only one was booked onboard. 

 

The Apex is an amazing room, and with the way things are going we may be some of the first paying customers on the APEX like the Edge. The Constellation cruise was just an amazing deal, that if we cancel it, we are unlikely to get a deal like that again. IMO worth the risk. 

 

I also expect that if they go bankrupt they wouldn't eat everyones money, it would be honored somehow unless the line goes away completely. If they ate everyones money, there would be absolutely zero trust with the line and they would have to allow people to pay like we do for hotels, no more paid in full dates.

A lot of different scenarios even around bankruptcy.  In a Chapter 11 reorganization they might still be in operation and/or perhaps there will be a settlement fund set up by the judge.  Not sure where passenger refunds would be prioritized in the fund.  The bankrupt line might also get acquired and ships re-flagged.  Perhaps the new company would respect full or even partial refunds to promote good relations with their passenger base.

[TeeRick]

12 hours ago, cgolf1 said:

 

I am with @TeeRick and think working on treatment vs a vaccine is the way to go (pretty sure I read that earlier in this thread). I never used my science degree in research, but am in an industry that supports research. This will likely be around for awhile and we will have to deal with it. 

 

I am still stunned at all the hatred for the cruise lines out there. They are being demonized because the results are visible because people are in the same space for a week or more. Airlines on the other hand that have probably spread this the most, but it has been hard to prove. Though I did see one airline have 100 cabin attendants test positive, so maybe that will take the heat off the cruise lines at least for a little bit.

My comments on vaccines and therapies were in this thread post #162.  Both approaches are needed rapidly.  

[TeeRick]

12 hours ago, Big_G said:

Given the numbers are coming in under projections and the country's brain thrust (not the government) is hard at work developing treatments and vaccines, I'm going with cautiously optimistic. We have the Allure booked in November and the Apex in January. My wife is laid off but that won't last long and I'm still working. Can't dwell on the negatives so we'll just keep chugging along and let the cards fall where they may.

Very good advice.

[hcat]

15 hours ago, Babr said:

No, trip insurance does not cover financial default of the carrier. If you are thinking about buying for that possibility, don’t. 

Conjures up bad memories of some  very surprised  cruise pax who were stranded when there  were a bankruptcy or two some yrs ago..The ships were re possessed or some such.   Somemone with a clearer  memory  will hopefully  correct my impressions or expand!  Let's hope it doesn't happen.

[ECCruise]

1 hour ago, hcat said:

Conjures up bad memories of some  very surprised  cruise pax who were stranded when there  were a bankruptcy or two some yrs ago..The ships were re possessed or some such.   Somemone with a clearer  memory  will hopefully  correct my impressions or expand!  Let's hope it doesn't happen.

Yes.  Renaissance cruises when they went belly-up in 2001.

Story here.

[cluso]

2 hours ago, ECCruise said:

Yes.  Renaissance cruises when they went belly-up in 2001.

Yep, the "R" ships.  We really enjoyed them.  No babies and no smoking on the ships (their advertising).  A little over 600 PAX.  Luckily, we were not caught in the end game.  The last time we were on one of the R ships was Azamara to the Baltic.  Three nights in St Petersburg, it was great!