Would you cruise if Wearing a mask is mandatory?

[A&L_Ont]

10 hours ago, Milwaukee Eight said:

We have a restaurant here that now charges a $1 for plastic straw. 

 

If they had paper straws they should pay you. 

[chipmaster]

24 minutes ago, TheJuryIsStillOut said:

 

Nice tan line, I rather find it sexy as most tan lines 😉

[npcl]

2 hours ago, OceanCruise said:

The CNBC study you cited was done on hamsters. 

 

From New England Journal of Medicine 5/21/20:

"We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection....In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372

 

This study in Respiratory Medicine 5/13/20  tried to determine if there was infectivity of asymptomatic carriers who had contact with 455 people. "No severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections was detected in 455 contacts by nucleic acid test".

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32405162/?fbclid=IwAR2q2NxWgFpKPLjqd-vKY7meWJ-pgGHb-CITNM8WoZ8lg8Ftc7dE1hN5iGU

Yes it did involve hamsters because the study was to look at actual infection.  Something that is usually not done with human volunteers.

 

 

Do you even read the article you posted

 

For example in the first article you quoted it goes on to talk about why masks should be used due to asymptomatic cases. which by the way you did not post the title.  The article is dealing with in a hospital setting.

 

 

From New England Journal of Medicine 5/21/20:

Universal Masking in Hospitals in the Covid-19 Era

More compelling is the possibility that wearing a mask may reduce the likelihood of transmission from asymptomatic and minimally symptomatic health care workers with Covid-19 to other providers and patients. This concern increases as Covid-19 becomes more widespread in the community. We face a constant risk that a health care worker with early infection may bring the virus into our facilities and transmit it to others. Transmission from people with asymptomatic infection has been well documented, although it is unclear to what extent such transmission contributes to the overall spread of infection.

 

As far as the second you did not post the conclusion

 

A Study on Infectivity of Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Carriers

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32405162/?fbclid=IwAR2q2NxWgFpKPLjqd-vKY7meWJ-pgGHb-CITNM8WoZ8lg8Ftc7dE1hN5iGU

 

Conclusion: In summary, all the 455 contacts were excluded from SARS-CoV-2 infection and we conclude that the infectivity of some asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers might be weak.

 

So they concluded that the infectivity of some asymptomatic carriers might be weak.

 

Not that all of them are weak,. only that some of them MIGHT be.

 

On the other hand  I will raise you an editorial from  NEJM

 

Asymptomatic Transmission, the Achilles’ Heel of Current Strategies to Control Covid-19

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2009758

 

Arons et al. now report in the Journal an outbreak of Covid-19 in a skilled nursing facility in Washington State where a health care provider who was working while symptomatic tested positive for infection with SARS-CoV-2 on March 1, 2020.

 

It is notable that 17 of 24 specimens (71%) from presymptomatic persons had viable virus by culture 1 to 6 days before the development of symptoms. Finally, the mortality from Covid-19 in this facility was high; of 57 residents who tested positive, 15 (26%) died.

 

Ultimately, the rapid spread of Covid-19 across the United States and the globe, the clear evidence of SARS-CoV-2 transmission from asymptomatic persons,5 and the eventual need to relax current social distancing practices argue for broadened SARS-CoV-2 testing to include asymptomatic persons in prioritized settings. These factors also support the case for the general public to use face masks10 when in crowded outdoor or indoor spaces. This unprecedented pandemic calls for unprecedented measures to achieve its ultimate defeat.

 

Clinical characteristics of 24 asymptomatic infections with COVID-19 screened among close contacts in Nanjing, China

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11427-020-1661-4.pdf

 

. Through epidemiological investigation, we observed a typical asymptomatic transmission to the cohabiting family members, which even caused severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Overall, the asymptomatic carriers identified from close contacts were prone to be mildly ill during hospitalization. However, the communicable period could be up to three weeks and the communicated patients could develop severe illness

 

Rapid asymptomatic transmission of COVID-19 during the incubation period demonstrating strong infectivity in a cluster of youngsters aged 16-23 years outside Wuhan and characteristics of young patients with COVID-19: A prospective contact-tracing study

 

Delivery of infection from asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19 in a familial cluster

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1201971220301740

 

Conclusions

Our findings indicate that COVID-19 can be transmitted by asymptomatic carriers during the incubation period.

 

There are only a few hundred studies showing transmission of COVID-19 while asymptomatic.

 

 

[pcur]

22 hours ago, cqpate said:

required palliative mask = no deal. i already delayed a colorado trip due to mask requirements. its near useless unless its n95.

NIOSH study--->Filter efficiency was measured across a wide range of small particle sizes (0.02 to 1 µm) at 33 and 99 L/min. N95 respirators had efficiencies greater than 95% (as expected). For the entire range of particles tested, t-shirts had 10% efficiency, scarves 10% to 20%, cloth masks 10% to 30%, sweatshirts 20% to 40%, and towels 40%. All of the cloth masks and materials had near zero efficiency at 0.3 µm, a particle size that easily penetrates into the lungs.

 

Well, I guess we can't believe everything we read, and need to watch the date on the information, since this is such a fluid situation.  The article I read said the  cotton fabric I used when I made our masks had an 80% efficiency factor if double layered, which I did when I made them.  Not useless in my opinion.

 

I've gone for 2.75 months now following the guidelines, wearing a mask, etc. BUT, the big deal is not exposing myself to a lot of people.  I complained twice at Costco about not requiring masks, and the next day (coincidence, I'm sure) Costco went nationwide requiring masks.  

[fredflint]

I have no issue wearing a mask when I am out in public right now, but I do not intend to cruise until the risk is at a low enough level to not need a mask.

 

I am not sure about this boat but the news was concerning to me how well any testing can work out.

 

They were all tested before they left, later  one person came down with symptoms and 86 people out of 126 people tested positive.  Scary numbers for sure, considering you could be exposed on the flight to the cruise.

 

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/american-seafoods-factory-trawler-returns-to-seattle-after-85-crew-members-test-positive-for-covid-19/

 

https://www.ktva.com/story/42197834/86-crew-members-aboard-fishing-vessel-test-positive-for-covid-19

 

One crew member had previously tested positive for the disease and, as a result, the company decided to test the entire crew.

 

Eighty-five additional crew members were confirmed to have COVID-19 over the weekend, according to a Sunday press release. Nine test results were still pending.

 

The crew is in the Port of Seattle and under lockdown on the vessel. All crew members are quarantined and being monitored by health professionals.

 

American Seafoods' CEO Mikel Durham said all crew members were screened and tested for COVID-19 antibodies and viral infection before they boarded the American Dynasty.

 

Only the people who tested negative were allowed on the fishing vessel.

 

“The health and safety of our crew, employees, and the communities where we operate is always the top priority for us,” said Durham in the release.

 

The American Dynasty is a two-level fish processor, according to the company's website. The crew fishes for Alaska pollock, Pacific hake and yellowfin sole. While aboard the vessel, they process, package and freeze the fish to be sold. 

[xpcdoojk]

5 hours ago, npcl said:

It is the velocity, more than the size of particles.  Slow down the air flow coming out and the particles disperse prior to reaching and infecting others. Plenty of research papers, including video analysis, of both large and small particles exits.  With masks far fewer reach another person standing a few feet away.

 

Again the purpose is not the wearing it is to reduce spread from the potentially infected individual.

 

With over 50% of those infected are asymptomatic the question becomes have you accidently killed someone today.  You may be healthy, but other may not be.

 

 

 

This video from a research institute in Singapore demonstrates how it helps

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLsGJHRGB_s

 

A couple of other articles.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/19/coronavirus-wearing-a-mask-can-reduce-transmission-by-75percent-new-study-claims.html

 

Wearing surgical masks in public could help slow COVID-19 pandemic's advance

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/04/200403132345.htm

 

The study was conducted at the University of Hong Kong as part of the dissertation research of the lead author, Dr. Nancy Leung, who, under the supervision of the co-senior authors Drs. Cowling and Milton, recruited 246 people with suspected respiratory viral infections. Milton's Gesundheit machine compared how much virus they exhaled with and without a surgical mask.

"In 111 people infected by either coronavirus, influenza virus or rhinovirus, masks reduced detectable virus in respiratory droplets and aerosols for seasonal coronaviruses, and in respiratory droplets for influenza virus," Leung said. "In contrast, masks did not reduce the emission of rhinoviruses."

Although the experiment took place before the current pandemic, COVID-19 and seasonal coronaviruses are closely related and may be of similar particle size. The report's other senior author, Professor Benjamin Cowling, division head of epidemiology and biostatistics, School of Public Health, HKUMed, and co-director of the World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, said, "The ability of surgical masks to reduce seasonal coronavirus in respiratory droplets and aerosols implies that such masks can contribute to slowing the spread of (COVID-19) when worn by infected people."

 

This is a very good video covering mask use and why they should be used.  Very good summary in plan terms.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P27HRClMf2U

 

 

 

And here I thought it was wrong to disagree with the World Health Organization.  If they are sharing wrong information, I guess it is ok if we quit paying the bill for them to operate?

 

inquiring minds?

 

I know that is so passé.  Nobody inquires anymore.  They read something on the internet and they know.  Scientific method was last century, we are now informed by anonymous posts in a cruising forum about infectious diseases by some people who can post links to studies on hamsters or gerbils upon which we can rest assured the results will happen.  

 

Good lord... while the streets of our cities burn based on a crime that 99.9% of the population agrees was murder.  What exactly are we disagreeing about?  O, it is systemic racism, which means we can not fix it.  So we have to start over.  Here we come Venezuela.... life will be awesome once we submit to those smarter than us to tell us all what to do.  

 

jc

Edited June 2, 2020 by xpcdoojk

[xpcdoojk]

2 hours ago, A&L_Ont said:

 

If they had paper straws they should pay you. 

 

True

[npcl]

42 minutes ago, xpcdoojk said:

 

 

And here I thought it was wrong to disagree with the World Health Organization.  If they are sharing wrong information, I guess it is ok if we quit paying the bill for them to operate?

 

inquiring minds?

 

I know that is so passé.  Nobody inquires anymore.  They read something on the internet and they know.  Scientific method was last century, we are now informed by anonymous posts in a cruising forum about infectious diseases by some people who can post links to studies on hamsters or gerbils upon which we can rest assured the results will happen.  

 

Good lord... while the streets of our cities burn based on a crime that 99.9% of the population agrees was murder.  What exactly are we disagreeing about?  O, it is systemic racism, which means we can not fix it.  So we have to start over.  Here we come Venezuela.... life will be awesome once we submit to those smarter than us to tell us all what to do.  

 

jc

You do know that when they are actually studing actual infection, it is normal to use an animal model, and not to conduct such tests on humans.  Since this study was looking at actual virus transfer animals were used.  Doing a study that intentionally gets humans ill is usually considered to be unethical and has very high hurdles for approval.

 

There are plenty of other studies out there, including some I referenced.  I included the one, because it was dealing with actual infection rates in an animal model, instead of looking at particle movement in mask tests.

Edited June 2, 2020 by npcl

[npcl]

1 hour ago, fredflint said:

I have no issue wearing a mask when I am out in public right now, but I do not intend to cruise until the risk is at a low enough level to not need a mask.

 

I am not sure about this boat but the news was concerning to me how well any testing can work out.

 

They were all tested before they left, later  one person came down with symptoms and 86 people out of 126 people tested positive.  Scary numbers for sure, considering you could be exposed on the flight to the cruise.

 

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/american-seafoods-factory-trawler-returns-to-seattle-after-85-crew-members-test-positive-for-covid-19/

 

https://www.ktva.com/story/42197834/86-crew-members-aboard-fishing-vessel-test-positive-for-covid-19

 

One crew member had previously tested positive for the disease and, as a result, the company decided to test the entire crew.

 

Eighty-five additional crew members were confirmed to have COVID-19 over the weekend, according to a Sunday press release. Nine test results were still pending.

 

The crew is in the Port of Seattle and under lockdown on the vessel. All crew members are quarantined and being monitored by health professionals.

 

American Seafoods' CEO Mikel Durham said all crew members were screened and tested for COVID-19 antibodies and viral infection before they boarded the American Dynasty.

 

Only the people who tested negative were allowed on the fishing vessel.

 

“The health and safety of our crew, employees, and the communities where we operate is always the top priority for us,” said Durham in the release.

 

The American Dynasty is a two-level fish processor, according to the company's website. The crew fishes for Alaska pollock, Pacific hake and yellowfin sole. While aboard the vessel, they process, package and freeze the fish to be sold. 

That is the issue, even the PCR tests have high rates of false negatives, depending upon how the sample was taken, the stage of the infection, etc.

 

There are cases where people are showing severe symptoms test negative multiple times.  One physician tested negative 4 times, using different types of test.  He only got a positive test when they took a deep lung sample.

 

One cannot assume that they are not contagious because they are not showing symptoms, and unfortunately even a negative PCR test can not be counted on.

 

https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardiology/journal-scans/2020/05/18/13/42/variation-in-false-negative-rate-of-reverse

 

Based on this analysis, the false-negative rate for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR is shockingly high, even at its lowest on day 8 post-exposure, or 3 days after symptoms. At its best, one out of five people suspected of COVID-19 will test negative. If clinical suspicion is high, infection should not be ruled out on the basis of RT-PCR alone

[Germancruiser]

3 hours ago, TheJuryIsStillOut said:

Oh well- great picture-  one thing is clear though- they wore their mask as it should be worn. Here Germany things are going slowly back to normal. The first openings began four weeks ago. MANDORY - wearing masks when using public transportation and while shopping and so such things.  The numbers of infected patients went down from 30 000 to 10 000 in these weeks. The press reports that is due to wearing masks- and people respect and follow those rules- well almost all poeple. Always some idiots around who know better!

 

Edited June 2, 2020 by Germancruiser

[HappyCamper49]

On 5/22/2020 at 8:18 AM, watson50 said:

 

I love your sarcasm. There's a pandemic raging and you've only worn a mask to get nails done? That's rich.😒. To answer to OP question. YES no problem. Live to cruise-Cruise to live.🚢

 

 

 

 

Yes, I would wear a mask if it were mandatory.  I wear the mask now when I have to go buy groceries or go to the drug store.  I wear it to protect OTHERS.  I do not like it, but I wear it.

[HappyCamper49]

4 hours ago, gatortrue said:

I voted yes, but I would not want to anywhere outside.  I want to enjoy fresh ocean air.

Is everyone booked on a cruise? 

Yes!😇

[HBE4]

18 hours ago, hazence said:

There really is no need to debate this issue anymore. The issue will be resolved for us in the next two weeks by looking at the numbers in many of the most highly infected cities in the country.  If...after what we have seen in the streets, in the parks, in the looted shops...there is no related surge of COVID...then we can be reasonably certain that younger people, at the least, can go back to work, to church, to restaurants, etc...without social distancing, without fear of COVID.
 

That is, if there are any workplaces, churches and restaurants still standing where they live.

 

Certainly will make the case for wearing a mask, as most of the people I see on TV are wearing masks.

[time4u2go]

12 hours ago, KsucAts said:

 

And what about everybody saying that the crowds over Memorial weekend in places like the Ozarks were going to cause huge spikes?  So far, I have only seen one reported case of somebody who partied at the Ozarks.  I know the media is busy on another topic right now, but enough of them would jump right back into covering covid if there was a spike caused by those crowds.  We are getting close to 10 days now from those crowds, so I say chances are pretty good that there will be nothing coming from it.  

Cases are going up in Missouri:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/missouri-coronavirus-cases.html

[Keksie]

1 hour ago, time4u2go said:

Cases are going up in Missouri:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/missouri-coronavirus-cases.html

Looking at that chart while one can say cases are going up there is not enough data to understand why.  Are antibody cases counted in this total.  That would be people who had been exposed at one time but not necessarily recently.  Does the count include people who have tested positive more than once.  Since two negative tests are needed in some cases to return to work a person could get another positive test before clearing the virus and this would inflate the positive case numbers.  What is the percentage of positive vs. negative tests.  When were the tests done and was there a lag between testing and results.  Was this because of a concentrated effort to test everyone in long term care facilities or other high density areas.  

[Ocean Boy]

6 hours ago, HBE4 said:

 

Certainly will make the case for wearing a mask, as most of the people I see on TV are wearing masks.

Yeah, they were destroying the city of Providence last night but following the governors mandate to wear their masks. I will destroy your business but I'll protect my fellow hoodlums from any virus that I might be carrying.

[time4u2go]

31 minutes ago, Keksie said:

Looking at that chart while one can say cases are going up there is not enough data to understand why.  Are antibody cases counted in this total.  That would be people who had been exposed at one time but not necessarily recently.  Does the count include people who have tested positive more than once.  Since two negative tests are needed in some cases to return to work a person could get another positive test before clearing the virus and this would inflate the positive case numbers.  What is the percentage of positive vs. negative tests.  When were the tests done and was there a lag between testing and results.  Was this because of a concentrated effort to test everyone in long term care facilities or other high density areas.  

They are not including antibody tests as of May 23:

 

https://www.kcur.org/2020-05-24/missouris-covid-19-testing-outlook-declines-after-health-department-removes-antibody-tests-from-tally

 

In light of that, it's somewhat telling that their numbers actually went up after they stopped doing that.  I would have expected them to go down.

 

I would guess that their reporting methods haven't changed regarding your other questions, so any trend should be considered fairly accurate.  If they have changed their reporting methods, then of course any trend is questionable.

Edited June 2, 2020 by time4u2go

[Ocean Boy]

New cases continue to show up in RI but hospitalizations and deaths are declining substantially. In my mind that is the most important statistic.

[molly361]

1 hour ago, Ocean Boy said:

New cases continue to show up in RI but hospitalizations and deaths are declining substantially. In my mind that is the most important statistic.

My sister who lives in Westchester is hoping to go to their timeshare in Missquimicutt this weekend so they can go to a restaurant and the beach😇

[xpcdoojk]

11 hours ago, npcl said:

You do know that when they are actually studing actual infection, it is normal to use an animal model, and not to conduct such tests on humans.  Since this study was looking at actual virus transfer animals were used.  Doing a study that intentionally gets humans ill is usually considered to be unethical and has very high hurdles for approval.

 

There are plenty of other studies out there, including some I referenced.  I included the one, because it was dealing with actual infection rates in an animal model, instead of looking at particle movement in mask tests.

 

 

I am too dumb to know anything about science.... I just come here to be educated. 

 

Do you talk down to everyone you post to?  Another thought for inquiring minds.

 

jc

[TNcruising02]

My dad, who is extremely high risk, spoke to his doctor about masks and the virus.  His doctor told him that if he got the virus, it will most likely kill him.  He said that other people wearing cloth and disposable masks will not protect him.  If he wears those types of masks, he will not be protected.  He needs to wear the N95 mask.  Thankfully, my daughter had a bunch of them before March, so he has them to use.  He rarely goes out and when he does, he protects himself.  He isn't depending on the actions of others or demanding specific behavior to protect himself.  He understands that people should continue to live their lives.

I wear them to the grocery store, but can't stand the masks. I know that if I have the virus, I won't really be protecting anyone.  The best protection is for sick people and high risk people to stay home.

 

 

[OceanCruise]

We are clearly nearing the bottom end of the bell curve as Covid peaked in mid-April according to CDC statistics. Scroll down this link for weekly US numbers and incidence in each state. 

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm 

Just because more people are reported as positive does not mean the actual rate of infection is increasing. Taking an arbitrary number, for example, a 5% rate in 100 people equals 5 people but a 5% rate in 1000 people equals 50 people. More people but exact same rate. 

 

[grapau27]

11 hours ago, HBE4 said:

 

Certainly will make the case for wearing a mask, as most of the people I see on TV are wearing masks.

This is interesting.

[SJ1_]

Yes

[chipmaster]

What's really the problem here?

 

1. After SARS/etc, countries in Asia learned to put masks on and/or stay at home when they don't feel well. That's called being considerate to your fellow humans.
2. The difference this time around is that COVID has plenty of asymptomatic transmitters... and a significantly higher death rate than "regular colds and flus". So, yes, now you need to put your mask on even when you don't feel ill. It's called being considerate to your fellow humans.

 

But, you're right: masks aren't likely needed everywhere. Some of your examples are likely places where one could go safely mask free. But you go near people (semi-crowded park, bus, airplane, office), you don the mask. It's just the right thing to do. You sit in your 6-foot circle of isolation in Brooklyn or go walking in the woods, feel free to take it off.

 

Realize the mask is determined by #2 , above. *you* potentially infecting *others* without you knowing it.

 

You have the right not to wear a mask, I suppose, and I also have the right to not take a shower for weeks and try to stand next to you. (note, I'm work from home, so this is no idle threat!) Both are obnoxious. Ever wonder why that subway car in NYC quickly gets empty when I get on, especially when the A/C is down? You're going to find the same thing will happen when folks without masks get on, too.

 

Wearing masks will never work if it's mandated (although, places where folks are forced into close proximity, it may be). It's going to work when it becomes cultural. It is in asia. It's starting to in the west, which is a good thing. No shirt, no shoes, no mask, no service.

 

Eventually, when lots of us get/have it, we figure out how to treat it quickly, we're all vaccinated, the need for mask wearing will decrease until the next time.