If Royal Requires A Covid-19 Vaccine Before Cruising Will You Get It???

[DCGuy64]

15 hours ago, lizzius said:

I'm referring to the black-and-white notions that cruise ships must have zero cases of covid onboard in order to successfully return, or that a vaccine offers perfect protection. While it seems your belief about a vaccine requirement is rooted in those two all-or-nothing contentions (and perhaps the thought that it would get you on a cruise ship faster), I wouldn't classify a vaccine requirement in and of itself as an absolutist solution.

I like your thinking, reasoning, and also the way you write. This comment in particular piqued my interest because I do see this type of all-or-nothing thinking being quite pervasive where I live. I honestly don't know where to lay the blame: poor reasoning or critical thinking skills, misunderstanding of the subject matter, or maybe a 1st world problem of expecting unrealistic outcomes, maybe something else entirely. At any rate, I am a realist. I don't expect the cruise industry, or any travel industry component, to develop and implement a 100% effective strategy against this virus or any other. Some here do, or seem to, based on the many posts littered with phrases like "not guaranteed," "not 100% effective," "it only takes 1 infected person to kill everybody" (okay, that last one was deliberate hyperbole, but you get the drift). What strikes me as odd is that these people are, or should be, cruising enthusiasts. Even before COVID, you could get sick onboard a ship, fall off, get mugged in a port, slip and hit your head on the side of the pool, etc. Life is fraught with risks, and cruising is no different, so did these folk expect a 100% risk-free experience before COVID-19? Doubtful. Why the sudden demand that the risk tolerance be 0? If that's your standard, you need to stay home and let the rest of us cruise. My last point is this: I see all mitigation efforts against COVID-19 as being cumulative, so having pre-boarding screening, temperature checks, wearing of masks, social distancing, QR code menus, excursion bubbles, assistance with buffet items, etc. all taken together can keep lowering the risk of infection. If one fails, the other could prevent the next infection, etc. No, there will never be a 0% chance of getting infected, but the more measures in place, the safer it will be. And that's good enough for me. (just my opinion, of course)

[lizzius]

4 hours ago, Bobal said:

 

I wonder how one provides 'proof of recovery'. I've had Covid and I've recovered from it. How do I prove that? Also my understanding is that I could still pick it up elsewhere and carry it. Perhaps our resident medics could chime in on this?

Yeah, that's tricky. You have to have been sick enough to need a doctor confirm the illness for you (not just a probable case, and it must have been an active infection), at which point you can get a form to this effect essentially certifying your recovery after so many symptom free days either from your own doctor or the department of public health (my dad had it over the summer, when the public health authorities in his area were still contacting all positive cases.. they offered to give him the letter if needed. His workplace actually had a higher clearance required for him to return to work at the time than would have been needed to get a plane: a negative PCR test). Here's the guidance I found on the web: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/travelers/testing-international-air-travelers.html

[DCGuy64]

2 minutes ago, lizzius said:

Yeah, that's tricky. You have to have been sick enough to need a doctor confirm the illness for you (not just a probable case, and it must have been an active infection), at which point you can get a form to this effect essentially certifying your recovery after so many symptom free days either from your own doctor or the department of public health (my dad had it over the summer, when the public health authorities in his area were still contacting all positive cases.. they offered to give him the letter if needed. His workplace actually had a higher clearance required for him to return to work at the time than would have been needed to get a plane: a negative PCR test). Here's the guidance I found on the web: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/travelers/testing-international-air-travelers.html

That's what we got, meaning my wife and me. I got a letter from the local health department and a letter from my doctor, both indicating that I'd tested positive, isolated for 10 days, and recovered. That, along with my positive test (although I've since tested negative) would suffice, I believe.

[time4u2go]

6 hours ago, Bobal said:

 

I wonder how one provides 'proof of recovery'. I've had Covid and I've recovered from it. How do I prove that? Also my understanding is that I could still pick it up elsewhere and carry it. Perhaps our resident medics could chime in on this?

Simple: A positive test followed later on by a negative test.

[coffeebean]

On 2/6/2021 at 9:52 PM, xpcdoojk said:

Wow, that is a lot of hopeful expectation from a test sample of less than 100 people contracting covid during the testing phase....  

 

I am not sure the statistics support that much “belief”, but hey.  I am happy if you are happy.  

 

I used to love watching REN and Stimpy...

Take a look at this information. This goes along with every single article I have read on the subject of vaccine efficacy and also what has been said in every news source.......

 

mRNA Vaccine efficacy information

[coffeebean]

On 2/6/2021 at 10:14 PM, lizzius said:

It's absolutely not 100% assurance... The all or nothing thinking is dangerous. Israel had 300ish positive cases among fully vaccinated 60+ year olds, 17 of which had to be hospitalized.

Which vaccine is being used in Israel?

[lizzius]

Just now, coffeebean said:

Which vaccine is being used in Israel?

Exclusively Pfizer.

[coffeebean]

23 hours ago, mek said:

I looked up the article and it appears people contracted the virus before they reached maximum immunity from the vaccine.  People do need to be reminded that it is still necessary to be extra careful until several weeks after the 2nd shot.

 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/240-israelis-diagnosed-after-vaccination-underscore-need-for-continued-vigilance/

Yes, it is imperative that fully vaccinated people wait the appropriate time frame after receiving their second shot to reach full immunity. It is easy to contract Covid within that time frame, in fact it is actually easier. Folks who are not informed that they must not consider themselves immune until the time frame passes may feel invisible and go out into the community as if they are completely protected when in actuality, they are not.

[coffeebean]

On 2/6/2021 at 10:14 PM, lizzius said:

It's absolutely not 100% assurance... The all or nothing thinking is dangerous. Israel had 300ish positive cases among fully vaccinated 60+ year olds, 17 of which had to be hospitalized.

 Moderna has informed that full immunity is not achieved until a certain time frame after the second shot. I believe it is either two or four weeks. I'm going with the four weeks just to be safe.

 

Also, I have seen in TV news casts that those who develop full immunity from an mRNA vaccine will also be protected from those awful sometimes lingering side effects that even Covid asymptomatic people can develop. That is great news!

 

I get my second shot of the Moderna vaccine today!

[coffeebean]

22 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

It seems to me that the issue shouldn't be whether someone is vaccinated or not, but whether that person poses a risk to others. Yes, I take this personally, because while I haven't yet gotten the vaccine (not eligible yet), I HAVE had COVID-19, recovered from it, and now test negative. My doctor has assured me that I am likely immune from it for the time being and will be for months. While I realize I'm not going on any cruises in the near future, my scenario would apply to many other people (unvaccinated yet recovered and not shedding the virus/not endangering anyone else) for a while to come. Should people like me be prevented from boarding a ship because we don't meet the criteria of having been vaccinated? What about people who either test negative or who have a positive Sars-CoV-2 test + a note from a doctor or public health official that the person has recovered and is no longer contagious? That's the standard now in place regarding anyone flying into the United States from abroad. If that standard is good enough for the US government, why would the cruise industry think it can impose a more stringent one? I would be VERY surprised if they got away with that. Imagine this scenario, and I don't think it's far-fetched at all: someone from the UK flies to Miami to get on a cruise ship. At MIA the person shows a negative test for COVID taken 72 hours prior and is allowed through passport control, but is later disallowed embarkation at PortMiami because he/she hasn't been vaccinated. That ain't fair. IOW it shouldn't just be about a jab in the arm, in my humble opinion. It should be about risk.

Those Covid tests are not always accurate. Also.....a person can test negative on day one and actually be a carrier of the virus on day two. Those negative tests mean absolutely nothing, IMHO. It has been said many times over, when you test negative, you are negative at that moment in time. You me contract Covid any moment after that. Again.....I do not trust the tests and never will. Three days is a lifetime of being able to contract the virus.

 

As for traveling from afar to board a cruise ship in MIA.......I have no doubt the cruise lines will inform their passengers long before they travel to their embarkation city that vaccination is mandated to board their ships. That is if a vaccine mandate actually does become a reality. (fingers, toes and eyes crossed that it does).

[lizzius]

4 minutes ago, coffeebean said:

 Moderna has informed that full immunity is not achieved until a certain time frame after the second shot. I believe it is either two or four weeks. I'm going with the four weeks just to be safe.

 

Also, I have seen in TV news casts that those who develop full immunity from an mRNA vaccine will also be protected from those awful sometimes lingering side effects that even Covid asymptomatic people can develop. That is great news!

 

I get my second shot of the Moderna vaccine today!

The group I cited was 1-2 weeks post second vaccination and were considered fully vaccinated. It's merely the difference between a trial with 30k people and one with millions in the real world. The data out of Israel will provide much more realistic statistics about the efficacy of the vaccine against various criteria.

[coffeebean]

On 2/9/2021 at 10:39 AM, molly361 said:

It's kind of sad. My friend was so happy and relieved to get an appointment for the vaccine that she cried

Why is that sad? It is a joyous occasion to score an appointment for the vaccine. There are folks here in Florida, that I know of, that have been doing everything they can to get an appointment and still NOTHING YET.

[coffeebean]

23 hours ago, OnTheJourney said:

Here's the thing though - regardless of what the cruise lines decide as to requiring vaccination and/or negative covid tests, unless being allowed to get off the ship, do excursions, etc. becomes a thing of the past (not much point cruising then IMHO), cruise passengers will be interacting with potentially thousands of people who may or may not have had the vaccine. The ship is a very limited microcosm such that - even if all pax and crew are 'protected' by vaccine and sanitizing protocol onboard - it all sort of becomes moot if people leave the ship and come back on board potentially infected. It's a huge and complicated issue. 

How about the cruise lines begin with cruises to nowhere? I'd definitely be on board for that, especially on the larger ships. For me, the ship is the destination and I'm so happy with that. I would think there are plenty of people out there who would cruise under those circumstances.

[molly361]

12 minutes ago, coffeebean said:

Why is that sad? It is a joyous occasion to score an appointment for the vaccine. There are folks here in Florida, that I know of, that have been doing everything they can to get an appointment and still NOTHING YET.

It's sad that anyone has to get that stressed out over getting an appt that they cry when it happens.    She is in Florida and so am I and I have had no luck getting one either

[lizzius]

3 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

I like your thinking, reasoning, and also the way you write. This comment in particular piqued my interest because I do see this type of all-or-nothing thinking being quite pervasive where I live.

...

No, there will never be a 0% chance of getting infected, but the more measures in place, the safer it will be. And that's good enough for me. (just my opinion, of course)

Well, thank you. I think the same about you, and admire your ability to extend olive branches when my instinct would be to keep leading with thorns. I think part of it is borne out of the fact that people may not have the skills (or desire) to at least stumble through academic papers on their own, or find themselves wholly uncomfortable looking at statistics. The latest one I've notice pop-up here and in my conversations with friends and family is this notion that not only should immunizations be mandated, but only certain immunizations should count... Which is disastrous in its own right and overlooks the fact that we don't have real world data for the early vaccines against the same variants we're judging these later vaccines against, nor do we even have apples to apples comparisons with the vaccines as they are thanks to differing trial endpoints and criteria for what counted as a case.

 

All of that to say, I think you and I agree that the approach for accepting passengers will likely continue to be risk based, with layers of mitigation (like we've been told to expect). I could see vaccine requirements being tiered with likelihood of disease (a recent report suggested yearly boosters may be necessary for the elderly and immune compromised for the next several years... Those could be required for the recommended populations), and more conditions being excluded in the fitness to sail declaration, perhaps in the short-term or perhaps forever. 

[xpcdoojk]

43 minutes ago, lizzius said:

The group I cited was 1-2 weeks post second vaccination and were considered fully vaccinated. It's merely the difference between a trial with 30k people and one with millions in the real world. The data out of Israel will provide much more realistic statistics about the efficacy of the vaccine against various criteria.

Don’t rain on their fantasy parade.  They are so sure of the “facts” that your additional and more meaningful numbers just cause irritation.  😇😆

 

jc<———— believes as usual, those following the science have no clue about science.

[coffeebean]

23 hours ago, mek said:

I'm not sure what the immunization recommendations will be for people who have had covid.  So far I've read several different opinions. While I think of all the reasons to allow  exceptions to the vaccine requirement rule, people like you have the most legitimate "excuse" to not have to have a vaccination I still believe that in order to get cruises up and running safely from US ports, that the vaccination rule has to apply to everyone.

Once one exemption is allowed, then everyone will want one - and then what is the point?

I'm sure many will argue that everyone should be allowed to cruise as long as they have a negative test when they board - I just don't happen to agree with that.

 

Exactly. We have been told many many times that a person is negative for Covid at that point in time. You may be exposed to Covid any time after that negative test and become a transmitter of the virus.

[coffeebean]

On 2/6/2021 at 9:52 PM, xpcdoojk said:

Wow, that is a lot of hopeful expectation from a test sample of less than 100 people contracting covid during the testing phase....  

 

I am not sure the statistics support that much “belief”, but hey.  I am happy if you are happy.  

 

I used to love watching REN and Stimpy...

I know I read that there is 100% protection from hospitalization with the mRNA vaccines. Even if that is totally not true, the Moderna vaccine does offer 94.1 efficacy against contracting Covid and for the 5.9%, not developing severe disease. That is good enough for me to feel safe enough in the community.

 

Efficacy and Safety of the mRNA Vaccine

[xpcdoojk]

Again, less than 10 people during the study got Covid19.  So, you are still basing your belief on a population of less than 2 hand fulls of people.

 

Where I went to college, that meant you don’t have enough data to make meaningful conclusions.

 

Like I have said now that you have quoted my post twice... if it makes you happy.  I am happy for you.

[coffeebean]

On 2/9/2021 at 1:20 PM, mek said:

I'm not sure what the immunization recommendations will be for people who have had covid.  So far I've read several different opinions. While I think of all the reasons to allow  exceptions to the vaccine requirement rule, people like you have the most legitimate "excuse" to not have to have a vaccination I still believe that in order to get cruises up and running safely from US ports, that the vaccination rule has to apply to everyone.

Once one exemption is allowed, then everyone will want one - and then what is the point?

I'm sure many will argue that everyone should be allowed to cruise as long as they have a negative test when they board - I just don't happen to agree with that.

 

I know someone who has had Covid and was told by a physician not to get the vaccine until 3 months have passed after testing negative. I also have read that natural immunity does not last as long as immunity from the mRNA vaccine although it still is not know how long immunity from the vaccine will be.

[coffeebean]

On 2/9/2021 at 1:26 PM, molly361 said:

I just read somewhere that Avalon Cruise Line (don't know them) is requiring a vaccine OR a negative test, I think 72 hours in advance

A  negative test from 72 hours in advance proves NOTHING.

[xpcdoojk]

2 minutes ago, coffeebean said:

A  negative test from 72 hours in advance proves NOTHING.

I agree with that.  However, the lawyers think it will reduce their liability.

[coffeebean]

On 2/9/2021 at 1:48 PM, Charles4515 said:

 

A couple of people I know who have had Covid plan to take the one dose J&J vacine in a few months. Several articles I have read suggest that people who have had Covid take one dose of any of the vaccines as a booster. 

There are scores of people who have had Covid and didn't even know they had it. That is what asymptomatic illness is. Is it considered dangerous for those asymptomatic people to get the two dose regimen of the mRNA vaccines or just pointless?

Edited February 10, 2021 by coffeebean

[lizzius]

1 minute ago, coffeebean said:

There are scores of people who have had Covid and didn't even know they had it. That is what asymptomatic illness is. Is it considered dangerous for those asymptomatic people to get the two dose regimen of the mRNA vaccines or just pointless?

Just pointless, thankfully. There were a few people in the trials who had asymptomatic prior infection and received the two dose regimen for Pfizer. They weren't included in the primary efficacy calculation, but were used for this secondary analysis.

[coffeebean]

22 hours ago, mek said:

Oh for heavens sake, using the numbers from the article you provided,  it's 99.99998% effective in preventing serious symptoms that require hospitalization. 

I'm not statistician but that, to me, is pretty damn close to 100%. That is what I have read about the mRNA vaccines also: 100% preventive of hospitalizations from Covid. I took those stats to mean Covid infection only.....not complications from other medical issues a person may suffer from. That last line is strictly my opinion.