CLIA cruise lines to test every passenger for Covid

[phoenix_dream]

On 10/9/2020 at 6:09 PM, Covepointcruiser said:

The most dangerous passenger would be the one that felt well but in fact had the virus and was spreading it, perhaps a superspreader.    Anyone testing positive should be denied boarding.

Regarding your last sentence - I cannot imagine for the life of me that any passenger testing positive would not be denied boarding.  It is possible that someone could test positive and then be tested again (and maybe even again) to ensure the test is accurate, but I can't see them letting any such person board a ship.

[phoenix_dream]

On 10/9/2020 at 10:22 AM, marieps said:

I'd like to be tested in every port,  so eventually they'll be confident enough to allow "on your our" exploration.

Sadly, testing in every port does absolutely nothing.  Even if you contacted the virus on land and eventually came down with it, there is no way it would show up in a test that same afternoon.  Perhaps over time there will be tests sensitive enough to do that, but they certainly don't exist at this time.  I think what I'm saying also applies whether you are talking about testing before leaving the ship, or testing upon returning.  

[marieps]

39 minutes ago, phoenix_dream said:

Sadly, testing in every port does absolutely nothing.  Even if you contacted the virus on land and eventually came down with it, there is no way it would show up in a test that same afternoon.  Perhaps over time there will be tests sensitive enough to do that, but they certainly don't exist at this time.  I think what I'm saying also applies whether you are talking about testing before leaving the ship, or testing upon returning.  

That's why I said eventually.  I'd be happy to take a test in St. Kitts to show I contracted nothing in San Juan 4 days earlier.  I'd take a test on the last sea day to show I was clean in St. Kitts.  EVENTUALLY, enough of these negative tests from enough passengers may lead to a loosening of the exploration policy.  To say a negative test does nothing is, IMHO, very short sighted.  Every negative test is a degree of relief for the testee, and a tiny pixel in the overall picture.   

Edited October 11, 2020 by marieps

[phoenix_dream]

17 minutes ago, marieps said:

That's why I said eventually.  I'd be happy to take a test in St. Kitts to show I contracted nothing in San Juan 4 days earlier.  I'd take a test on the last sea day to show I was clean in St. Kitts.  EVENTUALLY, enough of these negative tests from enough passengers may lead to a loosening of the exploration policy.  To say a negative test does nothing is, IMHO, very short sighted.  Every negative test is a degree of relief for the testee, and a tiny pixel in the overall picture.   

I certainly agree with your last sentence, but don't really follow the logic for what comes before.  People will (hopefully) be testing negative after taking only ships excursions in tightly controlled bubbles.  Even if 100% of them test negative over and over and over for many cruises, how does that mean that letting folks get off and roam on their own will be safer?  Unless there is some way to prove that they can't catch the virus at the port, I still contend that negative tests aren't any help, unless/until they can create a test that identifies the illness within a few hours of exposure.  Let's just focus on the Caribbean for now, and say St. Thomas opens up for "normal" port wandering because all the "bubble" excursion passengers have been testing negative.  How does that ensure that someone on the island doesn't have the virus and passes it along to the passengers?  Or from someone vacationing on the island?  Or from someone visiting from another cruise ship that isn't testing as well?  The answer is, it does not.  That's why I say negative testing in and of itself does not lead to loosening up of restrictions.  Of course 'eventually" may very well come for other reasons when the virus comes under control, but not from negative testing onboard.

[wrk2cruise]

I just read through the FAQ's just released for RCL restart sailings out of Singapore and they are only doing pre-cruise testing 48-72 hrs prior to boarding.  No testing at the pier.  They say they will have the ability to do PCR testing onboard but I suspect only when an outbreak is suspected.

 

Note from the URL the FAQ's are country specific so could be slightly different for US sailings.

 

https://www.royalcaribbean.com/sgp/en/royal-promise/faq?country=sgp

Edited October 11, 2020 by wrk2cruise

[Arizona Wildcat]

3 hours ago, phoenix_dream said:

I certainly agree with your last sentence, but don't really follow the logic for what comes before.  People will (hopefully) be testing negative after taking only ships excursions in tightly controlled bubbles.  Even if 100% of them test negative over and over and over for many cruises, how does that mean that letting folks get off and roam on their own will be safer?  Unless there is some way to prove that they can't catch the virus at the port, I still contend that negative tests aren't any help, unless/until they can create a test that identifies the illness within a few hours of exposure.  Let's just focus on the Caribbean for now, and say St. Thomas opens up for "normal" port wandering because all the "bubble" excursion passengers have been testing negative.  How does that ensure that someone on the island doesn't have the virus and passes it along to the passengers?  Or from someone vacationing on the island?  Or from someone visiting from another cruise ship that isn't testing as well?  The answer is, it does not.  That's why I say negative testing in and of itself does not lead to loosening up of restrictions.  Of course 'eventually" may very well come for other reasons when the virus comes under control, but not from negative testing onboard.

It takes a couple days for COVID to build up enough to be detected.   Is someone spreading COVID during that time?  Repeated testing is great, but a crap shoot since viruses effect each person differently.

All cruise lines can do is do their best with testing.  That said, the Singapore plan - if I read it correctly, terrible website requiring dozens of back and forth to get all the info - stinks.  A test several days before cruising followed by travel would not detect COVID acquired on the way to the cruise.

[wrk2cruise]

3 minutes ago, Arizona Wildcat said:

terrible website requiring dozens of back and forth to get all the info - stinks.

 

I agree completely that any web developer who did this should be ashamed.  The + should expand in place.   I managed a team of web developers when working and something like this would never have seen the light of day.

 

[LGW59]

7 minutes ago, wrk2cruise said:

 

I agree completely that any web developer who did this should be ashamed.  The + should expand in place.   I managed a team of web developers when working and something like this would never have seen the light of day.

 

Well it took a bit of work (though I certainly was not exhausted) but I was able to maneuver through it relative ease.  The premise of what they propose is there.  Perfect, no, helpful yes, enough to complain about without nit picking everything.  Still thanking the OP for sharing.

[hcat]

58 minutes ago, wrk2cruise said:

I just read through the FAQ's just released for RCL restart sailings out of Singapore and they are only doing pre-cruise testing 48-72 hrs prior to boarding.  No testing at the pier.  They say they will have the ability to do PCR testing onboard but I suspect only when an outbreak is suspected.

 

Note from the URL the FAQ's are country specific so could be slightly different for US sailings.

 

https://www.royalcaribbean.com/sgp/en/royal-promise/faq?country=sgp

I saw the Questions but not the answers.. maybe someone can explain a bit more,

 

Who is doing the tests and where?  Do cruisers have to arrive 48 to 72  hrs ahead? Cost?  Are cruisers isolated  between testing and results and boarding?

 

Not sure how this could work for other ports???

Edited October 12, 2020 by hcat

[Germancruiser]

Tui Cruises just anonnced that they will doing the testing now at embarkation day- the new ( I have no idea " how new") Anti- Gen - Test takes about 25 minutes to come up with a result.

[wrk2cruise]

At least for these departures they say the price of the test is included in the cruise fare.   I suspect it will be like TUI where they contract with a large lab where you go to get the test and the results are probably forwarded directly to the line (an you only if positive possibly).

[Germancruiser]

Exactly wrk2cruise- that is how it was done. I am just back from my 7 night cruise in the Baltic sea- no shore excursions- and had to go to a lab to get tested. The result was forwarded to TUI and the nice doctor called me the next day, to tell me I am good to go.

[TeeRick]

The rapid test that can be done at the pier or on ship is the Antigen test.  It will be positive only if the virus is replicating and producing antigen that is above the level of detection (sensitivity) of the test.  Previously infected people with active virus (even if no symptoms) will be positive.  But the Antigen test will not detect somebody just very recently infected from a port contact or an excursion or very recent travel.  It takes a few days for the virus to produce enough antigen.  Too late in most cases to keep it off the ship.    The PCR test is more capable of identifying the very recently infected but it of course takes generally a minimum of 24 hours to get a result.   Testing is a very good screen but there will still be positive cases on ship.  A good example of this right now is in the US in football (NFL).  So in any scenario for cruising, there will definitely be a breakthrough positive no matter how stringent the testing is done.  The important thing is the approved protocol to handle this very likely scenario must be known to all before boarding.

[Arizona Wildcat]

Glad it worked for you.  It was difficult on a mobile phone and then you got non answers.  Saying we will have a "measured response" to illness outbreaks?  That tells me zip.

[wrk2cruise]

For those of you in the know is there a difference between the PCR testing being widely done here in the US and the RT-PCR test capability they are saying will be onboard (in the Singapore Royal Promise document).

 

"Rapid SARS-CoV-2 tests can be conducted right onboard in our medical lab that allows for rapid, accurate onsite RT-PCR testing with results in under an hour"

[nocl]

14 minutes ago, wrk2cruise said:

For those of you in the know is there a difference between the PCR testing being widely done here in the US and the RT-PCR test capability they are saying will be onboard (in the Singapore Royal Promise document).

 

"Rapid SARS-CoV-2 tests can be conducted right onboard in our medical lab that allows for rapid, accurate onsite RT-PCR testing with results in under an hour"

Keep in mind that most of the delays in getting PCR results is due to travel times, lab workloads, etc. A couple of years ago the time for actually running a PCR sample was between 1-2 hours (45 minute to 1 hour for completing 40 cycles, temperature changes involved in the standard methods adding around another hour) if the equipment, reagents and personnel were available.  I would expect that with the recent work being done new systems could have that down under an hour and still keep the same accuracy.

 

One other note RT-PCR stands for reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction.  Some people are taking RT to mean real time, but it is really part of the full name in both the US systems and the Singapoire document.

 

The real time rapid tests, such as the Labcorp system is often listed as rRT-PCR.  You also see the terms qPCR (realtime PCR) and dPCR (digital PCR) show up in literature some times.

Edited October 12, 2020 by nocl

[Baron Barracuda]

1 hour ago, nocl said:

Keep in mind that most of the delays in getting PCR results is due to travel times, lab workloads, etc. A couple of years ago the time for actually running a PCR sample was between 1-2 hours (45 minute to 1 hour for completing 40 cycles, temperature changes involved in the standard methods adding around another hour) if the equipment, reagents and personnel were available.  I would expect that with the recent work being done new systems could have that down under an hour and still keep the same accuracy.

 

One other note RT-PCR stands for reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction.  Some people are taking RT to mean real time, but it is really part of the full name in both the US systems and the Singapoire document.

 

The real time rapid tests, such as the Labcorp system is often listed as rRT-PCR.  You also see the terms qPCR (realtime PCR) and dPCR (digital PCR) show up in literature some times.

Expect equipment aboard ship would be scaled down version of Labcorp or a hospital.  Might be able to process a few tests in an hour but what happens if they need to test entire ship?  Even under reduced capacity would amount to a couple of thousand passengers and crew.

[MISTER 67]

On 10/11/2020 at 2:46 PM, phoenix_dream said:

From everything I have read, it sounds like the virus is never going away completely.  Whether it will be "part of our daily lives" is of course another question.  What we can hope for is a vaccination extremely effective, like the one for polio.  If that ever comes, it is doubtful it could be here in another year or two but we can hope.  So if you won't cruise with any kind of a chance of catching Covid, I suspect your cruising days are over.  I would love to be wrong.

That's exactly what we are hoping for, a vaccine that is extremely effective like the Salk Vaccine.

[phoenix_dream]

2 hours ago, MISTER 67 said:

That's exactly what we are hoping for, a vaccine that is extremely effective like the Salk Vaccine.

That is what everyone is hoping for.  But to think it might be here in a year or two?  I highly, highly doubt it.  If you are waiting for that then I suspect your cruising days are over unless you are very young.  Fingers crossed that I am wrong, but I doubt it.

[MISTER 67]

20 hours ago, phoenix_dream said:

That is what everyone is hoping for.  But to think it might be here in a year or two?  I highly, highly doubt it.  If you are waiting for that then I suspect your cruising days are over unless you are very young.  Fingers crossed that I am wrong, but I doubt 

I'll be the one to decide when my cruising days are over, not you.

[TeeRick]

On 10/11/2020 at 2:46 PM, phoenix_dream said:

From everything I have read, it sounds like the virus is never going away completely.  Whether it will be "part of our daily lives" is of course another question.  What we can hope for is a vaccination extremely effective, like the one for polio.  If that ever comes, it is doubtful it could be here in another year or two but we can hope.  So if you won't cruise with any kind of a chance of catching Covid, I suspect your cruising days are over.  I would love to be wrong.

Yes agree.  This COVID-19 SARS virus even if well controlled with a highly effective vaccine, will be still with us in at least some parts of the world for decades.  Polio is a good example.  Vaccine in 1950's and then a safer vaccine (IPV) has been used to try and eradicate polio worldwide, an effort started in 1988.  But it still exists in pockets here and there in some countries. And this is with a vaccine that a child was required to take to attend school in the days before anti-vaxxers.  Sadly even with a very highly effective and very safe COVID vaccine (big if's), for this day and age the compliance to vaccine programs will not be high enough to really eradicate COVID.  I really do not see a COVID vaccine being mandated in the US.  Maybe other countries.  Maybe some states in the US and some universities will require it to attend school.  All this says we are in it to some extent for many years to come.   But maybe it will be reduced enough for life to return to normal for those of us choosing to get vaccinated.

[nocl]

1 hour ago, TeeRick said:

Yes agree.  This COVID-19 SARS virus even if well controlled with a highly effective vaccine, will be still with us in at least some parts of the world for decades.  Polio is a good example.  Vaccine in 1950's and then a safer vaccine (IPV) has been used to try and eradicate polio worldwide, an effort started in 1988.  But it still exists in pockets here and there in some countries. And this is with a vaccine that a child was required to take to attend school in the days before anti-vaxxers.  Sadly even with a very highly effective and very safe COVID vaccine (big if's), for this day and age the compliance to vaccine programs will not be high enough to really eradicate COVID.  I really do not see a COVID vaccine being mandated in the US.  Maybe other countries.  Maybe some states in the US and some universities will require it to attend school.  All this says we are in it to some extent for many years to come.   But maybe it will be reduced enough for life to return to normal for those of us choosing to get vaccinated.

Because of the rather large impact of COVID, I would expect some countries will require vaccination of travelers entering their country.  I would expect it will be mandated in several of the Asian countries.  Probably those that excelled at controlling the outbreak.

[maranelloboy05]

There needs to be a plan for positive tests at the port as well. Lets say I have a negative PCR 3 days before leaving. I fly across the country, get ready to board and get a positive. Regardless of it being false or accurate there needs to be a plan other than "ok good luck see ya". 

[Ride-The-Waves]

This doesn't do squat to make cruising safer.  

 

Europe and about 30 US states are experiencing significant increases in COVID-19 infections with the onset of cooler weather.  Expect that to continue to increase as winter approaches and envelops the northern hemisphere.

 

Vaccines?  COVID-19 is mutating faster than the medical labs can keep up.  Any vaccines for one strain will not protect against the others.  Which is the same for flu between the northern and southern hemispheres.

 

Until the cruise lines themselves, and the ships, come up with enforceable rules for social distancing, wearing of PPE,  processing of passengers, and ports accept cruise passengers, cruising as we have known it will continue to be a long way off in the future.

[sanger727]

21 minutes ago, maranelloboy05 said:

There needs to be a plan for positive tests at the port as well. Lets say I have a negative PCR 3 days before leaving. I fly across the country, get ready to board and get a positive. Regardless of it being false or accurate there needs to be a plan other than "ok good luck see ya". 

 

It's even more than that. I suspect everyone in your boarding party and potentially anyone sitting near you will be denied boarding.  I know when MSC had two positives on one sailing, they denied boarding to anyone who was in the shared transport to the port with either of them. So you could do everything right, not have covid, and by pure dumb luck end up too close to someone who does and still get denied boarding. I'm not willing to book a cruise until there is an acceptable answer for this issue.