Jump to content

More “Bad News” for the Cruise Industry.


stevenr597
 Share

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, darknightsdespiser said:

How do you prove you have had a vaccine- a tattoo on your forehead? Most of us will have died from boredom long before we get a vaccine.

Vaccines should be available within six months, and maybe sooner than that. I don't intend to die of boredom or anything else before then. 🙂

 

People could be given an ID card proving they have had the vaccine. Another suggestion was to have it linked to your passport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, darknightsdespiser said:

How do you prove you have had a vaccine- a tattoo on your forehead? Most of us will have died from boredom long before we get a vaccine.

 

Not that hard really. Some South American countries require a yellow fever vaccine - how do people that travel there prove they have had the vaccine. And the answer is that they don't have a tattoo. 😐

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TTEllis said:

WAWAZATT??🤭 Oh boy here we go again!! If I get the vaccine I certainly plan on it, I have no interest in sitting on my couch for the remainder of my existence. They can take their masks, curfews and social distancing and stick it where the sun don't shine. 

That's not how we say it in West Virginia, I'm just being nice. Nighty night

 

How's that working out for West Virginia? "Not so good" -- that's how we say it in the rest of the world.

 

1426366912_ScreenShot2020-11-24at5_29_46AM.thumb.png.33290b009918e30531402fa8975d192c.png

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question:  if it is determined (yes, I realize we have no solid evidence either way now) that once you contract COVID 19 and recover you are no longer a carrier of the virus, will you still need a vaccine?  Or just a certificate that says you are cleared as a carrier?  The reason I ask is because for 330 Million people that live in America (not counting all the European or other Nations that cruise) to get a vaccine will never happen.  Half of the people won't get it regardless, especially young healthy people that might consider the vaccine more harmful then the virus for them.  So, do you suppose the airline industry and the cruise industry will limit their potential customer base by making that limitation?  No vaccine we don't want you?  What about either a vaccine or a negative test?  And by the way, because you get the vaccine does not mean you can't catch COVID.  It just helps your defenses against dying from it.  So, should it be a vaccine and a negative test before boarding?

 

Really curious about people's ideas...I think getting stuck in a box by saying all or none is not a feasible answer, especially since the vaccine is not going to be a cure-all.  Thanks in advance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

Question:  if it is determined (yes, I realize we have no solid evidence either way now) that once you contract COVID 19 and recover you are no longer a carrier of the virus, will you still need a vaccine?  Or just a certificate that says you are cleared as a carrier?  The reason I ask is because for 330 Million people that live in America (not counting all the European or other Nations that cruise) to get a vaccine will never happen.  Half of the people won't get it regardless, especially young healthy people that might consider the vaccine more harmful then the virus for them.  So, do you suppose the airline industry and the cruise industry will limit their potential customer base by making that limitation?  No vaccine we don't want you?  What about either a vaccine or a negative test?  And by the way, because you get the vaccine does not mean you can't catch COVID.  It just helps your defenses against dying from it.  So, should it be a vaccine and a negative test before boarding?

 

Really curious about people's ideas...I think getting stuck in a box by saying all or none is not a feasible answer, especially since the vaccine is not going to be a cure-all.  Thanks in advance.

We have seen a similar type of problem with individuals who have had the measles, or not sure if they did.  Most likely the individual in question will have to obtain an antibody test for the Novel Coronavirus to determine if they have significant levels and submit this to the cruise agency. Whether they accept it, would be subjective.  I would advise that the individual receive the Coronavirus vaccine which would be a booster. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, stevenr597 said:

We have seen a similar type of problem with individuals who have had the measles, or not sure if they did.  Most likely the individual in question will have to obtain an antibody test for the Novel Coronavirus to determine if they have significant levels and submit this to the cruise agency. Whether they accept it, would be subjective.  I would advise that the individual receive the Coronavirus vaccine which would be a booster. 

Thanks.  I get the idea of a test to show if someone is a potential carrier.  But, getting the vaccine does not prevent you from getting the disease, so should those that have the vaccine also be reuqired to test prior?  I guess what I'm missing is why do so mnay people think just getting the vaccine means you're good to proceed?  Getting the vaccine protects you, not others.  Make sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

Question:  if it is determined (yes, I realize we have no solid evidence either way now) that once you contract COVID 19 and recover you are no longer a carrier of the virus, will you still need a vaccine?  Or just a certificate that says you are cleared as a carrier?  The reason I ask is because for 330 Million people that live in America (not counting all the European or other Nations that cruise) to get a vaccine will never happen.  Half of the people won't get it regardless, especially young healthy people that might consider the vaccine more harmful then the virus for them.  So, do you suppose the airline industry and the cruise industry will limit their potential customer base by making that limitation?  No vaccine we don't want you?  What about either a vaccine or a negative test?  And by the way, because you get the vaccine does not mean you can't catch COVID.  It just helps your defenses against dying from it.  So, should it be a vaccine and a negative test before boarding?

 

Really curious about people's ideas...I think getting stuck in a box by saying all or none is not a feasible answer, especially since the vaccine is not going to be a cure-all.  Thanks in advance.

It won’t be the cruise lines that require the vaccine it will be the countries that they visit that will require it. Many countries for yeas have required proof of protection from malaria and yellow fever. The cruise lines require you to have whatever documentation each country requires to board. You can find this requirement in your cruise documents 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, memoak said:

It won’t be the cruise lines that require the vaccine it will be the countries that they visit that will require it. Many countries for yeas have required proof of protection from malaria and yellow fever. The cruise lines require you to have whatever documentation each country requires to board. You can find this requirement in your cruise documents 

Thank you for the input.  I understand countries that the ship visits will have requirements, but again, I question the concern of the passengers needing the vaccine since the vaccine does not prevent them from carrying the virus.  I understand people want to take the vaccine befpre cruising as a means to protect themselves...but what is the process for protecting others?  That's the real rub.  I would assume either a test showing you are negative for COVID, or (if they find out you aren't a carrier after you contract it and recover) proof you had the disease.  That is a protective measure for others while the vaccine is to protect you.  I think you get the point.  So how would you address that?  Just seems to be a dilemma not really associated with the vaccine.  However, I think with a vaccine people feel more comfortable about traveling, so that helps get folks on board. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

Thank you for the input.  I understand countries that the ship visits will have requirements, but again, I question the concern of the passengers needing the vaccine since the vaccine does not prevent them from carrying the virus.  I understand people want to take the vaccine befpre cruising as a means to protect themselves...but what is the process for protecting others?  That's the real rub.  I would assume either a test showing you are negative for COVID, or (if they find out you aren't a carrier after you contract it and recover) proof you had the disease.  That is a protective measure for others while the vaccine is to protect you.  I think you get the point.  So how would you address that?  Just seems to be a dilemma not really associated with the vaccine.  However, I think with a vaccine people feel more comfortable about traveling, so that helps get folks on board. 

Nothing in life is 100% except death.  A vaccine which is 90% effective and is widely used will drastically cut down the amount of virus circulating in the population on account of a lack of suitable hosts for viral reproduction.  The virus lives by constantly spreading to new hosts and dies back if those spread vectors are withdrawn.  A 90% vaccine also means that 90% of the people that would die won't.  This isn't rocket science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, darknightsdespiser said:

How do you prove you have had a vaccine- a tattoo on your forehead? Most of us will have died from boredom long before we get a vaccine.

Hopefully, the ICVP booklet would be a way to prove vaccination. I actually have two of them, one containing all my childhood vaccinations from way too many years ago, and another one listing all my travel related vaccinations as an adult. I would hope the agency/organization/company that gives you the vaccinations(s) would agree to sign the booklet (as did all the folks who gave me all my other vaccinations)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hobbyfarmer2 said:

Nothing in life is 100% except death.  A vaccine which is 90% effective and is widely used will drastically cut down the amount of virus circulating in the population on account of a lack of suitable hosts for viral reproduction.  The virus lives by constantly spreading to new hosts and dies back if those spread vectors are withdrawn.  A 90% vaccine also means that 90% of the people that would die won't.  This isn't rocket science.

Thanks for the response.  Yeah, I know how the vaccine works.  But the question is: why would people be so concerned about others having the vaccine when that does nothing to prevent them from contracting the virus?  Yes, I know it ultimatley helps control the spread, but people are saying "Don't let anyone on without them having been vaccinated" when that has little to do with them catching the virus.  I think it's more important to determine people are not infected than people have been vaccinated.  BTW: I studied Rocket Science at Embry Riddle for my Master's Degree, so certainly understand this is not rocket science.  But thanks for the reminder!  Those were some tough days!  LOL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

Thanks.  I get the idea of a test to show if someone is a potential carrier.  But, getting the vaccine does not prevent you from getting the disease, so should those that have the vaccine also be reuqired to test prior?  I guess what I'm missing is why do so mnay people think just getting the vaccine means you're good to proceed?  Getting the vaccine protects you, not others.  Make sense?

 

Isn't the whole point of a vaccine to prevent you from getting whatever disease you are being vaccinated for?  

 

DON

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, sfaaa said:

Considering we are getting very close to rolling out a vaccine, I have little doubt cruising will resume in 2021 likely in the 3rd or 4th quarter.

I tend to agree with this comment. I moved all my cruises (5) to sail from mid August to mid October 2021.   If the entire world is not in a better place by then, there will be no cruising period because they will all be out of business!

And yes, if I get the opportunity for a vaccine, done deal and rolling up my sleeve 😁

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

Thanks for the response.  Yeah, I know how the vaccine works.  But the question is: why would people be so concerned about others having the vaccine when that does nothing to prevent them from contracting the virus?  Yes, I know it ultimatley helps control the spread, but people are saying "Don't let anyone on without them having been vaccinated" when that has little to do with them catching the virus.  I think it's more important to determine people are not infected than people have been vaccinated.  BTW: I studied Rocket Science at Embry Riddle for my Master's Degree, so certainly understand this is not rocket science.  But thanks for the reminder!  Those were some tough days!  LOL!

Here is a scenario for you.  You got vaccinated but for some complex reason you are one of the 10% who did not develop immunity.  If everyone else around you is vaccinated the odds of you catching COVID is much, much less than if few around you are vaccinated.  BTW, thanks for your polite and cheery response.  I studied Mathematics and my brain still hurts despite being retired.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

Thanks.  I get the idea of a test to show if someone is a potential carrier.  But, getting the vaccine does not prevent you from getting the disease, so should those that have the vaccine also be reuqired to test prior?  I guess what I'm missing is why do so mnay people think just getting the vaccine means you're good to proceed?  Getting the vaccine protects you, not others.  Make sense?

Your comment isn't totally accurate. There are several vaccines that will be available within the next six months. A couple of them (including Pfizer) don't stop the vaccinated person getting COVID, but the body is ready to fight the virus. Other vaccines (including the Oxford Uni one) work in a different way and prevent the person from contracting the virus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aus Traveller said:

Your comment isn't totally accurate. There are several vaccines that will be available within the next six months. A couple of them (including Pfizer) don't stop the vaccinated person getting COVID, but the body is ready to fight the virus. Other vaccines (including the Oxford Uni one) work in a different way and prevent the person from contracting the virus.

You are correct with what I read in some medical web site I found.

It listing the details of the hundred and something vaccines and therapy meds that they are working on and current condition they are in phase trials and initial results.

 

Though a lot of it was over my head, they are all (or most all) taking different approaches how theirs will attack. Also what I found interesting is they have different ranges of where their med should be administrator depending the condition of the patient (ie: patient in their first week with mild conditions gets X med and someone on O2 gets Y med and on ventilator would get Z med.

Sorry, I kind of find that stuff interesting and intelligent.

 

Reinforces my belief that there are a lot of smart people across our world wide medical field (thank God).

 

Cheers,

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

I think it's more important to determine people are not infected than people have been vaccinated. 

I assume the following airline experience could also happen with cruises:

 

A traveler tested negative for covid-19 before a flight. He had the virus and infected 4 passengers.

 

The study details an outbreak linked to one passenger on an 18-hour flight from Dubai to New Zealand in September.

 

Health officials in New Zealand, a country that has a strict 14-day quarantine in place for arriving travelers, released a case study on Friday that details the risks of traveling on long-haul flights during the coronavirus pandemic — even if negative coronavirus tests are required before the flight.

 

The report details a coronavirus outbreak linked through DNA analysis to one passenger on an 18-hour flight from Dubai to New Zealand in September. The traveler, who tested negative for the coronavirus with a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test within 48 hours of the flight, was contagious but pre-symptomatic onboard the plane, and infected at least four other passengers.

In total there were seven cases linked to the flight, which had 86 passengers onboard.

 

“By combining information on disease progression, travel dynamics and genomic analysis, we conclude that at least four in-flight transmission events of SARS-CoV-2 likely took place,” the study states. “Four of these six related genome sequences were from Switzerland, the country of origin of the suspected index case.”

 

New Zealand’s quarantine protocols make the study a unique analysis because all passengers were monitored and retested during their required 14-day quarantine lodging, which is managed by New Zealand authorities. Most flights, doctors have pointed out, have no way of monitoring passengers two weeks after their travel.

 

“This case speaks to how hard it is to keep infected people off a flight, even if you do PCR testing in a narrow window of time before the flight,” David Freedman, an infectious-disease specialist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham who has reviewed the report, told The Washington Post.

“The original case most likely became infectious after he took the preflight test, but in fact was not symptomatic until 71 hours after the flight,” Freedman said. PCR coronavirus tests are estimated to be about 98 percent effective at detecting the coronavirus, which is why they are required by many countries for entry.

 

Of the seven infected individuals, five had tested negative within 48 hours before the flight. The authors of the article say the “transmission events occurred despite reported use of masks and gloves in-flight,” and that stringent masking was required by the airline operating the flight.

 

 

“These seven cases were found to have been seated within four rows of each other during the approximately 18-hour flight,” the study states.

 

Transatlantic flights requiring rapid antigen testing preflight have also become available recently, but rapid tests are only about 70 percent as effective.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, USCcruisecrazy said:

I think it's more important to determine people are not infected than people have been vaccinated. 

I assume the following airline experience could also happen with cruises:

 

A traveler tested negative for covid-19 before a flight. He had the virus and infected 4 passengers.

 

The study details an outbreak linked to one passenger on an 18-hour flight from Dubai to New Zealand in September.

 

Health officials in New Zealand, a country that has a strict 14-day quarantine in place for arriving travelers, released a case study on Friday that details the risks of traveling on long-haul flights during the coronavirus pandemic — even if negative coronavirus tests are required before the flight.

 

The report details a coronavirus outbreak linked through DNA analysis to one passenger on an 18-hour flight from Dubai to New Zealand in September. The traveler, who tested negative for the coronavirus with a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test within 48 hours of the flight, was contagious but pre-symptomatic onboard the plane, and infected at least four other passengers.

In total there were seven cases linked to the flight, which had 86 passengers onboard.

 

“By combining information on disease progression, travel dynamics and genomic analysis, we conclude that at least four in-flight transmission events of SARS-CoV-2 likely took place,” the study states. “Four of these six related genome sequences were from Switzerland, the country of origin of the suspected index case.”

 

New Zealand’s quarantine protocols make the study a unique analysis because all passengers were monitored and retested during their required 14-day quarantine lodging, which is managed by New Zealand authorities. Most flights, doctors have pointed out, have no way of monitoring passengers two weeks after their travel.

 

“This case speaks to how hard it is to keep infected people off a flight, even if you do PCR testing in a narrow window of time before the flight,” David Freedman, an infectious-disease specialist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham who has reviewed the report, told The Washington Post.

“The original case most likely became infectious after he took the preflight test, but in fact was not symptomatic until 71 hours after the flight,” Freedman said. PCR coronavirus tests are estimated to be about 98 percent effective at detecting the coronavirus, which is why they are required by many countries for entry.

 

Of the seven infected individuals, five had tested negative within 48 hours before the flight. The authors of the article say the “transmission events occurred despite reported use of masks and gloves in-flight,” and that stringent masking was required by the airline operating the flight.

 

 

“These seven cases were found to have been seated within four rows of each other during the approximately 18-hour flight,” the study states.

 

Transatlantic flights requiring rapid antigen testing preflight have also become available recently, but rapid tests are only about 70 percent as effective.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not heard or read that the vaccination will not prevent a person from contracting the virus! Please post where this information came from. Our daughter was given every shot known to the pediatrician at the time and NEVER had a childhood illness. We all get our flu shots every year and none of us three has ever had the flu. So what is different about this vaccine? Need to know!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gmjc2 said:

I have not heard or read that the vaccination will not prevent a person from contracting the virus! Please post where this information came from. Our daughter was given every shot known to the pediatrician at the time and NEVER had a childhood illness. We all get our flu shots every year and none of us three has ever had the flu. So what is different about this vaccine? Need to know!

Will the COVID-19 vaccine stop you from spreading it to others? Experts don't know yet

The goal of the vaccines is stop the spread of disease once the virus is inside the body. But whether an immunized person is no longer contagious is not known yet.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gmjc2 said:

I have not heard or read that the vaccination will not prevent a person from contracting the virus! Please post where this information came from. Our daughter was given every shot known to the pediatrician at the time and NEVER had a childhood illness. We all get our flu shots every year and none of us three has ever had the flu. So what is different about this vaccine? Need to know!

Hi gmjc2,

 

I'm not sure if I understand your question about "this vaccine" as there are many different vaccines being developed to fight Covid (three of them are close). 2 of the 3 use a similar technology and the 3rd is different. 

 

This is a site I found that breaks down all the different vaccines and therapeutics:

https://www.raps.org/news-and-articles/news-articles/2020/3/covid-19-vaccine-tracker

 

I think what has been mentioned above is that the first two preliminary vaccines Phase 3 reports (which were made by the manufactures and not peer reviewed yet) did not test for asymptomatic cases (they only tested those with symptoms).

 

The most recent vaccine report (3rd with a different technology) tested all phase 3 participants, regardless if they showed symptoms or not, and they claim (again, preliminary report from manufacturer) that it showed a trend that it eliminated catching the virus.

 

Maybe the first two vaccines do the same but they do not have data to support it (yet). Who knows?? Data is increasing every day which is cool to see.

 

I am no expert at all of this and I implore everyone to do their own research and education about this. I personally just try to stay away from any news sites when searching and try to only read medical or university web sites (hopefully are not politically swayed one way or another).

 

Cheers,

John  

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • ANNOUNCEMENT: PONANT Cruises & Expeditions
      • Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Q&A with American Queen Voyages
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...