Carnival’s CEO states that they will not require vaccinations

[Tom-n-Cheryl]

34 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

The "consensus" says the exact opposite.  Actual infection produces a more robust immune response:

"It is true that natural infection almost always causes better immunity than vaccines."

 

https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-safety/immune-system-and-health

 

Further down in the post you quoted, I did say that "nothing is definitive yet". So I am sure that history will look back and make plenty of "comments"/corrections. Much like that which will stem from the prior resident at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

 

Tom

[Prismism]

As a critical thinker, it would make sense to me that if assiligo had already been previously infected with covid-19, and his body was able to easily handle the infection- One could then surmise that if he were to ever be infected again, even with one of the variants- that his body would again easily be able to handle the virus. So the point of how long the vaccine is effective would be moot, in my opinion.

Again, I'm just one man's opinion. Everyone is free to disagree. It won't hurt my feelings.

Edited April 20, 2021 by Prismism

[kdr69]

23 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

what does science say provides the best chance of a successful cruise.

uhmm...Dont do it?🤔

[Tom-n-Cheryl]

1 minute ago, kdr69 said:

uhmm...Dont do it?🤔

I immediately heard the Baretta theme song run through my mind!

Tom

[Tom-n-Cheryl]

9 minutes ago, Prismism said:

As a critical thinker, it would make sense to me that if assiligo had already been previously infected with covid-19, and his body was able to easily handle the infection- One could then surmise that if he were to ever be infected again, even with one of the variants- that his body would again easily be able to handle the virus. So the point of how long the vaccine is effective would be moot, in my opinion.

Again, I'm just one man's opinion. Everyone is free to disagree. It won't hurt my feelings.

Statistically, yes, they'd be in a better position. Yet, we have (an essentially) proven way to put such people in an even better position - with VERY little downside.

 

I think that most of us would consider ourselves critical thinkers. I'm also lugging along a Biology degree (yes, brainwashed by higher education).  🙂

[kdr69]

22 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

And that assumes Carnival can fool the judge that they will never, ever pollute again.

your just not getting off that Carnival ride (sorry for the pun) are ya?  That's an impossible thing for a judge to even ask let alone require so I'm pretty sure a judge worthy of their legal salt wouldn't even put it in a judgement.  Carnival only has to show they are satisfying the requirements as stated in the judgement not that they have a cure-all fix for the future that will absolutely prevent any more issues.  

[jfunk138]

20 minutes ago, ProgRockCruiser said:

That link, which you've provided before, is about diseases in general, and says nothing specific about COVID-19.

 

The data so far, specific to COVID-19, is not certain.  From a recent NY Times article:

 

"Which produces a stronger immune response: a natural infection or a vaccine?

The short answer: We don’t know. "

 

However, it goes on to state:

 

"Vaccines for some pathogens, like pneumococcal bacteria, induce better immunity than the natural infection does. Early evidence suggests that the Covid-19 vaccines may fall into this category. Volunteers who received the Moderna shot had more antibodies — one marker of immune response — in their blood than did people who had been sick with Covid-19."

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/05/health/covid-natural-immunity.html

 

(If you can't get to it, a free limited-access account seems to let you see it.)

I have already seen this article (which is already quite old in "Covid science" time) and did some digging...

The comparison they offer is a bacterial infection, which has a much different attack on the human body than a virus.  I haven't been able to find ANY examples of a viral infection where a vaccine produces a more robust and longer lasting immune response than natural infection with the virus itself.

Yes, Covid is novel.  But it's improbable that the virus would defy the case record where nearly every prior viral infection produces more robust immunity than its vaccine derived equivalent.  Is it possible that vaccines are better for Covid, yes.  But the MOST LIKELY scenario is that it behaves like other viral infections and produces better immunity from natural infection.

The medical community likes to downplay this fact for the simple reason that it might encourage folks to intentionally try to get infected, which wouldn't be good either, since it appears the risk of the vaccine is lower than the risk of natural infection.  But for folks like asalligo, who have already been infected, chances are very good that they have better immunity than the folks with the fancy piece of CDC cardboard.

[SNJCruisers]

5 hours ago, mondello said:

Out of context. My post clearly stated there will be no cruising from the U.S. on those dates. Don't truncate someone's post and try to twist words.

How does this sound then.  On both 5/31 and 7/4 all of the people that are posting back and forth on the various threads will still be standing on their side of the prospective line for the most part.  99.99% of the people have already determined whether or not they are going to get jabbed and nothing that anybody says on the other side of the line is going to make them change their mind.

As of yesterday anybody 16+ in the country can get the vaccine so possibly by your Memorial Day date of 5/31 and definitely by the 4th of July we should know where we stand in regards to herd immunity. 

[mondello]

3 minutes ago, SNJCruisers said:

How does this sound then.  On both 5/31 and 7/4 all of the people that are posting back and forth on the various threads will still be standing on their side of the prospective line for the most part.  99.99% of the people have already determined whether or not they are going to get jabbed and nothing that anybody says on the other side of the line is going to make them change their mind.

As of yesterday anybody 16+ in the country can get the vaccine so possibly by your Memorial Day date of 5/31 and definitely by the 4th of July we should know where we stand in regards to herd immunity. 

Perfect

[mredandchis]

43 minutes ago, Prismism said:

As a critical thinker, it would make sense to me that if assiligo had already been previously infected with covid-19, and his body was able to easily handle the infection- One could then surmise that if he were to ever be infected again, even with one of the variants- that his body would again easily be able to handle the virus. So the point of how long the vaccine is effective would be moot, in my opinion.

Again, I'm just one man's opinion. Everyone is free to disagree. It won't hurt my feelings.

I would agree to a point.  But let me toss this out to you.  If assiligo only had a small dose of covid-19, thier body may have gotten ahead of it before it got bad.  What if the next dose was large?  Would the symptoms be stronger has thier body got ahead of it?  Just a thought.

[SNJCruisers]

1 hour ago, asalligo said:

Someone who supports the vaccine, without emotion or politics please tell me why you think that a person should take it. Because I am struggling to see a benefit from the risk. 

 

The vaccine does not prevent infection clearly. 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/14/health/breakthrough-infections-covid-vaccines-cdc/index.html

 

So let's assume it reduces infection. Well I already had Covid and never even knew it since my blood has antibodies, so my body appears to be good at handling the virus already. 

 

Does it reduce mortality from infection? Well 74 of those 5800 people who caught Covid well after their 2nd dose are dead.

 

It does not prevent transmission either although they are studying if it reduces transmission. 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/fully-vaccinated-people.html

 

It does not stop me from getting it, it does not stop me from passing it on, it does not prevent mortality from the virus, and even if you think the risk small, taking the vaccine is a risk as people have died even according to the CDC. So please, without political agenda and emotion, why should I take it? 

 

 

 

 

Don't.   You have already made up your mind.  You will spin doctor the numbers in your favor when you need to in order to reinforce the decision that you have made.  

Hopefully the proposal by ProgRockCruiser regarding the procedures needed to embark for those cruisers that are unvaccinated comes to fruition.

[SNJCruisers]

14 minutes ago, mondello said:

Perfect

Isn't it nice when 2 posters can reach an agreement on this thread? 😉

[lesliejaykat]

On 4/14/2021 at 2:48 PM, LHARTWICK said:

Agreed!  I am just stunned that vaccinations will not be required after all the industry has been through.  The industry wouldn't survive another shutdown.  Why would they risk other outbreaks, regardless of how large or small?  I'm vaccinated, so I'm not worried about catching it either.  Once opened again, we may stick to lines that require vaccinations for a while.  

Because they still lose out on a lot of people that decide not to go because they are requiring vaccines. Maybe they can't survive at half capacity either? 

 

[mredandchis]

2 hours ago, asalligo said:

Someone who supports the vaccine, without emotion or politics please tell me why you think that a person should take it. Because I am struggling to see a benefit from the risk. 

 

The vaccine does not prevent infection clearly. 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/14/health/breakthrough-infections-covid-vaccines-cdc/index.html

 

So let's assume it reduces infection. Well I already had Covid and never even knew it since my blood has antibodies, so my body appears to be good at handling the virus already. 

 

Does it reduce mortality from infection? Well 74 of those 5800 people who caught Covid well after their 2nd dose are dead.

 

It does not prevent transmission either although they are studying if it reduces transmission. 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/fully-vaccinated-people.html

 

It does not stop me from getting it, it does not stop me from passing it on, it does not prevent mortality from the virus, and even if you think the risk small, taking the vaccine is a risk as people have died even according to the CDC. So please, without political agenda and emotion, why should I take it? 

 

 

 

 

You have every right to decide either way.  I can't tell you why you should take the jab.  For me, I felt covid would kick my tushy and maybe have me start feeding worms.  I am 69, and in excellent health for someone my age. I got my physical in March and my Doc was pleased that I got the jab. 

 

But wouldn't it be wisest to simply ask your Doctor?   he/she knows your health best, has a medical degree, and you obviously trust as you selected them as your doc.  

[mondello]

My concern for the unvaccinated is, I'm pretty sure I read in the past year, is that the last pandemic was much more deadly the second year after mutating. These surges, spikes and rising cases can not be downplayed.

[asalligo]

2 minutes ago, mredandchis said:

You have every right to decide either way.  I can't tell you why you should take the jab.  For me, I felt covid would kick my tushy and maybe have me start feeding worms.  I am 69, and in excellent health for someone my age. I got my physical in March and my Doc was pleased that I got the jab. 

 

But wouldn't it be wisest to simply ask your Doctor?   he/she knows your health best, has a medical degree, and you obviously trust as you selected them as your doc.  

Actually my doctor said no, that there was not sufficient reason to take the vaccine for me. At least not until later and two people on these boards said he should lose his license. 

[BlerkOne]

How do critical thinkers explain sometimes reinfected covid cases have more extreme symptoms up to and including death?

 

Surely critical thinkers realize infected people are still spreading the disease? Are critical thinkers only thinking of themselves! Could they be that selfish and inconsiderate?

[asalligo]

1 minute ago, BlerkOne said:

How do critical thinkers explain sometimes reinfected covid cases have more extreme symptoms up to and including death?

 

Surely critical thinkers realize infected people are still spreading the disease? Are critical thinkers only thinking of themselves! Could they be that selfish and inconsiderate?

So you discount the 5800 documented cases of Covid caught well after the 2nd vaccine? Or are you saying that these people have less of a chance of infecting others because they have taken the vaccine? You people just keep parroting that the vaccine should be taken for the good of all with no evidence that it is actually having an impact. The Covid numbers likely would have been dropping by now with no vaccine at all. 

[asalligo]

1 minute ago, BlerkOne said:

How do critical thinkers explain sometimes reinfected covid cases have more extreme symptoms up to and including death?

 

Surely critical thinkers realize infected people are still spreading the disease? Are critical thinkers only thinking of themselves! Could they be that selfish and inconsiderate?

So you discount the 5800 documented cases of Covid caught well after the 2nd vaccine? Or are you saying that these people have less of a chance of infecting others because they have taken the vaccine? You people just keep parroting that the vaccine should be taken for the good of all with no evidence that it is actually having an impact. The Covid numbers likely would have been dropping by now with no vaccine at all. 

[Tippyton]

43 minutes ago, jfunk138 said:

I have already seen this article (which is already quite old in "Covid science" time) and did some digging...

The comparison they offer is a bacterial infection, which has a much different attack on the human body than a virus.  I haven't been able to find ANY examples of a viral infection where a vaccine produces a more robust and longer lasting immune response than natural infection with the virus itself.

Yes, Covid is novel.  But it's improbable that the virus would defy the case record where nearly every prior viral infection produces more robust immunity than its vaccine derived equivalent.  Is it possible that vaccines are better for Covid, yes.  But the MOST LIKELY scenario is that it behaves like other viral infections and produces better immunity from natural infection.

The medical community likes to downplay this fact for the simple reason that it might encourage folks to intentionally try to get infected, which wouldn't be good either, since it appears the risk of the vaccine is lower than the risk of natural infection.  But for folks like asalligo, who have already been infected, chances are very good that they have better immunity than the folks with the fancy piece of CDC cardboard.

Yup.  Been saying this for a long time and I'm not even a virologist.  I am a critical thinker who can parse the real factoids out of a bunch of noise.  

[BlerkOne]

1 minute ago, asalligo said:

So you discount the 5800 documented cases of Covid caught well after the 2nd vaccine? Or are you saying that these people have less of a chance of infecting others because they have taken the vaccine? You people just keep parroting that the vaccine should be taken for the good of all with no evidence that it is actually having an impact. The Covid numbers likely would have been dropping by now with no vaccine at all. 

You people have to conspire better. One of you say no vaccinated people have passed the virus on.

 

Critical thinking says vaccinated people are more considerate of themselves and others and so less likely to be a super spreader.

 

Covid numbers are going back up.

[Tippyton]

12 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

How do critical thinkers explain sometimes reinfected covid cases have more extreme symptoms up to and including death?

 

Surely critical thinkers realize infected people are still spreading the disease? Are critical thinkers only thinking of themselves! Could they be that selfish and inconsiderate?

To quote a well-known poster here...Prove It!  I've not seen anything of the sort so I'd like to see what you have to support this.

[asalligo]

2 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

You people have to conspire better. One of you say no vaccinated people have passed the virus on.

 

Critical thinking says vaccinated people are more considerate of themselves and others and so less likely to be a super spreader.

 

Covid numbers are going back up.

I will agree to that. People who stayed home and got in line to get the vaccine may be more considerate of others. I think their own fear has to be factored in, but you are correct, I care less about others than most people I know.

 

So, if Covid was never contained, would you have been an advocate of never reopening cruising and travel? Because I personally welcome death without travel. Die today or never leave the house again, easy choice for me.  Let someone else die or never leave the house again, even easier choice. 

[Tippyton]

2 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

You people have to conspire better. One of you say no vaccinated people have passed the virus on.

 

Critical thinking says vaccinated people are more considerate of themselves and others and so less likely to be a super spreader.

 

Covid numbers are going back up.

Critical thinkers recognize there are very few absolutes in science.  That there have not been any documented case of a fully vaccinated person passing the virus on is a fact.  That there are fully vaccinated people that have contracted Covid is a fact - 95% of a million leaves 50,000.

 

Superspreader is a term people throw around a lot without knowing the science behind it.  The fact is there is little hard science about it. 

 

Critical thinkers also realize that consideration of their fellow man is in the realm of behavioral science, not virology.  The same critical thinkers will recognize that fully vaccinated people will not be superspreaders, irrespective of their behaviors.  Mixing sciences, like mixing pleasures, is a dangerous game most practiced by the ignorant.

[asalligo]

7 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

You people have to conspire better. One of you say no vaccinated people have passed the virus on.

 

Critical thinking says vaccinated people are more considerate of themselves and others and so less likely to be a super spreader.

 

Covid numbers are going back up.

How did you ever enjoy cruising? Cruising by its nature is a selfish vacation. We climb on giant floating environmental disasters and gorge ourselves on opulent fare while the less fortunate tend to our every need. I am cool with this, but if you care so much about your fellow man, how did you enjoy this before?