To Vax or not to vax...that is the question

[cruisemom42]

 

Sorry, duplicate post.

 

Edited May 24, 2021 by cruisemom42

[cruisemom42]

1 hour ago, TNcruising02 said:

I agree that there should be caution, hence why some people are waiting to get the vaccination.  I am fully vaccinated, but can respect those who want to proceed with caution.

 

That's good, but I fear that the assessments made by many people who are hesitating are not very accurate. People are generally lousy at comparing the relative risks. They assign a much larger risk to some things that are unlikely to happen or are not supported by the science, and a much smaller risk to things that are more likely to happen...

 

Edited May 24, 2021 by cruisemom42

[c-boy]

5 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

That's good, but I fear that the assessments made by many people who are hesitating are not very accurate. People are generally lousy at comparing the relative risks. They assign a much larger risk to some things that are unlikely to happen or are not supported by the science, and a much smaller risk to things that are more likely to happen...

 

is that your final answer  😀

[Toofarfromthesea]

20 hours ago, wowzz said:

The UK cruising Seacations,  that require 100% vaccinations for all pax seem to have sold extremely well. 

Hopefully, the message will have reached the HQ of every cruise line - demanding all pax are vaccinated will increase bookings. Those that do not wish to be vaccinated can just stay at home.   

Were there cruiselines that offered the same cruises without the mandatory vaccinations whose bookings were less robust?  If not, your attempt to conclude that requiring vaccines will increase bookings is evidence-free.

[Toofarfromthesea]

15 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

That's good, but I fear that the assessments made by many people who are hesitating are not very accurate. People are generally lousy at comparing the relative risks. They assign a much larger risk to some things that are unlikely to happen or are not supported by the science, and a much smaller risk to things that are more likely to happen...

 

You're stuttering. 😃

 

[sfaaa]

3 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

Perhaps, but my guess is the this isn't really driven by the difference in cost.   I think it is probably about there being more youthful cruisers on Carnival, including families.   Just a wild guess of course.   

I cruise both lines. Carnival definitely has a more partying and casual atmosphere onboard hence the slogan Fun Ship. 

[ldubs]

1 hour ago, sfaaa said:

I cruise both lines. Carnival definitely has a more partying and casual atmosphere onboard hence the slogan Fun Ship. 

 

I would agree 100%.  The times we have been on Carnival were really for the kids.  You know, milestones like graduating from college etc.  A much more high-spirited atmosphere!  

[navybankerteacher]

6 hours ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

You're stuttering. 😃

 

I don’t think she was  —- but even if she were, it would be preferable to the mindlessness demonstrated by the others to whom she referred.  

Edited May 25, 2021 by navybankerteacher

[MissyKish]

But my cousin's mail man knows a girl who works with a guy who once talked to his brother's doctor. The mail man told me not to get the shot because the brother's doctor who by the way is an Eye Doctor thinks that there is a chance I could catch pink eye from the vaccine. 
Sounds crazy, I know. But no more crazy than some of the other reasons people are giving for not getting the jab.

[Toofarfromthesea]

20 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

I don’t think she was  —- but even if she were, it would be preferable to the mindlessness demonstrated by the others to whom she referred.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CxX8nvLalE

[iancal]

People respond to surveys in different ways.

 

One's response to the survey  and what happens when the rubber hits the road  over the next few months may be at opposite ends of the spectrum.

Edited May 25, 2021 by iancal

[navybankerteacher]

46 minutes ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CxX8nvLalE

OK  -- now we know where you turn for guidance.  As mentioned earlier, I see no point in discussion with your sort. 

[ldubs]

On 5/24/2021 at 7:06 AM, TNcruising02 said:

Possible heart problems in young people and menstrual issues with females.  Just because those issues don't matter to you doesn't mean they don't matter to other people. Since the odds of anyone dying of covid under the age of 45 are very, very slim and have a smaller chance the younger the person, then those people are weighing the risks of the vaccine.  It's not rocket science to understand that people have concerns. Some people have a very narrow view of life and think that everyone should think the way they think and believe what they believe or they are wrong.  Give me a break.

https://www.kctv5.com/coronavirus/vaccine_tracker/heart-issue-warning-in-kids-after-covid-vaccination/video_3c6c7a5d-d1a6-5747-940a-5f9c3ca5f4ff.html

 

Aw, I think you are misreading this issue.  The CDC has noted a few cases of these issues and has asked Doc's to be on the lookout.  A very good precaution and I'm glad for that.   However, the CDC says the incidences are just as likely background noise, meaning no more than would occur in the normal population without any vaccine involved.   So when it comes to doing what our public health experts advise, this is not a valid medical reason to avoid the vaccine.   

[ldubs]

On 5/24/2021 at 12:35 PM, Toofarfromthesea said:

Were there cruiselines that offered the same cruises without the mandatory vaccinations whose bookings were less robust? 

 

 

I would expect no-vaccine cruises to be filled to the gills.  Most anti-vaxxers would likely jump on a cruise without any thought whatsoever.  Fortunately, such cruises were not allowed because the safety issues were recognized.  You know, kind of like reckless driving is not allowed.   

 

On 5/24/2021 at 12:35 PM, Toofarfromthesea said:

 

If not, your attempt to conclude that requiring vaccines will increase bookings is evidence-free.

 

It certainly is not going to be an impediment is it.   It shows that cruise lines will have no worries filling their fully vaccinated ships.    

 

 

[ontheweb]

10 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

OK  -- now we know where you turn for guidance.  As mentioned earlier, I see no point in discussion with your sort. 

And yet, you keep coming back to comment. I solved this for myself with this poster by using the ignore function that cruisecritic has wisely provided us with.

[wowzz]

40 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

And yet, you keep coming back to comment. I solved this for myself with this poster by using the ignore function that cruisecritic has wisely provided us with.

That is of course an option. The issue is, that when someone posts rubbish, if no one challenges the post, the OP will continue to believe that their view is correct.   

[ontheweb]

48 minutes ago, wowzz said:

That is of course an option. The issue is, that when someone posts rubbish, if no one challenges the post, the OP will continue to believe that their view is correct.   

I was speaking to the poster who keeps saying he is done with arguing with those who post rubbish, but keeps returning to do so. He was actually the one who inspired me to use the ignore function for that poster. It is not something I lightly do; in fact there is only one other on my ignore list.

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

And yet, you keep coming back to comment. I solved this for myself with this poster by using the ignore function that cruisecritic has wisely provided us with.

There is a great difference between commenting upon an absurdity (once posited in an open forum) and wasting time in a discussion with an individual who believes in and originally posted that absurdity.  Perhaps you you might be happier if you did actually use the ignore function.

Edited May 26, 2021 by navybankerteacher

[wowzz]

I must admit I do find it "enlightening" and also a bit frightening to realise that there are people out there who actually believe in so much fake information,  and who, moreover, feel it worthwhile to regurgitate such "information " on forums such as this.

[Aplmac]

Really....

 

[Toofarfromthesea]

18 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

OK  -- now we know where you turn for guidance.  As mentioned earlier, I see no point in discussion with your sort. 

I bet that seemed clever in your head.  Too bad it had to leak out and make you look petty and ridiculous.

[Toofarfromthesea]

7 hours ago, wowzz said:

That is of course an option. The issue is, that when someone posts rubbish, if no one challenges the post, the OP will continue to believe that their view is correct.   

LOLOLOL you really think you have changed a single mind here?

[Toofarfromthesea]

OOOPS:

 

https://medicine.wustl.edu/news/good-news-mild-covid-19-induces-lasting-antibody-protection/

 

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2021-05/elf-ciw052421.php

[Luckiestmanonearth]

On 5/24/2021 at 3:22 PM, cruisemom42 said:

 

That's good, but I fear that the assessments made by many people who are hesitating are not very accurate. People are generally lousy at comparing the relative risks. They assign a much larger risk to some things that are unlikely to happen or are not supported by the science, and a much smaller risk to things that are more likely to happen...

 

People are generally still unsure and nervous I guess .  I agree to follow the science but I’m sure there’s so much we still don’t know

 

I’m especially weary of the news that if you’ve had Covid and then got the shots, that you’ll never need a booster after that (implying permanent immunity).

 

I’d  like to believe that but how does anyone actually know this is for certain

[cruisemom42]

6 minutes ago, Luckiestmanonearth said:

People are generally still unsure and nervous I guess .  I agree to follow the science but I’m sure there’s so much we still don’t know

 

I’m especially weary of the news that if you’ve had Covid and then got the shots, that you’ll never need a booster after that (implying permanent immunity).

 

I’d  like to believe that but how does anyone actually know this is for certain

 

Not quite sure what you mean -- do you mean "weary" like you're tired of hearing it?  Or "wary" as in you are skeptical?

 

I'm not sure that I have actually heard this as an actual medical claim. To the best of my understanding the current state of knowledge is that neither natural immunity NOR vaccination are likely to be permanent. However, we really don't know yet just how long either one will last. 

 

One possible argument for vaccination following infection (for me anyway) that appears justifiable is that the vaccines -- at least the mRNA ones -- likely do a creditable job of protecting you against some of the variants that are out there. This has actually been reported. Natural immunity may only be protective against the strain that you were infected with....