Bahamas drops testing requirement

[smokeybandit]

45 minutes ago, wayne_trisha said:

Even not having passengers on ships stopped covid. It is now part of our life. Testing also costs a lot of money and who is paying that cost? All these people taking "free" tests that are not free. TAXPAYERS!!! 

Testing also costs RC money. They pay for 2 tests for unvaccinated people.  They pay for tests for symptomatic people on board. They are on the hook to refund your money if you test positive before a cruise. They are on the hook (at least for a little while longer) to reimburse those who test positive on board.

[Shorewalk Holmes]

1 hour ago, tallnthensome said:

So forcing the testing of hundreds of thousands of healthy vaccinated people days before the cruise  to find the few that are postive

 

This is an important point. What's a typical number of precruise positives per 5000 passengers, including both the people who test positive at home and those at the port?  1? 100? 300? The cruise lines probably know this, at least approximately.  Maybe someone here also knows.

 

 

Edited June 21, 2022 by Shorewalk Holmes

[BND]

14 hours ago, Shorewalk Holmes said:

 

This is an important point. What's a typical number of precruise positives per 5000 passengers, including both the people who test positive at home and those at the port?  1? 100? 300? The cruise lines probably know this, at least approximately.  Maybe someone here also knows.

 

 

You can't tell me airlines had lower positives pre-boarding than cruise ships yet they aren't testing them anymore.    Also, you just have a theory in your mind that pre-cruise testing cuts down on cases.    That is a theory that has never been proven.  Not to mention, for every person that tests positive, how many don't that would a day or two later?  Too many variables to state that pre-cruise testing makes any difference at all.

[Shorewalk Holmes]

30 minutes ago, BND said:

Also, you just have a theory in your mind that pre-cruise testing cuts down on cases.    That is a theory that has never been proven.  Not to mention, for every person that tests positive, how many don't that would a day or two later?  Too many variables to state that pre-cruise testing makes any difference at all.

 

It's not a 'theory' at all. It's true by definition.

 

As long as the test can correctly detect positive cases, and positive testers are refused boarding, testing cuts down on the total number of positive cases aboard the ship.

 

By the way, I'm amazed at how many people fall for the argument that 'if there's still covid cases after X, that proves X doesn't work' -- whether it's vaccines, masks, or testing. These precautions work to reduce the probability of spread, they don't eliminate it.

 

Yes, some people will have covid but not test positive until after they board.  Some people will get covid ashore.  None of that means that precruise testing doesn't work to reduce the number of cases aboard.

 

As I said earlier, the key question is how many people are denied boarding due to positive tests.  I'm hoping that one of the TAs here knows (and is willing to say) roughly how many boarding refusals there are.

 

 

 

Edited June 21, 2022 by Shorewalk Holmes

[hazeleyes46]

4 minutes ago, Shorewalk Holmes said:

 

It's not a 'theory' at all. It's true by definition.

 

As long as the test can detect positive cases, and positive testers are refused boarding, testing cuts down on the total number of positive cases aboard the ship.

 

By the way, I'm amazed at how many people fall for the argument that 'if there's still covid cases after X, that proves X doesn't work' -- whether it's vaccines, masks, or testing. These precautions work to reduce the probability of spread, they don't eliminate it.

 

Yes, some people will have covid but not test positive until after they board.  Some people will get covid ashore.  None of that means that precruise testing doesn't work to reduce the number of cases aboard.

 

As I said earlier, the key question is how many people are denied boarding due to positive tests.  I'm hoping that one of the TAs here knows (and is willing to say) roughly how many boarding refusals there are.

 

 

 

It's time to move on. No one is worried if someone comes on board with the flu or pneumonia or another virus but we HAVE to test ONLY for Covid, which is not 2020 Covid anymore.

[BND]

5 minutes ago, Shorewalk Holmes said:

 

It's not a 'theory' at all. It's true by definition.

 

As long as the test can detect positive cases, and positive testers are refused boarding, testing cuts down on the total number of positive cases aboard the ship.

 

By the way, I'm amazed at how many people fall for the argument that 'if there's still covid cases after X, that proves X doesn't work' -- whether it's vaccines, masks, or testing. These precautions work to reduce the probability of spread, they don't eliminate it.

 

Yes, some people will have covid but not test positive until after they board.  Some people will get covid ashore.  None of that means that precruise testing doesn't work to reduce the number of cases aboard.

 

As I said earlier, the key question is how many people are denied boarding due to positive tests.  I'm hoping that one of the TAs here knows (and is willing to say) roughly how many boarding refusals there are.

 

 

 

A theory is something that isn't proven so it is a theory.

 

I never said anything about vaccines, masking or testing not "working".  What I said was there is no way to prove that pre-cruise testing makes any difference.

 

 TA's have no clue about how many people are denied boarding except for their own clients.  Our TA's are good friends and they have no inside information.

 

And, as I said previously, testing will be going away.

 

 

Edited June 21, 2022 by BND

[BND]

Also, according to Tony (La Lido Loca on YT) the CDC is re-evaluating pre-cruise testing.

[The Scurvy Pirate]

13 minutes ago, Shorewalk Holmes said:

 

As long as the test can correctly detect positive cases, and positive testers are refused boarding, testing cuts down on the total number of positive cases aboard the ship.

 

 

At least until the first port day.... when testing is no longer required to get back on the ship.

[Shorewalk Holmes]

5 minutes ago, BND said:

A theory is something that isn't proven so it is a theory.

 

I never said anything about vaccines, masking or testing not "working".  What I said was there is no way to prove that pre-cruise testing makes any difference.

 

 TA's have no clue about how many people are denied boarding except for their own clients.  Our TA's are good friends and they have no inside information.

 

And, as I said previously, testing will be going away.

 

 

 

As long as precruise testing correctly detects positive cases before they get on the ship, it has already made a difference.  Not sure what other kind of proof you are looking for.

 

As I said, the important question is how many positive cases testing detects.  If it's 100 out of a ship of 5000, then I don't want to see testing go away. 

 

I don't know any of the TAs who post here personally but to me they seem to know a whole lot about cruising. 

[hazeleyes46]

3 minutes ago, Shorewalk Holmes said:

 

As long as precruise testing correctly detects positive cases before they get on the ship, it has already made a difference.  Not sure what other kind of proof you are looking for.

 

As I said, the important question is how many positive cases testing detects.  If it's 100 out of a ship of 5000, then I don't want to see testing go away. 

 

I don't know any of the TAs who post here personally but to me they seem to know a whole lot about cruising. 

My gf is a TA and I highly doubt she would know this information either. Should we test for strep or bronchitis or the flu or any other illness that can be contagious? It seems that people who are getting covid now are getting a "normal" cold or virus so most are not scared of getting norovirus as much as they are covid. Why get hung up on one virus?

[smokeybandit]

3 minutes ago, Shorewalk Holmes said:

As long as precruise testing correctly detects positive cases before they get on the ship, it has already made a difference.  Not sure what other kind of proof you are looking for.

 

But what difference has it made?  If your criteria is simply "preventing known cases from boarding" then maybe. But in today's covid era, where for the majority it's nothing more than a cold, what are you really gaining when many others with colds are getting on board already? 

[Shorewalk Holmes]

15 minutes ago, hazeleyes46 said:

It's time to move on. No one is worried if someone comes on board with the flu or pneumonia or another virus but we HAVE to test ONLY for Covid, which is not 2020 Covid anymore.

 

It's true that the whole system treats covid differently than these other diseases. For example, covid could get you quarantined and ruin your cruise.

[Shorewalk Holmes]

1 minute ago, smokeybandit said:

 

But what difference has it made?  If your criteria is simply "preventing known cases from boarding" then maybe. But in today's covid era, where for the majority it's nothing more than a cold, what are you really gaining when many others with colds are getting on board already? 

 

Presumably the cruise lines believe they are gaining fewer disruptive required quarantines, among other logistical hassles.

 

Haven't had covid yet, so I don't know for sure, but I suspect that for someone in his seventies, it could be much more than a cold.  Nevertheless I agree that the key question is how many positives the tests are picking up.  If it's 2  or 3, and none of these is a superspreader, then by the end of the cruise there might be a relatively small effect.  Doubt if I could justify testing in that case.  On the other hand, if its 100...

[rudeney]

Since pre-cruise testing is a very brief snapshot in time, it is illogical to claim that it has any significant effect on the levels of COVIDS on the ship.  All it takes is for one person to bring COVID aboard, either with a false-negative test, a delayed infection, or from a port, and it will spread. 

 

Testing two days before sailing is like checking a swimming pool full of toddlers for fecal matter.  A 2oz sample might be clear now, but one minute later and it's a toilet (sorry for that scatalogical example, but I just got an alert that our neighborhood pool is closed for the day because of yet another code brown!). 

 

Given the density of passengers on a cruise ship, all it takes is one infected person to expose nearly all other passengers within two days.  One person with Omicron will infect 7 - 14 others.  Do the math - it will move quickly through the ship. The only reason ships aren't returning everyone sick is because vaccines and natural immunity work to keep it at bay.  

[smokeybandit]

3 minutes ago, Shorewalk Holmes said:

Presumably the cruise lines believe they are gaining fewer disruptive required quarantines, among other logistical hassles.

But the quarantines aren't required because someone has cold symptoms and a positive test. They're required because the CDC says so. If the CDC said "you can end quarantines" the cruise lines would do that in a heartbeat.

[smokeybandit]

Just now, rudeney said:

Given the density of passengers on a cruise ship, all it takes is one infected person to expose nearly all other passengers within two days.  One person with Omicron will infect 7 - 14 others.  Do the math - it will move quickly through the ship. The only reason ships aren't returning everyone sick is because vaccines and natural immunity work to keep it at bay.  

 

This is all so wrong. Based on that everyone should leave a cruise sick with something they picked up on board.

[Shorewalk Holmes]

1 minute ago, smokeybandit said:

But the quarantines aren't required because someone has cold symptoms and a positive test. They're required because the CDC says so. If the CDC said "you can end quarantines" the cruise lines would do that in a heartbeat.

 

In that case it would be especially useful to have the positive test and case data from the cruise lines so we could make up our own minds.

[rudeney]

Just now, smokeybandit said:

 

This is all so wrong. Based on that everyone should leave a cruise sick with something they picked up on board.

 

Not "something" - the Omicron variant of COVID.  It is highly contagious, but it is also far less virulent than original recipe COVID, Delta variant, or even the flu.  Many people will be exposed but not get sick because they've already had it or they have very good immune systems that, combined with their vaccines, make prevent any symptoms at all.  

 

 

[smokeybandit]

1 minute ago, rudeney said:

 

Not "something" - the Omicron variant of COVID.  It is highly contagious, but it is also far less virulent than original recipe COVID, Delta variant, or even the flu.  Many people will be exposed but not get sick because they've already had it or they have very good immune systems that, combined with their vaccines, make prevent any symptoms at all.  

 

 

Yes, it's still all wrong.  Everyone on the ship is exposed in two days? One infected person will infect 7-14 others (which would be a record of contagiousness). No way. Cruise ships aren't sardine cans.

[hazeleyes46]

1 hour ago, Shorewalk Holmes said:

 

It's true that the whole system treats covid differently than these other diseases. For example, covid could get you quarantined and ruin your cruise.

Exactly and that is not fair because nothing else contagious is being quarantined.

[hazeleyes46]

54 minutes ago, rudeney said:

 

Not "something" - the Omicron variant of COVID.  It is highly contagious, but it is also far less virulent than original recipe COVID, Delta variant, or even the flu.  Many people will be exposed but not get sick because they've already had it or they have very good immune systems that, combined with their vaccines, make prevent any symptoms at all.  

 

 

Exactly. I have been exposed many times, unvaccinated and was fine. I hate the fact I have to vaccine to cruise but I have to do what I have to do. I rely on my immune system and it has worked for over 2 years for me.

[Shorewalk Holmes]

Just now, hazeleyes46 said:

Exactly and that is not fair because nothing else contagious is being quarantined.

 

Maybe officials are just being extra cautious about covid because it is new. Maybe they are afraid that uncontrolled spread could allow it to mutate again and evade the vaccines.  I'm not sure that we know the end of the covid story yet.

[hazeleyes46]

5 minutes ago, Shorewalk Holmes said:

 

Maybe officials are just being extra cautious about covid because it is new. Maybe they are afraid that uncontrolled spread could allow it to mutate again and evade the vaccines.  I'm not sure that we know the end of the covid story yet.

If people stopped testing and stopped talking about it, it would go away. It would be like every other cold/virus/illness. 

[rudeney]

1 hour ago, smokeybandit said:

Yes, it's still all wrong.  Everyone on the ship is exposed in two days? One infected person will infect 7-14 others (which would be a record of contagiousness). No way. Cruise ships aren't sardine cans.

 

Yep.  Per the CDC.

 

[tallnthensome]

4 hours ago, Shorewalk Holmes said:

 

As long as precruise testing correctly detects positive cases before they get on the ship, it has already made a difference.  Not sure what other kind of proof you are looking for.

 

As I said, the important question is how many positive cases testing detects.  If it's 100 out of a ship of 5000, then I don't want to see testing go away. 

 

I don't know any of the TAs who post here personally but to me they seem to know a whole lot about cruising. 

...... and what if It was zero out of 5000 ? Shall we continue on with this nonsense ? You need to let it go.......