Diamond Princess passenger "tested positive for Wuhan coronavirus"

[Farts]

8 minutes ago, kent9xxx1 said:

Tokyo alone has 650 hospitals.   

 

Yea, if you filled up all those beds with quarantined ppl, then the hospital system would grind a halt. 

[Farts]

5 minutes ago, generichandle said:

Of course not. That is the point of the 14-day quarantine, to let the estimated incubation period run it's course, Presumably, those testing positive now are those who got it a week before the quarantine, so two weeks and symptoms. When those who got it just before quarantine, or didn't, run their whole 14 day course, hopefully, the rest were not exposed. 

 

how do you know? 

[npcl]

3 minutes ago, kent9xxx1 said:

Tokyo alone has 650 hospitals.  

1. you use hospitals for patients, not quarantine.

 

2. Even large hospitals have very few isolation rooms. 

 

3. The 135 patients they have already taken off have stretched the limit in Tokyo. Articles have indicated that some of the first 73 have already been sent to other prefectures.

[ed01106]

8 minutes ago, Farts said:

There isn't a 3,600 bed hospital in japan or anywhere in the world. It would literally overwhelm the entire hospital system. 

 

For reference, a medium sized hospital is anywhere from 300-450 beds. 

Actually China has 5000 bed hospital on Beijing.  But me thinks the Chinese healthcare system is a little stretched ATM.

[Psoque]

13 minutes ago, kent9xxx1 said:

And a service to their own citizens as well.  
 

Japan promptly turned away the next ship.  My own cynicism, but likely due to not many Japanese on that one.  
 

Anyway, fresh news, Beijing and Shanghai are imposing partial lock down today.  Those are big cities.  Mask is a must.  
Tiny ship, mask is not a must.  You see where this is going.  

 

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3049891/beijing-and-shanghai-impose-new-controls-residents-china-battles

 

 

Japan closed their ports to international cruises, but it's not like they made an exception for Diamond Princess.  They did not welcome Diamond Princess to disembark.  They are providing assistance in Japanese waters because it is the right thing to do, and it is one of the few countries nearby that can provide this kind of assistance.  I wonder, in your opinion, what should the Japanese government have done to prove that it is not giving Diamond Princess any preferential treatment?

[npcl]

2 minutes ago, ceilidh1 said:

Right - I get that piece. BUT if passengers were tested on day 1 and found to be clear then does that mean that they would have been safe to disembark? Let's assume they had the ability and means to test each and every passenger...would that have been enough to say they did not have the virus? OR would it have been pointless to test day 1 since the virus may or may not show at that point? We have seen cases where the virus has been found but there have been no symptoms, so could it have been found (or not) before the quarantine started?

 

Just curious, that's all.....and this is the question I would be asking if I was on that ship right now...

testing on day one would identify cases, but would clear those showing negative at that time.

[Kmkub]

13 minutes ago, kent9xxx1 said:

You live in an oxygen tent (worst case), you might be able to walk away without getting infected.

You live in your cabin, you will be off the ship with the guy in hazmat suit.  
I think you would rather take the tent.  

The cabin is, for all intents and purposes, an oxygen tent. The cabins do not share oxygen. If you are in an oxygen tent in the hospital, they still have to lift the tent to feed you. Similar to opening the door with a mask for a very short time to get food.

 

 

[npcl]

1 minute ago, Psoque said:

Japan closed their ports to international cruises, but it's not like they made an exception for Diamond Princess.  They did not welcome Diamond Princess to disembark.  They are providing assistance in Japanese waters because it is the right thing to do, and it is one of the few countries nearby that can provide this kind of assistance.  I wonder, in your opinion, what should the Japanese government have done to prove that it is not giving Diamond Princess any preferential treatment?

also on the HAL ship there were not any active cases so not a medical emergency. Also it still had plenty of food and fuel so no logistical emergency. so no immediate need.

 

Also japan, because of the Diamond is dealing with the largest number of cases outside of china.

 

 

[capriccio]

6 minutes ago, kent9xxx1 said:

Tokyo alone has 650 hospitals.  

 

And those 650 hospitals mean that there are 4.7 hospitals available per 100,000 Tokyo residents and those residents are filling the beds with medical and surgical patients, accident patients, obstetric patients, etc.  Those beds are not sitting empty.

 

Availability of hospitals in Japan (https://www.statista.com/statistics/605639/japan-hospital-number/)

Despite the highest number of existing hospitals in Tokyo Prefecture, when it comes to the density of hospitals, other prefectures surpass Tokyo by far. As of 2018, Kochi Prefecture ranked first among other prefectures with close to 18 hospitals available per 100 thousand inhabitants in that area. In contrast, only around 4.7 hospitals were provided per 100 thousand inhabitants in Tokyo. That year, the average number of hospital beds offered per 100 thousand inhabitants in Japan reached approximately 1,220.

[ed01106]

FYI there is a world wide shortage of test kits.  They can't spare tests on people without symptoms (fever)

[Farts]

9 minutes ago, npcl said:

1. you use hospitals for patients, not quarantine.

 

2. Even large hospitals have very few isolation rooms. 

 

3. The 135 patients they have already taken off have stretched the limit in Tokyo. Articles have indicated that some of the first 73 have already been sent to other prefectures.

Right. We agree. The ppl shouldn't be disembarked. hospital facilities would be overwhelmed. where would you even quarantine them. it just makes sense to keep them on. 

[npcl]

11 minutes ago, dog said:

The crew are not confined to cabins, not always wearing masks. 

because some of the crew needs to operate the ship they cannot all be isolated as effectively as the passengers. Once the passengers are gone I expect that the crew will be moved to individual passenger rooms for a new round of quarantine. Which will still not be as tight as the passenger quarantine, but will greatly limit spread, until the ship goes 14 days without new case.

[Psoque]

10 minutes ago, ceilidh1 said:

Right - I get that piece. BUT if passengers were tested on day 1 and found to be clear then does that mean that they would have been safe to disembark? Let's assume they had the ability and means to test each and every passenger...would that have been enough to say they did not have the virus? OR would it have been pointless to test day 1 since the virus may or may not show at that point? We have seen cases where the virus has been found but there have been no symptoms, so could it have been found (or not) before the quarantine started?

 

Just curious, that's all.....and this is the question I would be asking if I was on that ship right now...

In most viral tests, the sensitivity of the test goes up as the viral load goes up, so the chance of false negative results on someone infected on day 0, tested on day 1, for example would be very high.  Also, in a more "modern" definition of incubation period, it could be between exposure and becoming "infectious" (which has its own sets of different definitions) or between exposure and testing positive on a test (in some instances).  I was just quoting the most classic definition of incubation period.  Also, there is a difference between exposure and actual infection.

[Aus Traveller]

5 hours ago, bluesea321 said:

 

2) Count the days....  the pax who is blamed for the epidemic left the ship on Jan 25, 16 days ago <<<

 

3) 16 days since he left the ship so a) the 14 day incubation time frame is wrong or b) some of the new cases were transmitted on the ship, i.e., those that were originally infected by the Hong Kong pax are now beyond their 14 day incubation period.

 

Chinese authorities stated quite some time ago, that people with the virus can pass it on, although they are asymptomatic. People on the ship who contracted the virus from the person (or persons) who disembarked in Hong Kong, could have passed it on to others on the ship before the isolation quarantine was put in place. If the 14 day incubation period previously reported by Chinese authorities is correct, then it would run from the time the isolation of passengers was put in place.

[Farts]

4 minutes ago, generichandle said:

*snicker* Then you already knew they must test the incubation period, and the only way is the new 'human petrie disk (sp?)' that is Diamond Princess. I know those aboard are not volunteers for experiments, but there could hardly be a better opportunity in these circumstances, and how else to decide about future interventions?

right. we are saying the same thing and we agree. 

 

 

[npcl]

1 hour ago, SunNFunCruzer said:

 

 

I posted about this last night.  It's my understanding that the virus can lay dormant for up to 14 days in a person's system (and there are some UK outlets reporting up to 23 days -- but I cannot vouch for their credibility *Independent + Daily Mail*). Imagine a husband and wife are together in a cabin and the wife doesn't start showing symptoms until the 12th-14th day, at which point she has a fever and starts coughing, spreading virus droplets in the cabin. The husband could then, theoretically, inhale a droplet of the virus and become infected on her 12th-14th day. If it then takes him 12-14 days to show symptoms, you'd need a 28-30 day quarantine to make sure that everyone was clear.  

 

Same holds true for others out on deck. Or those in adjacent balcony cabins. If the virus becomes "airborne" and is transmitted later in someones 14 day cycle, then a whole new 14 day cycle would have to begin to make sure there was no cross-contamination/virus spread.  Please tell me if there is a flaw in this logic.  Why is the Diamond only quarantined until February 19th?

 

https://boards.cruisecritic.com/topic/2730905-diamond-princess-passenger-tested-positive-for-wuhan-coronavirus/?do=findComment&comment=59363451
 

 

 

cabin mates yes. they are at risk until 14 days after last contact. maybe longer if confirmation of virus living on hard surface for multiple days.

 

Balcony is considered to provide enough separation between cabins with dividers as long as they don't lean around then to talk with neighbors. they should also leave masks on.

 

getting cruise ship passengers to all follow directions is a bit like herding cats.

[ed01106]

Being there isn’t enough room to separate the crew on the Diamond, what Princess could do is cancel Saphines cruises, refund all of those passengers.  Fly that crew home and sail that ship to Japan and have folks split between the two ships.

[Pushka]

David is feeling much better today as they hung out a wet towel during the night and that has prevented his dry cough this morning. It is also natural for people to feel down as they reach the mid point of their isolation then hopefully, they pass through that and can say they are now over halfway through. We al know that feeling. 

Edited February 10, 2020 by Pushka

[Psoque]

35 minutes ago, kent9xxx1 said:

And a service to their own citizens as well.  
 

Japan promptly turned away the next ship.  My own cynicism, but likely due to not many Japanese on that one.  
 

 

 

 

36 minutes ago, cruiserchuck said:

 

I think Japan is doing it in part because half the passengers on board are from Japan.  

 

I don't think these comments should be allowed in a civilized society, but that's just my opinion.

[Aus Traveller]

4 hours ago, bluesea321 said:

 

The so called "one" left the ship 16 days ago. If the max is 14 days then everyone directly infected by the "one" is already beyond their 14 days. So either the 14 days max is not really the max or there has been contamination from pax to pax.

Yes. Transmission from one person on board to another after the infected man disembarked in Hong Kong and the isolation of passengers from each other.

[kent9xxx1]

26 minutes ago, Psoque said:

Japan closed their ports to international cruises, but it's not like they made an exception for Diamond Princess.  They did not welcome Diamond Princess to disembark.  They are providing assistance in Japanese waters because it is the right thing to do, and it is one of the few countries nearby that can provide this kind of assistance.  I wonder, in your opinion, what should the Japanese government have done to prove that it is not giving Diamond Princess any preferential treatment?

so why didn’t it provide assistance to the Westerdam being one of the few countries nearby that can provide assistance?  

[SunNFunCruzer]

7 minutes ago, ed01106 said:

Being there isn’t enough room to separate the crew on the Diamond, what Princess could do is cancel Saphines cruises, refund all of those passengers.  Fly that crew home and sail that ship to Japan and have folks split between the two ships.

 

This is a terrible idea. There are already people saying that they are fearful that the virus will be "stuck" in the Diamond Princess HVAC, carpets, soft furniture, etc and stating that they would not board, even after everyone is disembarked and the ship is sanitized.  I believe it would be financial suicide to potentially risk "perceived" or "real" contamination of another ship.

 

I believe Asian cruises should be scrapped for the season and they should reposition the unaffected ships ASAP giving cancelled Asian itinerary cruisers another cruising option this season and salvaging some lost profit.  I am booked in to the Caribbean in March on a ship that have NO reports of virus and I'm nervous.

[kent9xxx1]

30 minutes ago, Farts said:

 

Yea, if you filled up all those beds with quarantined ppl, then the hospital system would grind a halt. 

650 hospitas.  Not 650 beds.  They somehow managed to make room for 135+ and more to come.  Yeah, they can handle a bit more than you think they can.  

 

[ed01106]

6 minutes ago, SunNFunCruzer said:

 

This is a terrible idea. There are already people saying that they are fearful that the virus will be "stuck" in the Diamond Princess HVAC, carpets, soft furniture, etc and stating that they would not board, even after everyone is disembarked and the ship is sanitized.  I believe it would be financial suicide to potentially risk "perceived" or "real" contamination of another ship.

 

I believe Asian cruises should be scrapped for the season and they should reposition the unaffected ships ASAP giving cancelled Asian itinerary cruisers another cruising option this season and salvaging some lost profit.  I am booked in to the Caribbean in March on a ship that have NO reports of virus and I'm nervous.

Oh I know they wouldn’t do that.  But they could if they truly cared more about their “teammates “ as much as Jan claimed. But I know Jan cares more about profit than her “teammates “

Edited February 10, 2020 by ed01106

[Aus Traveller]

3 hours ago, kent9xxx1 said:

China had pop up hospital in a few days. 

Have you seen the video taken in one of the Chinese pop-up hospitals? 20 cots in a room with only about two feet between the cots. Portable toilets are outside the building 200 metres away. A person there reported that there is no hot water and no treatment offered. I would rather stay on the Diamond Princess with my own space, my own bathroom and some activities such as TV/movies etc available.