Changes in Onboard Behavior & Procedures after Cruises restart sailing again...

[navybankerteacher]

13 minutes ago, NavyCruiser said:

 

What measles outbreak?

Did you go out & got the measles vaccine...?

If you were informed, you would have known about the 2018-2019 measles outbreak in Rockland County, NY - which was obviously the result of non-immunization.

[NavyCruiser]

Sorry, not informed & never heard of Rockland county NY.

 

Are you informed of the massive swine outbreak in Jim Hogg county TX lately...?

1.5 million wild hogs in TX, killed 5 people

Get immunized,  get a Remington model 7600....

 

[rkacruiser]

6 hours ago, oldishseadog said:

There does not appear to be evidence that prior infection gives future immunity.

 

Yet.  It's going to take much testing which will take much time.  It is my hope that prior infection, with the production of the needed antibodies to fight the virus, may be the "light at the end of the tunnel" in helping to develop a vaccine.  Currently, folks who have had the virus are having some plasma withdrawn that should have the antibodies needed to fight the virus.  If that proves true and the antibodies from patient A will work on a newly infected patient, our scientists may have a shorter path to developing a vaccine for all of us.    

[ontheweb]

16 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

If you were informed, you would have known about the 2018-2019 measles outbreak in Rockland County, NY - which was obviously the result of non-immunization.

And just within the last few weeks despite the order for social distancing, there was a very large turnout for a rabbi's funeral in Rockland County. BTW, Rockland County along with Westchester County and New York City, is the epicenter for the coronavirus.

[Vegas12]

I believe the cruise lines will adapt the “Shanghai QR” system that Disneyland Shanghai has now adopted to open up parts of the theme park in China. Japan and Russia are also implementing this technology. It’s far to complex to go into detail here, but look it up on Google. 

[2wheelin]

23 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

You keep ignoring the point.  If a clearly stated condition for permitting    boarding is showing evidence of vaccination, the line has the right (and, arguably, the obligation) to deny boarding to those who do not show such evidence.   This has nothing to do with efficacy of vaccine or the likelihood of people having natural immunity.  

 

 

 

 

You are missing the point that people are pointing out this would be an absolutely ridiculous requirement for the cruise line to implement. Sure, they can enforce whatever rules they put in place, but that kind of rule would not prevent outbreaks.

It will take years to determine how long a vaccine is effective and then only in retrospect. Huge numbers of people may have immunity without the vaccine. Antibody titering would be a better indicator. 

[navybankerteacher]

6 minutes ago, 2wheelin said:

You are missing the point that people are pointing out this would be an absolutely ridiculous requirement for the cruise line to implement. Sure, they can enforce whatever rules they put in place, but that kind of rule would not prevent outbreaks.

It will take years to determine how long a vaccine is effective and then only in retrospect. Huge numbers of people may have immunity without the vaccine. Antibody titering would be a better indicator. 

The point being discussed is simply whether a cruise line has the right to deny boarding to people who fail to comply with the published requirements for boarding.  It has nothing to do with the long term efficacy of vaccines - or if people might have naturally acquired immunity.  

 

You are needlessly complicating the question.

[sanger727]

53 minutes ago, 2wheelin said:

You are missing the point that people are pointing out this would be an absolutely ridiculous requirement for the cruise line to implement. Sure, they can enforce whatever rules they put in place, but that kind of rule would not prevent outbreaks.

It will take years to determine how long a vaccine is effective and then only in retrospect. Huge numbers of people may have immunity without the vaccine. Antibody titering would be a better indicator. 

 

It would be, but as evidenced by the rules the cruise line put in place at the beginning of the coronavirus outbreak; anything that can be defined quickly with a little bit of documentation is the easiest and quickest  thing they can put in place to keep embarkation moving smoothly. Like when they banned all chinese passport holders regardless of whether or not they had been to china. Or when they required people 70+ to produce a doctor's note to sail. There is a presedence to require a vaccine like yellow fever vaccines. This would be much easier for them to put into place and quickly and easily enforce than doing testing onsite as they are trying to move large numbers of people through a line. I think the requirement to show you have had the vaccine or have antibodies that make you immune or have a medical reason you cannot get the vaccine may become a common requirement for international travel moving forward. Even if additional testing and research will be needed for long term immunity it will help get things up and running again in the "short" (12-18 months) term.

Edited April 16, 2020 by sanger727

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, sanger727 said:

 

...

I think the requirement to show you have had the vaccine or have antibodies that make you immune or have a medical reason you cannot get the vaccine may become a common requirement for international travel moving forward. ...

 

An individual having “a medical reason” for not getting a vaccine - while perhaps understandable, might not justify his/her being permitted to board.  If it determined that proof of vaccination is necessary, then proof of vaccination should be required.  Unfair:  perhaps , but is putting thousands of others at risk for the sake of one fair to them?

[clo]

11 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

An individual having “a medical reason” for not getting a vaccine - while perhaps understandable, might not justify his/her being permitted to board.  If it determined that proof of vaccination is necessary, then proof of vaccination should be required.  Unfair:  perhaps , but is putting thousands of others at risk for the sake of one fair to them?

I had just had that thought. Seems like there ought to be something similar that has happened. I've also wondered if these should be various countries 'laws' rather than left to the discretion of the cruise lines who might not be as motivated to keep people off as to let people on.

[mom says]

36 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

An individual having “a medical reason” for not getting a vaccine - while perhaps understandable, might not justify his/her being permitted to board.  If it determined that proof of vaccination is necessary, then proof of vaccination should be required.  Unfair:  perhaps , but is putting thousands of others at risk for the sake of one fair to them?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but proof of Yellow Fever vaccination is a requirement for those cruising to certain countries. Yet a waiver is accepted for those who are unable for medical reasons to get the vaccine. Why would the same thing for a COVID 19 vaccination be unacceptable?

[d9704011]

9 minutes ago, mom says said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but proof of Yellow Fever vaccination is a requirement for those cruising to certain countries. Yet a waiver is accepted for those who are unable for medical reasons to get the vaccine. Why would the same thing for a COVID 19 vaccination be unacceptable?

Perhaps the difference may lie in the possibility of an unvaccinated person being a carrier and possible spreader of coronavirus vs a person who has a YV waiver who is more simply exposed to becoming ill?

[navybankerteacher]

23 minutes ago, mom says said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but proof of Yellow Fever vaccination is a requirement for those cruising to certain countries. Yet a waiver is accepted for those who are unable for medical reasons to get the vaccine. Why would the same thing for a COVID 19 vaccination be unacceptable?

Proof of Yellow Fever vaccination is primarily for the benefit of the individual - so a waiver would primarily only jeopardize that individual;  while failure to comply with COVID 19 precautions puts many others at risk.

[mom says]

1 hour ago, navybankerteacher said:

Proof of Yellow Fever vaccination is primarily for the benefit of the individual - so a waiver would primarily only jeopardize that individual;  while failure to comply with COVID 19 precautions puts many others at risk.

You can't have it both ways. In the described scenario, proof of vaccination or proof of positive antibody test would be required for all except those who had a medical reason for exemption. So only those with an exemption would be at risk; as with YF exemptions. And in that case, herd immunity would also play a part.

[navybankerteacher]

3 minutes ago, mom says said:

You can't have it both ways. In the described scenario, proof of vaccination or proof of positive antibody test would be required for all except those who had a medical reason for exemption. So only those with an exemption would be at risk; as with YF exemptions. And in that case, herd immunity would also play a part.

It’s not a matter of having it “both ways” (whatever you might have meant by that expression).  The situations are quite different - COVID 19 is highly contagious - passing from human to human in all environments,  while Yellow Fever is significantly less so - requiring a mosquito as vector - which only exists in tropical areas.  Finally, when it comes to getting on a cruise ship - which is a totally voluntary, non-essential activity - which is what we are talking about there is absolutely no justification for waiving a health requirement.

[slidergirl]

52 minutes ago, mom says said:

You can't have it both ways. In the described scenario, proof of vaccination or proof of positive antibody test would be required for all except those who had a medical reason for exemption. So only those with an exemption would be at risk; as with YF exemptions. And in that case, herd immunity would also play a part.

Right now, there is no antibody test that is reliable.  And, there are now cases in Singapore of people coming down with COVID-19 again after going through it and eventually testing negative.  

 

I was just putting that "medical reason" for not getting the vaccination out there because it is used for other medical requirements for traveling in some areas of the world.   Right now, there aren't enough people who have had COVID-19 and recovered (or never knew they had it, I suppose), added with a vaccine, to provide any semblance of "herd immunity" to those who couldn't get that vaccination.  

[rkacruiser]

35 minutes ago, slidergirl said:

Right now, there is no antibody test that is reliable.  And, there are now cases in Singapore of people coming down with COVID-19 again after going through it and eventually testing negative.  

 

 

I have not heard that news from Singapore.  That's very disappointing news to me because I was hoping that once antibodies were developed, they would be "somewhat lasting".  It makes me wonder if any vaccine that is developed will really be as effective over a period of time as many of the vaccines we now have are.  

 

My health insurance plan allows for a monthly health coaching session by phone with a RN.  My April meeting was this afternoon.  I asked him about what he has heard about testing for antibodies for the virus.  His response:  "We are getting conflicting information.  But, plasma is being donated from those who have recovered and used.  It's too soon to tell if this will work."

[mom says]

2 hours ago, slidergirl said:

Right now, there is no antibody test that is reliable.  And, there are now cases in Singapore of people coming down with COVID-19 again after going through it and eventually testing negative.  

 

I was just putting that "medical reason" for not getting the vaccination out there because it is used for other medical requirements for traveling in some areas of the world.   Right now, there aren't enough people who have had COVID-19 and recovered (or never knew they had it, I suppose), added with a vaccine, to provide any semblance of "herd immunity" to those who couldn't get that vaccination.  

I don't disagree with you. And since there is no vaccine, nor is there any guarantee that a highly effective one can be developed, the whole discussion is moot.

[slidergirl]

5 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

 

I have not heard that news from Singapore.  That's very disappointing news to me because I was hoping that once antibodies were developed, they would be "somewhat lasting".  It makes me wonder if any vaccine that is developed will really be as effective over a period of time as many of the vaccines we now have are.  

 

My health insurance plan allows for a monthly health coaching session by phone with a RN.  My April meeting was this afternoon.  I asked him about what he has heard about testing for antibodies for the virus.  His response:  "We are getting conflicting information.  But, plasma is being donated from those who have recovered and used.  It's too soon to tell if this will work."

I believe the plasma is being drawn and used to see if it helps lessen COVID is someone with it.  It's also part of the antibody research.  But, the have to figure out what to look for first (who knew??).   

Right now, we can only telemed at my clinic.  We're so small that they don't want anyone in there unless it is something emergent.  And, our health care providers can work first with their COVID patients.  I don't mind.  It saves me some time driving over to it.  

[ldubs]

11 hours ago, mom says said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but proof of Yellow Fever vaccination is a requirement for those cruising to certain countries. Yet a waiver is accepted for those who are unable for medical reasons to get the vaccine. Why would the same thing for a COVID 19 vaccination be unacceptable?

 

Going slightly off track here just out of curiosity.  I know some places require proof of YF vaccination if a traveler in is from certain other places.  But are there really cruise ports that require passengers to have proof of YF vac?   Maybe if there was an active outbreak happening?  I just haven't heard of that.   And I really have not been to a lot of places where YF is a big issue.     

Edited April 17, 2020 by ldubs

[ldubs]

I have not read all of the responses.  I think there will be increased emphasis (with little enforcement) on hand washing and sanitizing.   Otherwise, I think cruise lines will do no more than what they are absolutely forced to do in order to get passengers on board.  What that might be I don't know.   I do think there will be stricter reporting requirements of passenger illnesses.  

 

 

 

[ilikeanswers]

43 minutes ago, ldubs said:

Going slightly off track here just out of curiosity.  I know some places require proof of YF vaccination if a traveler in is from certain other places.  But are there really cruise ports that require passengers to have proof of YF vac?   Maybe if there was an active outbreak happening?  I just haven't heard of that.   And I really have not been to a lot of places where YF is a big issue.     

 

There are some African cruises where it is required, they are usually expedition cruises along the west coast or up the Congo River but generally most cruises don't stop at places that require YF vaccine.

[triplett]

13 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

 

My health insurance plan allows for a monthly health coaching session by phone with a RN.  My April meeting was this afternoon.  I asked him about what he has heard about testing for antibodies for the virus.  His response:  "We are getting conflicting information.  But, plasma is being donated from those who have recovered and used.  It's too soon to tell if this will work."

 

[triplett]

I work in a blood center and he is correct. They have no idea if Convalescent Plasma will help the COVID patients. We have only been offering it for about a week and we can't keep it on the shelf. The hospitals are asking for it as fast as we can get it tested. On an interesting note, there was a rumor earlier that COVID effects more people with blood type "A". Most of our Convalescent Plasma donors are type A. Usually in any donation category the majority of donors are about equal type "A" and  type "O", followed by "B" then "AB". We actually have one local patient who is blood type "B" and we have had to give him our "AB" Convalescent Plasma, because we have yet to find a donor who is his blood type. I will be interested in seeing how the numbers play out.

[Joebucks]

21 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

The point being discussed is simply whether a cruise line has the right to deny boarding to people who fail to comply with the published requirements for boarding.  It has nothing to do with the long term efficacy of vaccines - or if people might have naturally acquired immunity.  

 

You are needlessly complicating the question.

 

Why wouldn't they have that right? There has clearly been processes that denied people due to "health" reasons in the past.

 

The real question is would such a process be reasonable, effective, or even worth it?