No Sail Order extended - 100 days

[pumpkin 11]

5 hours ago, Germancruiser said:

Not even the stated experts we hear every day are of the same opinion. All those virolgist seem a bit worn out after all the answers the have ben confronted with.

When I see  our chief expert - or many say- our national virologist on TV I change channels at once.

The American counterpart ich Fauci- i believe a very special friend of DT. LOL!

THAT VIRUS IS NOT CALLED THE " NEW" VIRUS FOR NOTHING.

So even the experts learn every week more about this evil little bugger!

What a wonderful surprise to meet so many new experts around here!

Oh yes everyone is now a mass casualty expert, sorry I forgot! haha

[TeeRick]

15 hours ago, markeb said:

 

Interesting. I hadn't seen the WHO advice document. It was released last Friday.

 

Unfortunately, the WHO once again uses different definitions in the same discussion, and in this case words matter.

 

If what they're saying (and I think this is what they mean) is that people who are exposed and clear the virus and never develop symptoms rarely transmit the virus, that's great news. But the summary statement at the end says

 

"Comprehensive studies on transmission from asymptomatic individuals are difficult to conduct, but the available evidence from contact tracing reported by Member States suggests that asymptomatically-infected individuals are much less likely to transmit the virus than those who develop symptoms."

 

Which once again confuses pre-symptomatic transmission (which the cited WHO document supports) with transmission by people who clear the virus and remain asymptomatic. This is the same terminology problem that's way too late to change of classifying everyone who tests positive on PCR as a case, not just those who become ill. And PCR gives no indication of viability of the virus. The unanswered question then becomes is a PCR positive individual who never develops symptoms capable of transmission at some point in the disease? WHO is saying the evidence is that's rare to extremely rare (0-14% depending on the study).

 

You have to go to the source document cited in the Axios article to get some clarity on terminology, and some interesting results on viral viability I haven't seen before. Unfortunately, the pull quote from the Axios article is a direct quote from the complete document, and probably suffers from being written in French by a native Flemish speaker then translated into English and the nuance of "those who develop symptoms" possibly meaning either presymptomatic at the time of transmission and became symptomatic, or symptomatic at the time of transmission only. They also seem to be making a distinction between those who never have any illness, and people who develop unrecognized or unrecognizable symptoms of COVID19. I'm not sure that has any practical significance now, maybe a research question at some point. 

 

The paper makes a pretty good argument that totally asymptomatic individuals (which is probably nobody living anywhere with pollen in the air in North America) don't need a mask. But that's not what's being said right now by the CDC in the US. And they're somewhat unlikely to quote a WHO study as justification to put out new guidance.

 

The closing line in the article still applies:

 

The bottom line: These statements are a reminder of just how little we understand about this virus.

Thanks Mark for digging into this and summarizing your thoughts here.  It is very helpful.  I think these high impact headlines reporting the information from complicated studies are really doing a disservice to all of us.  Most people do not have the background and expertise to understand the fine details and the headlines take over as the latest fact.  Sort of like the recent CDC advice on viral spread from surfaces.   I think that if asymptomatic individuals (however defined) are less likely than originally thought to spread virus and infect others, that would be terrific news- almost a game changer.  It does make some sense from a virus perspective.  Respiratory viruses need to produce enough viral particles within the cells of the host to produce enough of a dose to infect others.  Replication of the virus causes cellular damage and at least some symptoms.   So if asymptomatic individuals are mostly not shedding virus,  it might mean that temp checks and health screening could be valuable to cruising to some extent.  One type of evaluation tool anyway.  I know some of this is timing related to when you do the testing.  But I am hoping this is a good step forward if it holds up.

[PTC DAWG]

1 hour ago, TeeRick said:

So if asymptomatic individuals are mostly not shedding virus,  it might mean that temp checks and health screening could be valuable to cruising to some extent.  One type of evaluation tool anyway.  I know some of this is timing related to when you do the testing.  But I am hoping this is a good step forward if it holds up

Agree totally, time for us to move on with our lives and quit crippling the World's Economy. 

[UnorigionalName]

1 hour ago, pumpkin 11 said:

Because they didn't know it existed, how do you test for that?

 

They collect nasal swabs every year for tracking the flu and the samples are stored in a way that preserves the RNA.

 

A few groups went back to all the old nasal swabs collected for the flu and tested hundreds of them for covid.  No cases earlier than the known jan cases were found. And the earliest real local transmission was like mid feb on west coast, which isn't even the way the main outbreak came in from later, which is mostly from europe.

[pumpkin 11]

9 minutes ago, UnorigionalName said:

 

They collect nasal swabs every year for tracking the flu and the samples are stored in a way that preserves the RNA.

 

A few groups went back to all the old nasal swabs collected for the flu and tested hundreds of them for covid.  No cases earlier than the known jan cases were found. And the earliest real local transmission was like mid feb on west coast, which isn't even the way the main outbreak came in from later, which is mostly from europe.

And yet non stop flights from Wuhan to NYC never stopped until mid March... and why would that be?? Hmmm... let me think here

 

Oh right to keep the fentanyl supply running for the Mexican cartels - who could forget! Wuhan is one of the worlds largest suppliers of fentanyl.

 

Covid was here before February.

Edited June 9, 2020 by pumpkin 11

[UnorigionalName]

2 minutes ago, pumpkin 11 said:

And yet non stop flights from Wuhan to NYC never stopped until mid March... and why would that be?? Hmmm... let me think here

 

Oh right to keep the fentanyl supply running for the Mexican cartels - who could forget! Wuhan is one of the worlds largest suppliers of fentanyl.

 

Covid was here before February.

 

again, where is your evidence?  All the mathematic models of growth all support the consensus view.  If it were here earlier it would have spread quicker, and yes the models include asymptomatic patients.

Edited June 9, 2020 by UnorigionalName

[markeb]

1 minute ago, pumpkin 11 said:

And yet non stop flights from Wuhan to NYC never stopped until mid March... and why would that be?? Hmmm... let me think here

 

Oh right to keep the fentanyl supply running for the Mexican cartels - who could forget! Wuhan is one of the worlds largest suppliers of fentanyl.

 

Covid was here before February.

 

They were retrospective studies once there were decent tests. And they do show evidence of being here before February, unless January is now after February.

[pumpkin 11]

3 minutes ago, UnorigionalName said:

 

again, where is your evidence?

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-04-24/wuhan-china-coronavirus-fentanyl-global-drug-trade

[UnorigionalName]

4 minutes ago, pumpkin 11 said:

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-04-24/wuhan-china-coronavirus-fentanyl-global-drug-trade

 

not about the fentanyl, who cares, we are talking about COVID.  Please take your conspiracy theories somewhere else.

[markeb]

7 minutes ago, pumpkin 11 said:

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-04-24/wuhan-china-coronavirus-fentanyl-global-drug-trade

 

It doesn't say that travel remained open to keep fentanyl flowing; it says that when China shut down Wuhan, combined with later closures of international travel into the US, fentanyl and methamphetamine precursors stopped flowing into Mexico, and the finished products became much harder to smuggle into the US.

 

None of which has anything to do with the topic of this thread.

Edited June 9, 2020 by markeb

[pumpkin 11]

Just now, UnorigionalName said:

 

not about the fentanyl, who cares, we are talking about COVID.  Please take your conspiracy theories somewhere else.

You claimed Covid wasn't here until feb, i'm telling you it was here earlier and i'm telling you why... pretty simple

[pumpkin 11]

Just now, markeb said:

 

It doesn't say that travel remained open to keep fentanyl flowing; it says that when China shut down Wuhan, combined with later closures of international travel into the US, fentanyl and methamphetamine precursors stopped flowing into Mexico, and the finished products became much harder to smuggle into the US.

Okay read between the lines, that is what theyre saying. after all it's the LA times

[Fouremco]

1 minute ago, pumpkin 11 said:

Okay read between the lines, that is what theyre saying. after all it's the LA times

Hmmm, I'm starting to think that you spend a lot of your time reading what you imagine lies between the lines and little time reading the lines themselves.

[VickyMcG]

Yeah, was here at lest in January. (Calif). Either way, wish it was dealt with sooner.  Wish there had been some leadership all along.

[UnorigionalName]

1 hour ago, pumpkin 11 said:

You claimed Covid wasn't here until feb, i'm telling you it was here earlier and i'm telling you why... pretty simple

 

I don't need sources on HOW it can potentially come over in the fall.  

 

I am asking for PROOF it was here before jan with spread before mid Feb.  

 

It doesn't exist so you keep throwing out these non-sequiturs and burying your head in the sand.

[pumpkin 11]

3 minutes ago, UnorigionalName said:

 

I don't need sources on HOW it can potentially come over in the fall.  

 

I am asking for PROOF it was here before jan with spread before mid Feb.  

 

It doesn't exist so you keep throwing out these non-sequiturs and burying your head in the sand.

You really think there is an article out there that would say such a thing? No, but it is easy to put two and two together

[Germancruiser]

What more proof do you need than China telling the world that they had cases of the Virus since December? Very possibly a bit earlier then mid December!

[TeeRick]

Here is a good article on COVID cases in the USA going back to early in the year.  The virus was here in January.  Travel had not been restricted yet and it was spreading into a naive population.  Period.  I don't think this needs to be too complicated.  

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/05/us-coronavirus-cases-january/611305/

 

 

[VickyMcG]

Hey, guys.  Does it really matter right now.  Just hope we start sailing again some time this year.

[excitedofharpenden]

Here's an idea. It works for me. It's evident that some have been locked up and/or prevented from going out for way too long and they therefore come here for their bit of "fun". You can spot them a mile off. Put them on ignore (go to your user settings here and go to ignored users and add them) and don't bother responding. They'll get bored if nobody rises to the bait. 

 

Phil 

Edited June 10, 2020 by excitedofharpenden

[phoenix_dream]

3 hours ago, excitedofharpenden said:

Here's an idea. It works for me. It's evident that some have been locked up and/or prevented from going out for way too long and they therefore come here for their bit of "fun". You can spot them a mile off. Put them on ignore (go to your user settings here and go to ignored users and add them) and don't bother responding. They'll get bored if nobody rises to the bait. 

 

Phil 

Thank you.  I just did that for the first time.  I don't mind a good discussion back and forth as long as it is civilized - everyone is entitled to their opinion and it doesn't need to agree with mine.  But some people on these boards (thankfully not too many) seem to be in it just for the fight.  I don't come on these boards to fight - life is tough enough these days.

[excitedofharpenden]

4 hours ago, phoenix_dream said:

I don't come on these boards to fight - life is tough enough these days.

Exactly!

 

Phil 

[Pushka]

On 6/2/2020 at 12:46 AM, WrittenOnYourHeart said:

 

There have been multiple reports - including from people on here - of there being an "East Coast strain" and a "West Coast strain" at the very least.

That's certainly been the experience in Australia where examining the strain has found that most of our strains have been from Europe and not China. 
 

Covid was certainly in Australia by late January from Wuhan. If it was here it was definitely in USA. Just 102 deaths from Covid in Australia but our borders were closed in March. 

Edited June 11, 2020 by Pushka

[WNcruiser]

I am really surprised we haven’t heard anything from the CDC is almost 3 months. The last information on the no sail order was the first week of April.
 

Yes I know they are busy repatriating crew and of course with COVID but not a word about working with the cruise lines about new policies or procedures. 
 

I am hoping for an update soon as we will be in July next week and the no sail order ends the 24th. Maybe that’s why CLIA just extended it on their own. 

[Charles4515]

I am really surprised we haven’t heard anything from the CDC is almost 3 months. The last information on the no sail order was the first week of April.
 
Yes I know they are busy repatriating crew and of course with COVID but not a word about working with the cruise lines about new policies or procedures. 
 
I am hoping for an update soon as we will be in July next week and the no sail order ends the 24th. Maybe that’s why CLIA just extended it on their own. 

Perhaps CLIA extended because they determined that new policies and procedures required now would not work economically for the cruise business. That they would be better off waiting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro