Social Distancing - will ships have to rearrange or even close venues? And who regulates this?

[chipmaster]

1 hour ago, ducklite said:

This is where sailing on a ship where there are only 200-300 people makes a big difference.  Sun decks have space between loungers, meals are served during meal hours, regardless of what time people show up--which tends to range between waiting for the dining room to open to 45 minutes later.  Tables are already spaced out with the choice of dining alone or at a large table.  Even at embarkation people tend to show up anytime in the three or four hours prior to "all aboard."  

There are a number of lines with small ships like this, and they all seem to be profitable (under normal circumstances.)  I expect the biggest changes we'll see will be extra hand sanitizer stations around the ship, staff serving us at the buffets, and perhaps the medical center making face masks available to anyone who would like one.  

 

The exclusive lines are an interesting thought, just like private jets.  I hear Elon Musk is flying around a lot.  

 

But mass market cruiselines are history for a long time and most here cruise those.   Also few countries are going to invite even 200 world rich travels after the Diamond, Grand, Zaandaam incidents.

[ducklite]

43 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

And how did people move from deck to deck on those ships?  

 

Jumping in crowded lifts?  which will no longer be appropriate.

 

Also I suspect that the smaller ships in fleets will have been propped up by the larger more profitable ships in the fleets.

 

Without the larger ships the ticket prices will soar on smaller ships and/or service and quality will be greatly reduced.

 

What we've had up to this point simply can no longer continue.  It will all have to drastically change.

 

A new business model, a new cruise experience, a new proposition.   It remains to be seen what that will be and indeed whether anyone will be interested to pay £000s for it.

 

.

Most people take the stairs.  Usually there are three sets.  We seldom saw others use them at the same time we were.

I'm talking lines that ONLY sail small ships, and have never owned larger ones.  

Many pay for cruising on smaller ships and have done so for years.  Those ships aren't sailing empty.

 

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, ducklite said:

Except often it only covers you from the time you step on the ship until you step off.  Fine if you live in Bowie and cruise out of Baltimore or Orlando and cruise out of Port Canaveral, but not so great if you are flying to Rome with a few days prior to your cruise there, and leaving Barcelona a few days after the cruise ends.

It is not cruise line insurance that we buy, so what you wrote does not apply.

[ducklite]

2 minutes ago, chipmaster said:

 

The exclusive lines are an interesting thought, just like private jets.  I hear Elon Musk is flying around a lot.  

 

But mass market cruiselines are history for a long time and most here cruise those.   Also few countries are going to invite even 200 world rich travels after the Diamond, Grand, Zaandaam incidents.

You'd be surprised.  Many are already booking 2021 cruises, and wouldn't be doing so if they didn't already have port contracts in place.  I do suspect that Princess and HAL might have a harder time negotiating moving forward.  I also suspect that some of these large lines who have NOT taken care of their crews will have a very challenging time staffing ships in the future.  At some point the camels back will break and they will have to either offer higher salaries with those costs passed onto the consumer, or will have to forego things like daily housekeeping on the cheapest cruises/cabins.

[chipmaster]

7 minutes ago, ducklite said:

You'd be surprised.  Many are already booking 2021 cruises, and wouldn't be doing so if they didn't already have port contracts in place.  I do suspect that Princess and HAL might have a harder time negotiating moving forward.  I also suspect that some of these large lines who have NOT taken care of their crews will have a very challenging time staffing ships in the future.  At some point the camels back will break and they will have to either offer higher salaries with those costs passed onto the consumer, or will have to forego things like daily housekeeping on the cheapest cruises/cabins.

 

Booking means nothing, wait till they really need to sail and see what happens.

 

If sports come back with audience allowed then I believe cruising in that country could be possible.  But if cruising goes to another country then it won't happen unless unrestricted flying is allowed.   How can that happen w/o vaccine, testing, and are you going to be excited at thousands of people disembarking that have just traveled the world and then mingled shoulder to shoulder after a muster drill, test and vaccine not withstanding?

 

 

Edited May 14, 2020 by chipmaster

[ducklite]

40 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

 

Insurance companies are not going to insure people for COVID-19.  The costs would be astronomically high for them.   COVID-19 will be deemed "act of God" in small print.  That leaves travellers exposed and vulnerable.  The prospect of footing your own medical bills abroad and minimum 14 days isolation with related accommodation costs for spouses and then flights home and further 14 day quarantining on returning etc would simply be prohibitive to most people.  It's a stalemate.

 

Insurers might be prepared to insure people who can scientifically prove they have had the virus and lived through it and thus gained immunity.  That would however herald the introduction of public bagging and tagging, health certification and so on Orwellian 1984 style.   Insurers might also be prepared to insure people who have been vaccinated, but then that would largely come down to their knowledge of any vaccine and its proven (or not) efficacy.   Let's be real here.   If Influenza were more of a killer disease than it is, insurers would not insure people for all the associated costs based on them having had a Flu Shot as the science tells us that Flu shots are extremely ineffective (preventing only 1 person in 71 vaccinated from getting Flu).   So any COVID-19 vaccine is first going to have to be monitored and studied to prove its effectiveness imo before insurers will be happy to insure people on the basis of having been vaccinated.

 

There is a long road yet to iron out all such details imo

 

.

 

My health insurance covers 60% out-of-network  even overseas, and their medical is much cheaper than in the USA, so it won't bankrupt me.  The cost of quarantine is cheap relatively speaking.  Typically you are in a hotel room.  Big whoop, it's a few extra grand.  The "flying home" quarantine is typically in your home, so no extra cost except InstaCart for groceries.

For people with no savings and maxed out credit cards, I agree, they should stay home.  There was a news story the other night about a lady "stuck" in Peru because she can't afford the ticket to get home.  $2500 this week or if she waits a week (staying with relatives) it's $850.  Someone that strapped for cash should never have been traveling to begin with.

[njhorseman]

35 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

 

Insurance companies are not going to insure people for COVID-19.  The costs would be astronomically high for them.   COVID-19 will be deemed "act of God" in small print.  That leaves travellers exposed and vulnerable.  The prospect of footing your own medical bills abroad and minimum 14 days isolation with related accommodation costs for spouses and then flights home and further 14 day quarantining on returning etc would simply be prohibitive to most people.  It's a stalemate.

 

Insurers might be prepared to insure people who can scientifically prove they have had the virus and lived through it and thus gained immunity.  That would however herald the introduction of public bagging and tagging, health certification and so on Orwellian 1984 style.   Insurers might also be prepared to insure people who have been vaccinated, but then that would largely come down to their knowledge of any vaccine and its proven (or not) efficacy.   Let's be real here.   If Influenza were more of a killer disease than it is, insurers would not insure people for all the associated costs based on them having had a Flu Shot as the science tells us that Flu shots are extremely ineffective (preventing only 1 person in 71 vaccinated from getting Flu).   So any COVID-19 vaccine is first going to have to be monitored and studied to prove its effectiveness imo before insurers will be happy to insure people on the basis of having been vaccinated.

 

There is a long road yet to iron out all such details imo

 

.

 

  Not all travel insurance companies have excluded COVID-19 coverage from their. policies. I suggest you check out what's available with and without COVID-19 coverage on tripinsurancestore.com website.  Travelex is an example of a reputable company  providing coverage. Here's a link to their simple explanatory FAQ page rather than asking you to dig through and understand their actual policy language:

https://www.travelexinsurance.com/covid19

 

As a retired actuary, I think it will be possible to price coverage of COVID-19.  Might it make insurance significantly more expensive ? Sure.

 

I don't care to argue your flu shot effectiveness statement...but where you got the idea that it's only effective in 1 of 71 cases is beyond me. That type of claim could only come from some anti vaxxer disinformation campaign. 

 

[clo]

26 minutes ago, ducklite said:

Many are already booking 2021 cruises, and wouldn't be doing so if they didn't already have port contracts in place. 

Good point but they're booking cruises that they're pretty sure to positive aren't going to happen so who knows?

[chipmaster]

58 minutes ago, ducklite said:

Most people take the stairs.  Usually there are three sets.  We seldom saw others use them at the same time we were.

I'm talking lines that ONLY sail small ships, and have never owned larger ones.  

Many pay for cruising on smaller ships and have done so for years.  Those ships aren't sailing empty.

 

 

You hold the handrails, touch the fancy menus shared by everyone?

[chipmaster]

46 minutes ago, ducklite said:

My health insurance covers 60% out-of-network  even overseas, and their medical is much cheaper than in the USA, so it won't bankrupt me.  The cost of quarantine is cheap relatively speaking.  Typically you are in a hotel room.  Big whoop, it's a few extra grand.  The "flying home" quarantine is typically in your home, so no extra cost except InstaCart for groceries.

For people with no savings and maxed out credit cards, I agree, they should stay home.  There was a news story the other night about a lady "stuck" in Peru because she can't afford the ticket to get home.  $2500 this week or if she waits a week (staying with relatives) it's $850.  Someone that strapped for cash should never have been traveling to begin with.

 

Some people aren't as fortunate nor at the same stage of life,  maybe you were lucky and born with a silver spoon in your mouth, but I suspect when you were in your 20's you had a different set of money and time constraints.    

 

Empathy and understanding of others is a problem many have, and also the most basic reason the US has become so polarizing.

[cruisemom42]

1 hour ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

 

Insurance companies are not going to insure people for COVID-19.  The costs would be astronomically high for them.   COVID-19 will be deemed "act of God" in small print.  That leaves travellers exposed and vulnerable.  The prospect of footing your own medical bills abroad and minimum 14 days isolation with related accommodation costs for spouses and then flights home and further 14 day quarantining on returning etc would simply be prohibitive to most people.  It's a stalemate.

 

Insurers might be prepared to insure people who can scientifically prove they have had the virus and lived through it and thus gained immunity.  That would however herald the introduction of public bagging and tagging, health certification and so on Orwellian 1984 style.   Insurers might also be prepared to insure people who have been vaccinated, but then that would largely come down to their knowledge of any vaccine and its proven (or not) efficacy.   Let's be real here.   If Influenza were more of a killer disease than it is, insurers would not insure people for all the associated costs based on them having had a Flu Shot as the science tells us that Flu shots are extremely ineffective (preventing only 1 person in 71 vaccinated from getting Flu).   So any COVID-19 vaccine is first going to have to be monitored and studied to prove its effectiveness imo before insurers will be happy to insure people on the basis of having been vaccinated.

 

 

 

 

Rather than cruise lines asking for proof of insurance, perhaps they would instead ask all passengers to sign prior to embarkation a form stating that if they should test positive for the virus while onboard, they will go into immediate quarantine/isolation and will be asked to leave the ship at the next port AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE.

 

As a side note, I'm finding it hard to validate your claim that flu shots prevent only 1 in 71 people vaccinated from getting influenza. Of course the level of protection varies from year to year based on how accurately the makers were able to forecast which flu strains would predominate in the coming year. Can you provide a link to the statistic you cite?

 

A good scientific (if you really seek understanding) review of how many of these "statistics" that are randomly tossed around in news stories can be so misleading without context -- especially looking at flu vaccine effectiveness -- can be found here: https://virologydownunder.com/influenza-vaccines-do-have-an-effect-and-we-need-to-do-more-to-understand-it/

[navybankerteacher]

59 minutes ago, ducklite said:

You'd be surprised.  Many are already booking 2021 cruises, and wouldn't be doing so if they didn't already have port contracts in place.  ...

...

These people who are booking 2021 cruises are doing so without knowing with any degree of certainty if those cruises will take place, or even if the line with which they are booking will still be in business.   They are taking a “leap of faith” - the same way the lines taking those bookings are:  betting that there will not be a second surge, and they will still be in business, in addition to the fact that the ports might cancel at any time.

 

Both sides: the cruise lines and the passengers booking are winging it - so that, if cruise do sail on the dates booked, the passengers will get to sail and the lines will get their revenue.

[cruisemom42]

12 minutes ago, chipmaster said:

 

Some people aren't as fortunate nor at the same stage of life,  maybe you were lucky and born with a silver spoon in your mouth, but I suspect when you were in your 20's you had a different set of money and time constraints.    

 

Empathy and understanding of others is a problem many have, and also the most basic reason the US has become so polarizing.

 

I disagree. I was far from being born with a silver spoon, but it would never occur to me to take a long trip or vacation without having the wherewithal to get myself back home in an emergency. Why should that be anyone else's responsibility besides my own? Part of travel is being able to plan and effectively manage unexpected events.

 

The lack of planning, and also the ill-health, of many elderly passengers on world cruises that apparently 'precluded' their taking a long flight or series of flights to return home when their cruises unexpectedly ended due to COVID-19 was startling to me. Surely no one could claim that a passenger on a world cruise is lacking in material resources...

[ducklite]

29 minutes ago, chipmaster said:

 

You hold the handrails, touch the fancy menus shared by everyone?

If they put hand sanitizer stations at the top and bottom of each staircase, that problem is solved.  We've always gotten paper menus that were printed fresh each day as the menu changes often based on local ingredient availability and guest chefs.

[njhorseman]

26 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

Rather than cruise lines asking for proof of insurance, perhaps they would instead ask all passengers to sign prior to embarkation a form stating that if they should test positive for the virus while onboard, they will go into immediate quarantine/isolation and will be asked to leave the ship at the next port AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE.

There's no need for any form to be signed specifically addressing COVID-19.  The cruise lines' ticket contracts already give them the right to take those types of actions for any illness and such actions are already at the passenger's own expense.

[ducklite]

28 minutes ago, chipmaster said:

 

Some people aren't as fortunate nor at the same stage of life,  maybe you were lucky and born with a silver spoon in your mouth, but I suspect when you were in your 20's you had a different set of money and time constraints.    

 

Empathy and understanding of others is a problem many have, and also the most basic reason the US has become so polarizing.

I definitely wasn't born with a silver spoon in my mouth.  I paid for every bit of education I received after high school,  and often worked two or even three jobs to make ends meet.  As my value in the workforce increased, I continued to work a second job to buy a home, furnish it, and be able to take vacations.  Up until a few years ago I was still working (albeit limited hours) a second job to continue to bulk up my savings. 

I learned early on in adulthood that I couldn't afford everything I wanted, and that having plenty of savings was far more important than vacations.  

[ducklite]

25 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

I disagree. I was far from being born with a silver spoon, but it would never occur to me to take a long trip or vacation without having the wherewithal to get myself back home in an emergency. Why should that be anyone else's responsibility besides my own? Part of travel is being able to plan and effectively manage unexpected events.

 

The lack of planning, and also the ill-health, of many elderly passengers on world cruises that apparently 'precluded' their taking a long flight or series of flights to return home when their cruises unexpectedly ended due to COVID-19 was startling to me. Surely no one could claim that a passenger on a world cruise is lacking in material resources...

Agree!  When I get to the point where I can't fly home from whatever far flung part of the world I might be in, can't handle my luggage, or don't have the mental acuity to figure out how to handle getting home in an emergency, I will stop cruising other than maybe the river cruises on the Columbia or Mississippi where I never leave the continental US.

[njhorseman]

1 hour ago, ducklite said:

1) They could at the drop of a hat.  They should. In fact Florida should have absolutely refused anyone sick with COVID or on a sick ship who didn't have insurance.

2) At least one of them was reported to have suggested that they planned on asking. Carnival took a bailout from Florida by being allowed to continually dump sick people--some without insurance--in our hospitals.

 

3)  I've always found better insurance for a lower cost than what cruise lines offer through their agents.  Perhaps if agents are licensed insurance brokers as well, they might be offering other options.

I have no idea where you've gotten the idea that cruise lines were "dumping" sick people in Florida. If you look at the facts surrounding the Zaandam  and Rotterdam situations there were only a small number of ill passengers on board when they were given permission to dock...and how would you know how many were uninsured? 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/cruises/2020/04/02/coronavirus-holland-america-ships-dock-fort-lauderdale/5110778002/

 

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article241707936.html

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/02/us/holland-america-cruise-ships-florida/index.html

 

From the CNN article:

"Broward County Mayor Dale Holness told reporters that 26 passengers with possible coronovirus symptoms will remain on the ships. Additionally, 13 passengers and one crew member will be treated at a local hospital. At one time more than 200 guests and crew had flu-like symptoms."

 

And:

"Holland America said late Wednesday that it had secured a local health system to treat the fewer than 10 people in need of immediate critical care onshore. The Broward Health Hospital System confirmed Thursday that critically ill patients from the Zaandam would be transferred there, according to spokeswoman Jennifer Smith."

[cruisemom42]

4 hours ago, KnowTheScore said:

Social Distancing is impossible on a cruise ship. 

 

How could you even operate lifts/elevators?!    How could you organise the long queues of 100s of people waiting to get into a lift for their solitary trip in it?  

How could you organise people going up and down staircases spread apart by 2m or more?

How would you get 1000s of people into areas for the compulsory muster drills?

 

How would you manage long queues of 1000s of people all coming down for their evening meal, all having to be 2m apart whilst queuing?      Plus of course the restaurants wouldn't be able to seat them sitting 2m apart.

 

Theatres would have to be ripped apart probably reduce to 1/3rd or 1/4 of their current capacity.   People wouldn't be able to get to the shows as a result. 

 

Coffee bars would be largely pointless.  They can't cope as it is now with high volumes of passengers.  Removing most tables to leave the rest 2m apart would cripple the service and just make it pointless.

 

Most ships are designed with walkways down each side of the ship.  None of them are really wide enough to ensure social distancing as people walk in both directions.  So you'd have to implement a circular directional system with people only ever walking in one direction.

 

Many of the prom decks that are thin would be useless and out of action. 

 

Sun beds would have to be reduced in numbers to prevent crowding and the decks would have to be marked out with car park like spaces so people knew where to put them.  The current practice of passengers dropping sunbeds wherever they liked, blocking walkways and the like would have to cease.

 

 

 

All large companies are having to deal with similar types of questions in order to open up their businesses. For example, I work in a mid-rise building with about 8 total floors of people. Some work in offices or large cubes, which are fine. Some work in smaller individual or in shared cubes, which won't work. Some work at long open tables. There are meeting rooms ranging from 4 to 60 people. There are common areas and a cafeteria....

 

With a little ingenuity, workarounds are developed. The first step is getting people to realize that it's NOT going to be the same, at least not for a long time. It's a "new normal". 

 

Elevators should be reserved for those with physical challenges. Some can be switched to utilize voice commands. Or an elevator operator punches the buttons. Or everyone is provided with a "push stylus" in a care package on boarding, together with a number of disposable masks

 

Stairs become one-directional wherever possible, as do hallways and promenades. Stickers can be placed on the floor to remind people of the correct direction. Yes, more walking will be done.

 

One line to my knowledge has already floated an idea of have people "attend" muster virtually in their cabins, by watching a presentation on their cabin tv. They will still have to complete a simple form, either on their app or on paper answering a few questions to prove they participated. Some incentive like a free sailaway drink might be offered to ensure everyone gets this done before departure, as required in some geographies.

 

Theatres wouldn't have to be 'ripped apart' -- they would just need to block every other seat (or similar) effectively, and have people monitoring the lounges before shows to ensure compliance.

 

With regard to food, there are a number of options that could be considered. Basic room service or pre-packaged breakfast meals (with some variety) offered for pickup in the Lido/buffet (meal handed to you by gloved server). No self service, including beverages like coffee or water. Lunch could be similar arrangement in the Lido/buffet with various options (e.g., hot meal of the day, sandwich options, pizza or burger/fries; vegetarian);  MDR service for lunch is getting rarer on most cruises anyway, but could be offered on a reservation basis only to ensure distancing.

 

Dinner is more problematic but could probably be managed by squeezing in an additional seating, offering delivery of dinner in your cabin (HAL does this already), or of course the buffet route again.

 

Also keep in mind that not every single person has to be distanced from every other. There will be a number of couples, or larger families, that will be able to be seated together at a single table especially if they are already sharing a cabin.

 

Pool areas/decks could be painted with rectangles to indicate placement of loungers. 

 

And finally, yes I think ships would have to sail with fewer passengers to make this work. Balcony cabins would probably have to be sold only every other one, for example, to avoid contact while on your balcony.  Check in would have to maintain strict staggering and as much as possible should be completed before arriving at the port. 

 

As to health procedures -- too complex for the scope of this thread, but the CDC will certainly require plans from the cruise lines as to how they will manage testing and what procedures are in place should an infection occur onboard ship.

 

 

[ducklite]

Just now, njhorseman said:

I have no idea where you've gotten the idea that cruise lines were "dumping" sick people in Florida. If you look at the facts surrounding the Zaandam  and Rotterdam situations there were only a small number of ill passengers on board when they were given permission to dock...and how would you know how many were uninsured? 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/cruises/2020/04/02/coronavirus-holland-america-ships-dock-fort-lauderdale/5110778002/

 

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article241707936.html

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/02/us/holland-america-cruise-ships-florida/index.html

 

From the CNN article:

"Broward County Mayor Dale Holness told reporters that 26 passengers with possible coronovirus symptoms will remain on the ships. Additionally, 13 passengers and one crew member will be treated at a local hospital. At one time more than 200 guests and crew had flu-like symptoms."

 

And:

"Holland America said late Wednesday that it had secured a local health system to treat the fewer than 10 people in need of immediate critical care onshore. The Broward Health Hospital System confirmed Thursday that critically ill patients from the Zaandam would be transferred there, according to spokeswoman Jennifer Smith."

Thousands of people who had been exposed were allowed to walk off those ships with no quarantine.  The same thing with ships in Port Canaveral.  At least one person who disembarked in Port Canaveral was treated for over a week at a Port Canaveral area hospital and had no insurance. This is from a friend who works in financial in the hospital who spoke directly to the patient about their (in)ability to pay.  

[njhorseman]

1 minute ago, ducklite said:

Thousands of people who had been exposed were allowed to walk off those ships with no quarantine.  The same thing with ships in Port Canaveral.  At least one person who disembarked in Port Canaveral was treated for over a week at a Port Canaveral area hospital and had no insurance. This is from a friend who works in financial in the hospital who spoke directly to the patient about their (in)ability to pay.  

One uninsured person with COVID-19...wow. Yes...you can really generalize from that one patient.

 

Hospitals routinely treat uninsured patients with every condition under the sun every day of the week. How many uninsured people who had heart attacks were they treating at the same time? 

[ducklite]

1 minute ago, njhorseman said:

One uninsured person with COVID-19...wow. Yes...you can really generalize from that one patient.

 

Hospitals routinely treat uninsured patients with every condition under the sun every day of the week. How many uninsured people who had heart attacks were they treating at the same time? 

Apples to oranges.  Bottom line, if a person can't afford to pay for various scenarios involving medical emergencies or repatriation, they shouldn't be cruising.  

What about the crew that got dumped onto Miami?  I'm guessing most of them had no insurance once they were off the ship, and I highly doubt the cruise lines were paying any bills once they kicked the crew member to the curb.

[chengkp75]

I have to say that "thousands of people exposed" (who apparently did not burden the local hospitals), and "getting a bail out for dumping sick people" are two wildly different things.  As for the person disembarked and treated at a Port Canaveral hospital, what does your friend who works at the hospital say would have happened if the person was disembarked with a severe heart condition and couldn't pay?  The cruise line would not be responsible for that bill either.

[chengkp75]

3 minutes ago, ducklite said:

Apples to oranges.  Bottom line, if a person can't afford to pay for various scenarios involving medical emergencies or repatriation, they shouldn't be cruising.  

What about the crew that got dumped onto Miami?  I'm guessing most of them had no insurance once they were off the ship, and I highly doubt the cruise lines were paying any bills once they kicked the crew member to the curb.

As far as the crew goes, the cruise line is responsible for all costs, including health care until the person is repatriated to their home country.  That's the law.

 

And, as for someone who cannot pay for all medical contingencies, that is not the cruise line's responsibility, any more than it would be if that person had flown to Port Canaveral and had a heart attack, it would not be the airline's responsibility.

Edited May 14, 2020 by chengkp75

[navybankerteacher]

27 minutes ago, ducklite said:

Thousands of people who had been exposed were allowed to walk off those ships with no quarantine.  The same thing with ships in Port Canaveral.  At least one person who disembarked in Port Canaveral was treated for over a week at a Port Canaveral area hospital and had no insurance. This is from a friend who works in financial in the hospital who spoke directly to the patient about their (in)ability to pay.  

What do Florida hospitals do with uninsured Florida residents who show up at the emergency room bleeding from a wound/wounds?