More Cancellations Imminent?

[cruisenewbie1976]

8 hours ago, mercury7289 said:

Your also assuming!

*you're

[cruisenewbie1976]

8 hours ago, wowzz said:

If a nurse did 12 injections an hour, approximately 100 could be done a day, or 500 a week. Let's assume overtime plus weekend working , so a very generous 1000 injections a week. And whilst nurses are giving jabs, they are not doing their normal job, so it is not easy to throw labour at the situation.

It doesn't take a maths genius to work out that to immunise even 30 million people is going to take the best part of a year.

Let's not forget that you don't have to be a nurse to administer a jab. You can get flu jabs all over the place. Government offers these places money to increase resources and Bob's your uncle. Let's not forget they recruited over 20,000 contact tracers. Getting people vaccinated will save them a fortune overall. 

[wowzz]

40 minutes ago, cruisenewbie1976 said:

Let's not forget they recruited over 20,000 contact tracers. 

A bit of a difference between someone performing a medical procedure compared to taking details over the phone. I still believe you are seriously under estimating the time scale required to immunise a significant number if the population.

[cruisenewbie1976]

49 minutes ago, wowzz said:

A bit of a difference between someone performing a medical procedure compared to taking details over the phone. I still believe you are seriously under estimating the time scale required to immunise a significant number if the population.

I don't think I gave a timescale. I'm not saying they'll get it done and dusted in a couple of weeks. But I don't think they'll rely on slotting people in, as and when they can. I'm sure there are lots of hurdles to overcome yet anyway, not least whether the vaccine actually works etc.  

Edited June 11, 2020 by cruisenewbie1976
typo

[terrierjohn]

10 hours ago, cruisenewbie1976 said:

You're assuming that the roll out would be at the same pace as the flu jab. They'd likely throw every available resource at it, if the vaccine proves to be successful. It would be money better spent that having to resource the NHS for a possible winter influx. 

 

10 hours ago, mercury7289 said:

Your also assuming!

Despite all the negative comments about the Govt and PHE, they did manage to get the Nightingale hospitals up and running in time to ensure the NHS was not overwhelmed.  And in fact the re-configuring of most major hospitals was so successful that the Nightingales were not needed.

So the impossible can be achieved when enough resource is made available.

[Selbourne]

10 hours ago, cruisenewbie1976 said:

You're assuming that the roll out would be at the same pace as the flu jab. They'd likely throw every available resource at it, if the vaccine proves to be successful. It would be money better spent that having to resource the NHS for a possible winter influx. 

Possibly, but I doubt it. Although everyone is praising the NHS for having dealt so well with Covid-19, it has been at the expense of virtually everything else that they would normally deal with going on hold. I am just watching an article on the news that warns that as many as 10m people could be waiting for treatment by the end of the year as a result of this. Many senior health professionals, such as cancer experts, are warning that the indirect impact of this crisis on the nations health will be greater than the direct impact of the virus itself. Although a lot of this has been down to members of the public being fearful of going anywhere near a hospital or a GP, there are 1.5m people working in the NHS and a great many are in very specialist roles, so won’t have all been dealing directly with Covid-19 patients. Many will rightly look back on this crisis and question the wisdom of having virtually suspended almost all NHS activity to deal with it. Add to that the facts that only a small proportion of NHS staff can administer injections in the community and the eye watering stats involved (as articulated earlier by Wowzz) then I maintain that it will take well into 2021 to vaccinate everyone, even if the vaccine is available from October. 

[terrierjohn]

1 minute ago, Selbourne said:

Possibly, but I doubt it. Although everyone is praising the NHS for having dealt so well with Covid-19, it has been at the expense of virtually everything else that they would normally deal with going on hold. I am just watching an article on the news that warns that as many as 10m people could be waiting for treatment by the end of the year as a result of this. Many senior health professionals, such as cancer experts, are warning that the indirect impact of this crisis on the nations health will be greater than the direct impact of the virus itself. Although a lot of this has been down to members of the public being fearful of going anywhere near a hospital or a GP, there are 1.5m people working in the NHS and a great many are in very specialist roles, so won’t have all been dealing directly with Covid-19 patients. Many will rightly look back on this crisis and question the wisdom of having virtually suspended almost all NHS activity to deal with it. Add to that the facts that only a small proportion of NHS staff can administer injections in the community and the eye watering stats involved (as articulated earlier by Wowzz) then I maintain that it will take well into 2021 to vaccinate everyone, even if the vaccine is available from October. 

I thought the suspension of treatments was mainly where these resulted in an impaired immune system, like cancer and transplants and anything needing ICU beds.  Other treatments continued as normal, my wife takes Warfarin and the routine anti-coagulant clinics operated as normal, well as normal as social distancing allowed.

[Selbourne]

2 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

I thought the suspension of treatments was mainly where these resulted in an impaired immune system, like cancer and transplants and anything needing ICU beds.  Other treatments continued as normal, my wife takes Warfarin and the routine anti-coagulant clinics operated as normal, well as normal as social distancing allowed.

Not so John. We know a number of people who have had operations postponed, including things like knee operations. Can’t imagine that the surgeon who would have performed that knee Op is treating Covid-19 patients with respiratory issues. Completely different specialism. The examples on the TV this morning were also people whose lives had been impaired through delays to life changing ops, none to do with impaired immune systems. Add to that the fact that the numbers of people reporting for signs of things that could point to heart conditions (or even attacks), strokes or cancer (which at one stage were down by 75%, yet the experts are saying that no less incidents would have occurred) and you have tens of thousands of people who are now walking time bombs. As an example, as we all know, the single most critical factor in successful cancer treatment is early diagnosis and treatment. Just wait for the stats in a year or so showing the huge jump in cancer patients at advanced stages.

I do agree with you that the NHS has coped admirably with Covid-19. All the scare stories of the NHS being overwhelmed, running out of ventilators etc have been proved wrong and the fact that the Nightingale hospitals weren’t needed is a huge relief, but I believe that we will look back on all of this in years to come and feel that the price of this was that the second order consequences of this crisis were far greater than the virus itself. 

[terrierjohn]

11 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

Not so John. We know a number of people who have had operations postponed, including things like knee operations. Can’t imagine that the surgeon who would have performed that knee Op is treating Covid-19 patients with respiratory issues. Completely different specialism. The examples on the TV this morning were also people whose lives had been impaired through delays to life changing ops, none to do with impaired immune systems. Add to that the fact that the numbers of people reporting for signs of things that could point to heart conditions (or even attacks), strokes or cancer (which at one stage were down by 75%, yet the experts are saying that no less incidents would have occurred) and you have tens of thousands of people who are now walking time bombs. As an example, as we all know, the single most critical factor in successful cancer treatment is early diagnosis and treatment. Just wait for the stats in a year or so showing the huge jump in cancer patients at advanced stages.

I do agree with you that the NHS has coped admirably with Covid-19. All the scare stories of the NHS being overwhelmed, running out of ventilators etc have been proved wrong and the fact that the Nightingale hospitals weren’t needed is a huge relief, but I believe that we will look back on all of this in years to come and feel that the price of this was that the second order consequences of this crisis were far greater than the virus itself. 

Hindsight is always a wonderful thing Selbourne, but doing nothing in this situation was not an option, although economically it might have been the best option.  The death rate might have been up to half a million, mostly elderly and those with underlying health conditions, which would have pushed back the care crisis by 10 or 20 years, and reduced the pressure on the NHS by killing off a significant number of future cases.  Leaving the survivors with a high herd immunity and the ability  to get the economy going rapidly and possibly resulting in a major improvement in general standards of living.

Why on earth didn't we follow this strategy.

[Selbourne]

20 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

Hindsight is always a wonderful thing Selbourne, but doing nothing in this situation was not an option, although economically it might have been the best option.  The death rate might have been up to half a million, mostly elderly and those with underlying health conditions, which would have pushed back the care crisis by 10 or 20 years, and reduced the pressure on the NHS by killing off a significant number of future cases.  Leaving the survivors with a high herd immunity and the ability  to get the economy going rapidly and possibly resulting in a major improvement in general standards of living.

Why on earth didn't we follow this strategy.

Now you’re just baiting Harry 😉. To be fair though John, it’s not just hindsight. Many of us were saying months ago that the cost of virtually paralysing the NHS for one, albeit very important, issue would be a massive escalation in things such as cancer a year or so down the line. One very good thing to come out of this though is the big drop in A&E visits. Far too many people go to A&E for very minor issues and others as a short cut as they can’t get a timely GP visit, thus resulting in excessive waits for those who really need it. I would hope that this trend would continue post Covid-19 but fear that this may be a naive hope!

[ToxM]

58 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

Now you’re just baiting Harry 😉. To be fair though John, it’s not just hindsight. Many of us were saying months ago that the cost of virtually paralysing the NHS for one, albeit very important, issue would be a massive escalation in things such as cancer a year or so down the line. One very good thing to come out of this though is the big drop in A&E visits. Far too many people go to A&E for very minor issues and others as a short cut as they can’t get a timely GP visit, thus resulting in excessive waits for those who really need it. I would hope that this trend would continue post Covid-19 but fear that this may be a naive hope!

I also hope that GPs continue to do video/phone consultations as triage prior to offering an appointment - it seems a far more cost effective way of doing things and frees up appointments for those who really need it. 

 

 

[wowzz]

2 hours ago, terrierjohn said:

Nightingale hospitals up and running in time to ensure the NHS was not overwhelmed.  

They certainly got the physical structures in place. Unfortunately, if they had been full of patients, they didn't have the staff to nurse them. 

[Adawn47]

13 hours ago, cruisenewbie1976 said:

*you're

There are many errors throughout these threads. We've all made them, and your post was unnecessary.

Avril  

[terrierjohn]

1 hour ago, Adawn47 said:

There are many errors throughout these threads. We've all made them, and your post was unnecessary.

Avril  

Quite a lot of them due to predictive text and fat fingers on a smart phone.

[Adawn47]

29 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

Quite a lot of them due to predictive text and fat fingers on a smart phone.

I can relate to both😆

Avril 

[drsel]

There are many errors throughout these threads. We've all made them, and your post was unnecessary.
Avril  

You should use voice typing or voice to text and don't stress your fingers.
I do it all the time it's so fast and easy

[Britboys]

On 6/9/2020 at 6:14 PM, jeanlyon said:

Yes possibly, but I also did notice P&O had 4 ships going across to the Caribbean, so that's probably why.

Well I suppose anything is possible Jean but as we know, they have already suggested that the resumption will be gradual, so if it does start again in October, I would imagine that maybe Britannia will be the first, followed perhaps a week later by either Iona or Azura/Ventura. I think they will want to assess how any new on-board arrangements are working.

[Manx buoy]

3 hours ago, Britboys said:

Well I suppose anything is possible Jean but as we know, they have already suggested that the resumption will be gradual, so if it does start again in October, I would imagine that maybe Britannia will be the first, followed perhaps a week later by either Iona or Azura/Ventura. I think they will want to assess how any new on-board arrangements are working.

With the best will in the world they’re not going to send ships to the Caribbean before this situation is under control they will trial cruises closer to home first anybody thinking otherwise well you need to think again just my opinion

[terrierjohn]

52 minutes ago, Manx buoy said:

With the best will in the world they’re not going to send ships to the Caribbean before this situation is under control they will trial cruises closer to home first anybody thinking otherwise well you need to think again just my opinion

If cruising is to restart in Nov/Dec then I feel certain that P&O will want to get Britannia and Azura over to the Caribbean.  That is the major winter cruising destination for the USA so both the cruise industry and the Caribbean cruise ports will be desperate for it to commence.  Plus the airlines will also be extremely keen to have their planes back in action. 

[wowzz]

4 hours ago, Britboys said:

Iona or Azura/Ventura. 

23 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

Plus the airlines will also be extremely keen to have their planes back in action. 

 

First of all, Iona can't operate in the Caribbean,  and anyway, she also has a winter schedule planned in Europe. 

With regard to flights, the situation is extremely problematic. Most pilots, especially on charter airlines, are no longer "current". They have not flown sufficient hours in recent months,  and therefore they cannot fly again until they have been re-certified . The aircraft also have to be brought back into service, as per the service schedule.  You can't just fire the engines up and fly away. 

So, taking the pilot and aircraft criteria into account, it could be the best part of 4 or 5 months before any sense of normality could be restored.  And then you have to take into account all the redundancies that the carriers have implemented. Flight schedules will be thrown into disarray for the rest of this year, and the majority if 2021. 

Even if , say, Oceana can start her Gulf cruises,  will there be any aircraft available to carry passengers? 

 

[terrierjohn]

10 hours ago, wowzz said:

First of all, Iona can't operate in the Caribbean,  and anyway, she also has a winter schedule planned in Europe. 

With regard to flights, the situation is extremely problematic. Most pilots, especially on charter airlines, are no longer "current". They have not flown sufficient hours in recent months,  and therefore they cannot fly again until they have been re-certified . The aircraft also have to be brought back into service, as per the service schedule.  You can't just fire the engines up and fly away. 

So, taking the pilot and aircraft criteria into account, it could be the best part of 4 or 5 months before any sense of normality could be restored.  And then you have to take into account all the redundancies that the carriers have implemented. Flight schedules will be thrown into disarray for the rest of this year, and the majority if 2021. 

Even if , say, Oceana can start her Gulf cruises,  will there be any aircraft available to carry passengers? 

 

As usual I think you exaggerate the difficulties to emphasise your point wowzz, yes there will be some things that need to be addressed but I assume the cruise lines are making their restart plans now and will know when certain things need to be actioned  in order to meet their target date. 

I know P&O are useless at many things, but arranging cruise itineraries and ensuring everything works smoothly is not one of them. 

[ozzysdad]

5 minutes ago, terrierjohn said:

As usual I think you exaggerate the difficulties to emphasise your point wowzz, yes there will be some things that need to be addressed but I assume the cruise lines are making their restart plans now and will know when certain things need to be actioned  in order to meet their target date. 

I know P&O are useless at many things, but arranging cruise itineraries and ensuring everything works smoothly is not one of them. 

Exaggerating is a very apt word, I have two cruises booked so have been following these threads closely and feel that wowzz is becoming the forum doom monger, I have no problem with someone having a pessimistic view but not everything that happens in the future needs to be viewed in the context of worst case scenario, holidays after all are something to look forward to and I'd still prefer to be hopeful that my October cruise on Iona and the other I have booked on Azura for March will go ahead.

[wowzz]

I hope my pessimism is misplaced.

My points about the resumption of air travel are merely summations of posts in a pilot forum that I follow, where the air industry professionals discuss the logistical problems of re-starting the air travel industry 

[jeanlyon]

I imagine pilots will be "in check" doing simulator training to keep up to scratch, so don't think that's a problem.  Similarly the cabin crew will be doing their safety training as normal.

 

Mind you with 12,000 British Airways layoffs, that could be problematic.

 

Also, as the Caribbean has been relatively unscathed by this virus, I wouldn't think they would want huge cruise ships visiting and bringing potential disease.

Edited June 13, 2020 by jeanlyon

[wowzz]

9 minutes ago, jeanlyon said:

I imagine pilots will be "in check" doing simulator training to keep up to scratch, so don't think that's a problem.  Similarly the cabin crew will be doing their safety training as normal.

 

Mind you with 12,000 British Airways layoffs, that could be problematic.

Not sufficient Sims out there for the number of non flying pilots.