If Royal Requires A Covid-19 Vaccine Before Cruising Will You Get It???

[Formula280SS]

On 1/21/2021 at 12:03 AM, atgood said:

We’re way down on the list to get the vaccine so it won’t be happening for us anytime soon.  
 

On a positive note though, the WHO announced revised guidance today regarding interpreting PCR test results, essentially saying that high cycle rates result in high false positive rates.  “WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.”  https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05

If PCR cycle rates are lowered, then the # of positive cases will drop.  Also, with the focus on administering the vaccine now, testing will go down and so will the # of CV cases too. 

 

Of course, especially on the day it was announced.  Not a surprise at all.  The CDC is also contemplating recommending that states only us Covid as the "cause of death" not for "deaths of people that also had Covid" (especially without symptoms).  In our largest cities, previously locked down, at the current highest weekly rates of infection, cases, hospitalizations and deaths, such impositions are being lifted for restaurants, bars, gyms, etc.  Again, no surprise at all to a reasonably and independently informed person.

[xpcdoojk]

55 minutes ago, Formula280SS said:

 

Of course, especially on the day it was announced.  Not a surprise at all.  The CDC is also contemplating recommending that states only us Covid as the "cause of death" not for "deaths of people that also had Covid" (especially without symptoms).  In our largest cities, previously locked down, at the current highest weekly rates of infection, cases, hospitalizations and deaths, such impositions are being lifted for restaurants, bars, gyms, etc.  Again, no surprise at all to a reasonably and independently informed person.

Not only not surprising, but completely predictable

[smokeybandit]

56 minutes ago, Formula280SS said:

The CDC is also contemplating recommending that states only us Covid as the "cause of death" not for "deaths of people that also had Covid" (especially without symptoms). 

 

Where did you see this?  This would remove about 3/4 of all covid deaths if they changed this.

Edited January 23 by smokeybandit

[atgood]

There needs to be a distinction between “dying from CV19” and “dying with CV19.”  

[smokeybandit]

1 hour ago, atgood said:

There needs to be a distinction between “dying from CV19” and “dying with CV19.”  

Also "dying with covid symptoms but not confirmed covid"

[ThirstyCruiser]

4 hours ago, smokeybandit said:

 

Where did you see this?  This would remove about 3/4 of all covid deaths if they changed this.

Highly unlikely they would go back pre mid-January to lower the numbers.

[smokeybandit]

8 minutes ago, ThirstyCruiser said:

Highly unlikely they would go back pre mid-January to lower the numbers.

Definitely not. I'm just saying that if that was the criteria from the start, then we are all cruising right now.

[coffeebean]

On 1/19/2021 at 4:11 PM, HBE4 said:

 

I just love the old "they were going to die anyways" argument. 

 

The same can be said of someone that dies of a heroin overdose. The difference is that person choose to shoot up heroin knowing the risk. Nobody chooses to die of/with Covid. 

Oh yes they do. Those are the people who refuse to social distance themselves from others. They congregate in groups and don't think twice that someone in that group could possibly be an asymptomatic transmitter of the virus.They don't wear masks either but wearing a mask really does little to protect the wearer. Masks are more for source control.

[coffeebean]

On 1/19/2021 at 8:36 PM, yogimax said:

Hmm... I notice right away if my mask slips down and my nose is sticking out.  

The masks I wear NEVER slip down. It depends on the mask. So many news casters have masks that do not stay up when they speak. They look like "designer" masks to me and they are worthless.

[coffeebean]

On 1/19/2021 at 10:00 PM, xpcdoojk said:

Yes, I can’t imagine how awful it has been in CA.  I have gone to work everyday.  As has my DW.  We wear masks, which are pretty much useless because Covid is way smaller than the weave of the material.  However, we stay away from groups, we don’t go to church.  We eat out only as a couple but mostly take out.  And Knock on wood, neither of us has gotten sick.  Masks and hand washing are not really stopping this disease, but being social isolates does.  If you have no close contact with others you can avoid this disease if you are lucky.  That said, that sucks.

 

The problem is as humans we desire human contact, and we want to talk to others.  

 

Way back last winter, I was standing in the yard while my dog was doing his biz... it was cold and it was a crisp cold night.  I have 3 in ground lights that light my flagpole, and as I was watching the dog do his biz and encouraging him to finish said biz... I could see tiny droplets lit by the lights floating with every word I spoke.  It was at that moment I confirmed that I imagine that is exactly happens when I am in a room with others, as thousands of little sparkly light floated around me in my back yard.  This is an airborne disease.  If you spend a lot of time indiscriminately talking to people you all are sharing droplets.  I do believe that a mask is helpful for others not the wearer.  I think if we went around and never talked and if we went around but never when we are coughing or sneezing we would be pretty safe.  

 

That said, that is not the standard.

 

We, of course, go in public with our face diapers on and we act exactly like we did prior to Covid except now we believe we are bullet proof due to said face diaper.

 

 

Masks do work as source control because that tiny virus travels on aerosols which ARE caught by the fibers of a mask. I've seen infrared cameras demonstrate this and it is very enlightening how masks DO work. For larger droplets, masks work very well, just don't pull down the mask and sneeze or cough into your bare hands. Duh!

[TheMastodon]

On 1/23/2021 at 7:20 PM, coffeebean said:

Masks do work as source control because that tiny virus travels on aerosols which ARE caught by the fibers of a mask. I've seen infrared cameras demonstrate this and it is very enlightening how masks DO work. For larger droplets, masks work very well, just don't pull down the mask and sneeze or cough into your bare hands. Duh!

 

N95 yes.

 

Most masks work so well they want us to wear two - but why stop there?  Make it three or four! Also, don't forget to stay away from other filthy human beings!

 

 

[yogimax]

1 hour ago, TheMastodon said:

 

N95 yes.

 

 

Also Korean manufactured NF-94

[Ocean Boy]

1 hour ago, TheMastodon said:

 

N95 yes.

 

Most masks work so well they want us to wear two - but why stop there?  Make it three or four! Also, don't forget to stay away from other filthy human beings!

 

 

Soon the masks will have so many layers that they will need to add a port to insert an oxygen delivery cannula.

 

Funny, today a heard Fauci say that it is common sense that more layers provide more protection. Where was the common sense back in March when they were saying masks won't really help.

[TheMastodon]

46 minutes ago, yogimax said:

Also Korean manufactured NF-94

KN95 also good

[TheMastodon]

2 minutes ago, Ocean Boy said:

Soon the masks will have so many layers that they will need to add a port to insert an oxygen delivery cannula.

Soon my mask will be in the trash, along with all the terrible opinions of people I debate with on here and at the club.  

[John&LaLa]

38 minutes ago, TheMastodon said:

KN95 also good

 

Stay away from ventilator ones. 

 

Pisses people off.

[Tree_skier]

I think some people should wear a diaper on their head...

 

 

[Russ Lomas]

On 1/20/2021 at 9:39 PM, xpcdoojk said:

 

On the upside I get to give blood Friday... I hope I can take off the mask for the hour.... but am guessing not.

I have donated blood here in Canada right through the pandemic.  Masks had to stay on for the entire time in there.  You were not even permitted to remove it to have cookies and juice after donating.  You had to wait to eat and drink until after you left the building.

[smokeybandit]

On 1/20/2021 at 10:03 PM, atgood said:

We’re way down on the list to get the vaccine so it won’t be happening for us anytime soon.  
 

On a positive note though, the WHO announced revised guidance today regarding interpreting PCR test results, essentially saying that high cycle rates result in high false positive rates.  “WHO guidance Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed (1). The cycle threshold (Ct) needed to detect virus is inversely proportional to the patient’s viral load. Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.

WHO reminds IVD users that disease prevalence alters the predictive value of test results; as disease prevalence decreases, the risk of false positive increases (2). This means that the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity.”  https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05

If PCR cycle rates are lowered, then the # of positive cases will drop.  Also, with the focus on administering the vaccine now, testing will go down and so will the # of CV cases too. 

 

As much as I think PCR thresholds should be lowered, that's not entirely what this says. It says if the test hits at a high cycle, don't immediately take that as a positive case.  Retest and/or use that in conjunction with clinical observations to determine if it should be considered  positive case.

[Russ Lomas]

We would be fine with getting the vaccination before cruising.  Our question is, what will happen if they mandate the vaccination to cruise but we have not been offered the opportunity to get the vaccination yet?  I am sure this will come up, especially for people in countries that do not have as quick access to the vaccine as others.

 

Also, what happens for children who they will not give the vaccine to since there has not been significant testing on children yet?  Will they ban children from cruising?  Probably not the best decision for a family cruise line.

[Ourusualbeach]

1 minute ago, Russ Lomas said:

We would be fine with getting the vaccination before cruising.  Our question is, what will happen if they mandate the vaccination to cruise but we have not been offered the opportunity to get the vaccination yet?  I am sure this will come up, especially for people in countries that do not have as quick access to the vaccine as others.

 

Also, what happens for children who they will not give the vaccine to since there has not been significant testing on children yet?  Will they ban children from cruising?  Probably not the best decision for a family cruise line.

The cruise line will likely only be following the decisions that other countries make.  If other countries make the vaccine a requirement they will have no choice but to follow.

[molly361]

14 minutes ago, Russ Lomas said:

We would be fine with getting the vaccination before cruising.  Our question is, what will happen if they mandate the vaccination to cruise but we have not been offered the opportunity to get the vaccination yet?  I am sure this will come up, especially for people in countries that do not have as quick access to the vaccine as others.

 

Also, what happens for children who they will not give the vaccine to since there has not been significant testing on children yet?  Will they ban children from cruising?  Probably not the best decision for a family cruise line.

Don't know what they will do but as I have said on other threads it should be vaccines for all or those who can't or won't including kids should not be allowed on board.  Doesn't seem fair for others to get vaccinated and then get sick from some kid that brings it on.  FYI I am over 65 and have not had any luck getting one yet so I might be one not let on board either

[TheMastodon]

37 minutes ago, John&LaLa said:

 

Stay away from ventilator ones. 

 

Pisses people off.

Stay away from ventilators in general .  Blows up lungs!  

[smokeybandit]

5 minutes ago, molly361 said:

Don't know what they will do but as I have said on other threads it should be vaccines for all or those who can't or won't including kids should not be allowed on board.  Doesn't seem fair for others to get vaccinated and then get sick from some kid that brings it on.  FYI I am over 65 and have not had any luck getting one yet so I might be one not let on board either

 

It doesn't seem fair to exclude families with younger kids just because kids can't get the vaccine, despite kids getting and spreading covid at 50%, if not higher, rates than adults.

Plus how often would you as a 65 yr old cruiser being spending time in close contact with a kid you don't know?

[molly361]

5 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

 

It doesn't seem fair to exclude families with younger kids just because kids can't get the vaccine, despite kids getting and spreading covid at 50%, if not higher, rates than adults.

Plus how often would you as a 65 yr old cruiser being spending time in close contact with a kid you don't know?

All it would take is one wrong encounter😇