Vaccination by Christmas? Many takers?

[Presto2]

39 minutes ago, No pager thank you said:

Brings you back to the "Covid-19 passport" model idea ... no one will force you to be vaccinated, but unless and until you are, international (and / or cruise ship travel) is restricted.

 

Sounds very George Orwell  ......

[No pager thank you]

8 minutes ago, Presto2 said:

 

Sounds very George Orwell  ......

I know, but I feel that this could be a possibility once a "safe" vaccine becomes available for the population at large.  Or, it could become linked to insurance risk.  Not saying this is "right" by the way.

 

I believe that there are similar (if not identical) precedents for this in terms of travel vaccinations.

 

Personally, irrespective of the science and the possibility of large swathes of people not washing/recycling or handling masks correctly, I was surprised that mask wearing in shops moved to effectively being mandatory, as opposed to being highly recommended/encouraged.  This was in a way that the similar moves for public transport and hospitals moves did not surprise me.

 

It is harder to avoid "shops" permanently if you are "anti-mask" for whatever reason.  However, from 24th July, you must comply.  If shops, why not all indoor spaces and so on?

 

Personally, I am willing to wear a face visor, although I am unconvinced (in part) by the efficacy argument, mainly because of the way that people handle the products.  If people follow the guidance strictly, which they won't, then it would be safer.

 

It follows that what some people might see as being unreasonable restrictions on civil liberties, in the name of protecting population health, are now possible, in a way which were almost unthinkable just a year ago (or in the visions of 1984).  

 

There is no reason to see why this wouldn't read across in to the "consequence" of a choice not to be vaccinated (i.e. international travel), however right or wrong this is.  Not seeking to share views on the politics of this, just as it relates directly to cruising.

[Presto2]

It all seems bizarre to me. Totally get the need to stay safe and we have been wearing face masks throughout and will continue to do so with no issue (our choice previously). I just don't get the fact that the rules are not consistent. You can stay in a hotel or have a meal in a pub with dozens of others but have to wear a face mask in a shop, even if the shop keeper doesn't.

 

I just don't get it

 

And then there is talk of a vaccine that reduces who goes where and when ---- very, very odd

 

Whatever, at the moment, we are still continuing as it if was lockdown - prefer to stay safe and make our own choices re what is and isn't safe for us at the moment. Felt very safe in Wales - they seem to be taking it more slowly than England and people seem more cautious.

[grapau27]

10 hours ago, Harry Peterson said:

According to today’s Times, reporting comments from the deputy chief medical officer for England, a coronavirus vaccine may be licensed for older people first and be made available “this side of Christmas”.

 

Jonathan Van-Tam said that as the elderly were much more likely to die of the virus, regulators would probably need less assurance about the safety of a vaccine before giving it to them. Vaccinating the 20 per cent of adults most at risk could eliminate up to 90 per cent of deaths, his calculations suggested.

 

Good news maybe for cruising again?  Happy to have the vaccine?  I’ll take a chance on it if it gets my freedom back.
 

 

We would definitely take the vaccine.

[Adawn47]

1 hour ago, No pager thank you said:

Brings you back to the "Covid-19 passport" model idea ... no one will force you to be vaccinated, but unless and until you are, international (and / or cruise ship travel) is restricted.

You have to show proof of certain vaccinations to enter some countries already. A covid certificate will be no different. I'd have no problem with it.

Avril 

[Chrisdriving]

 

 

 

 

Bedtime reading especially the vaccinated people can still spread the virus potentially bit.

 

’

One concern is that some vaccines can protect against disease (that is, the outcome of an infection) but not against infection (the ability of the virus to get into the body). In this scenario, vaccinated individuals could potentially become asymptomatic carriers of SARS-CoV-2, thereby spreading COVID-19. For this and many other reasons, a cautious approach must be taken to developing COVID-19 vaccines.

 

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/fast-covid-19-vaccine-timelines-are-unrealistic-and-put-the-integrity-of-scientists-at-risk-139824

 

 

https://theconversation.com/immunity-to-covid-19-may-not-last-this-threatens-a-vaccine-and-herd-immunity-142556O

Edited July 22, 2020 by Chrisdriving

[wowzz]

1 hour ago, No pager thank you said:

I know, but I feel that this could be a possibility once a "safe" vaccine becomes available for the population at large.  Or, it could become linked to insurance risk.  Not saying this is "right" by the way.

 

I believe that there are similar (if not identical) precedents for this in terms of travel vaccinations.

 

Personally, irrespective of the science and the possibility of large swathes of people not washing/recycling or handling masks correctly, I was surprised that mask wearing in shops moved to effectively being mandatory, as opposed to being highly recommended/encouraged.  This was in a way that the similar moves for public transport and hospitals moves did not surprise me.

 

It is harder to avoid "shops" permanently if you are "anti-mask" for whatever reason.  However, from 24th July, you must comply.  If shops, why not all indoor spaces and so on?

 

Personally, I am willing to wear a face visor, although I am unconvinced (in part) by the efficacy argument, mainly because of the way that people handle the products.  If people follow the guidance strictly, which they won't, then it would be safer.

 

It follows that what some people might see as being unreasonable restrictions on civil liberties, in the name of protecting population health, are now possible, in a way which were almost unthinkable just a year ago (or in the visions of 1984).  

 

There is no reason to see why this wouldn't read across in to the "consequence" of a choice not to be vaccinated (i.e. international travel), however right or wrong this is.  Not seeking to share views on the politics of this, just as it relates directly to cruising.

You reflect my views entirely. I don't want to wear a mask, but will do so out of civic responsibility,  but it seems that only certain places require me to exercise my responsibility.  Basically, it's a dog's dinner of a policy, with guidance being changed from day to day.

As a totally irrelevant aside, on our trip to Cleethorpes yesterday, we saw a few individuals walking on the beach,  100 yards or so away from us, no one else around them, breeze blowing, wearing a mask.  Just why?  

[No pager thank you]

1 hour ago, Presto2 said:

It all seems bizarre to me. Totally get the need to stay safe and we have been wearing face masks throughout and will continue to do so with no issue (our choice previously). I just don't get the fact that the rules are not consistent. You can stay in a hotel or have a meal in a pub with dozens of others but have to wear a face mask in a shop, even if the shop keeper doesn't.

 

I just don't get it

Part of the official reasoning behind the shops issue is driven by economics, which makes the overall case harder for people to grasp, as it is not all health driven.  However, it does feel bizarre and somewhat belated a step I agree.

 

The Government (according to the Health Secretary) believes that shoppers will be more confident to enter retail outlets / shops if customers wear masks.  Therefore, masks will support economic recovery. 

 

Personally, I think that this will be shown to be incorrect and shoppers will be disinclined from traditional "browsing" shopping or long shopping trips by having to wear masks; time will tell.

 

Shop keepers, security, and retail staff have a choice, but they have been disproportionately affected by Covid-19 infections so far, so they will be expected to choose to comply.

 

Similarly, the view is that asking customers to wear masks in eating/drinking establishments and hotels would have the opposite effect. 

 

Read across, I doubt that the Government would seek to insist that cruise ship passengers wear masks, as it would dis-incline travel.  Who knows about vaccinations though?

 

 

[No pager thank you]

4 minutes ago, wowzz said:

You reflect my views entirely. I don't want to wear a mask, but will do so out of civic responsibility,  but it seems that only certain places require me to exercise my responsibility.  Basically, it's a dog's dinner of a policy, with guidance being changed from day to day.

As a totally irrelevant aside, on our trip to Cleethorpes yesterday, we saw a few individuals walking on the beach,  100 yards or so away from us, no one else around them, breeze blowing, wearing a mask.  Just why?  

Exactly, it's a complete dog's dinner of a policy.

 

There are already well publicised accounts of people boarding buses and trains, apparently wearing said mask, and then releasing the covering from the nose, helping them to breathe normally when onboard.  In doing so, they also touch their mask repeatedly, then their faces (without sanitising) and there you go, all and any germs are successfully transmitted.  The same will happen inside shops and from shop to shop when people will put the mask on and off again, unwittingly not following the strict guidance.

 

However, people will feel safer through this show of collective, civic responsibility, in some settings, at least in the short term; including when they are walking alone in the countryside, strictly within their "bubble" and without the possibility of harm to another soul.

 

I would suggest that online retailers will see more custom in the next few weeks and then the policy will quietly fade away...well before any cruise ships sail!

 

[kruzseeka]

1 hour ago, Chrisdriving said:

 

 

 

 

Bedtime reading especially the vaccinated people can still spread the virus potentially bit.

 

’

One concern is that some vaccines can protect against disease (that is, the outcome of an infection) but not against infection (the ability of the virus to get into the body). In this scenario, vaccinated individuals could potentially become asymptomatic carriers of SARS-CoV-2, thereby spreading COVID-19. For this and many other reasons, a cautious approach must be taken to developing COVID-19 vaccines.

 

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/theconversation.com/amp/fast-covid-19-vaccine-timelines-are-unrealistic-and-put-the-integrity-of-scientists-at-risk-139824

 

 

https://theconversation.com/immunity-to-covid-19-may-not-last-this-threatens-a-vaccine-and-herd-immunity-142556O

 

Not a publication I'm familiar with - but makes very interesting reading and I can't fault the rationale behind the points made.  Just hope it turns out to be erring on the side of caution (though caution in this instance wrt to safety is a real issue!) and an effective vaccine is not too far away.  

Edited July 22, 2020 by kruzseeka

[wowzz]

2 hours ago, Presto2 said:

 

Sounds very George Orwell  ......

Or even yellow stars. We're starting down a dangerous road here.

[wowzz]

33 minutes ago, No pager thank you said:

Read across, I doubt that the Government would seek to insist that cruise ship passengers wear masks, as it would dis-incline travel.

To be honest, I dont think that the Government cares that much about the cruise industry. Everyone here knows that the support services employ hundreds of people,  and generates tax income,  but supporting the industry is not a "vote winner".

Unless you live in Southampton,  how many people do we know that directly rely on the cruising industry for their living?  Cruising is seen as a white, middle class Southern holiday, and helping it out will not keep votes in the Red Wall.

[No pager thank you]

1 minute ago, wowzz said:

To be honest, I dont think that the Government cares that much about the cruise industry. Everyone here knows that the support services employ hundreds of people,  and generates tax income,  but supporting the industry is not a "vote winner".

Unless you live in Southampton,  how many people do we know that directly rely on the cruising industry for their living?  Cruising is seen as a white, middle class Southern holiday, and helping it out will not keep votes in the Red Wall.

I agree with these observations (was just making a vagueish, belated attempt to keep on thread with my last sentence Wowzz 😉)

 

Essentially, the cruise ship industry is low down the pecking order when it comes to promoting nationwide economic recovery and "maintaining the new base," in electoral terms.

[wowzz]

9 minutes ago, No pager thank you said:

I agree with these observations (was just making a vagueish, belated attempt to keep on thread with my last sentence Wowzz 😉)

 

Essentially, the cruise ship industry is low down the pecking order when it comes to promoting nationwide economic recovery and "maintaining the new base," in electoral terms.

Sorry - I see what you did with your last sentence!

Sometimes I forget we are on a cruise forum! 

[davecttr]

9 hours ago, No pager thank you said:

Exactly, it's a complete dog's dinner of a policy.

 

There are already well publicised accounts of people boarding buses and trains, apparently wearing said mask, and then releasing the covering from the nose, helping them to breathe normally when onboard.  In doing so, they also touch their mask repeatedly, then their faces (without sanitising) and there you go, all and any germs are successfully transmitted.  The same will happen inside shops and from shop to shop when people will put the mask on and off again, unwittingly not following the strict guidance.

 

However, people will feel safer through this show of collective, civic responsibility, in some settings, at least in the short term; including when they are walking alone in the countryside, strictly within their "bubble" and without the possibility of harm to another soul.

 

I would suggest that online retailers will see more custom in the next few weeks and then the policy will quietly fade away...well before any cruise ships sail!

 

I see we now have more confusion over mask wearing in shops. Previously 'someone' who we have all heard of said you don't need to wear a mask in a takeaway. There are reports today that you will have to wear a mask, plus if you buy your food from the counter you can't sit down in the premises to eat it. It appears 'waiter service only' applies to inside eating.

[Harry Peterson]

Whatever laws you bring in about masks, or anything else for that matter, if there’s no effective way to enforce them it’s a pointless exercise.

 

You can’t expect shop staff to enforce the law, and the police obviously don’t have the resources, so what are you left with? Common sense? And we all know how much of that there is in this country, whatever government ministers might like to pretend.

 

 

[No pager thank you]

4 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

Whatever laws you bring in about masks, or anything else for that matter, if there’s no effective way to enforce them it’s a pointless exercise.

 

You can’t expect shop staff to enforce the law, and the police obviously don’t have the resources, so what are you left with? Common sense? And we all know how much of that there is in this country, whatever government ministers might like to pretend.

 

 

ANPR cameras, Civil Enforcement Officers ... I jest, but I take your point.

 

A great deal of the current policy relies on behavioural norms i.e. those who are reticent about complying will feel under implied pressure to do so to avoid feeling like they are the odd one out, with any associated social stigma or criticism arising.

 

However, when it comes to enforcement, a certain level of herd non-compliance renders the policy redundant - see details of recent protests, sporting celebrations, or the "illegal rave" in Bath for examples.  

 

The same will happen with shops (eventually) and the same will happen when social distancing norms are applied to cruise ships (very eventually).

[kalos]

9 hours ago, wowzz said:

 

As a totally irrelevant aside, on our trip to Cleethorpes yesterday, we saw a few individuals walking on the beach,  100 yards or so away from us, no one else around them, breeze blowing, wearing a mask.  Just why?  

Yep Wowzz it looks totally bizarre and at first glance I would think "Why " as well.

Looking for a logical answer as to why they are mask clad on a beach with no one around ?

Could it be they parked their car up then masked up and walked along the prom amongst other people and then 

decided to have a quick wander along the shoreline as they head back to their car?

We are advised to avoid touching masks when they are on and if they had no hand sanitiser on them ,it could be said

that they were trying to do the right thing at that time.

If we are given rules that seem odd then we can expect to see things that seem odd .

8 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

Common sense? And we all know how much of that there is in this country, whatever government ministers might like to pretend.

It's for your own good Harry .It's all based on Government intelligence !

oops ,there I go again using those two words in the same sentence again .

 

 

[wowzz]

12 minutes ago, kalos said:

Yep Wowzz it looks totally bizarre and at first glance I would think "Why " as well.

Looking for a logical answer as to why they are mask clad on a beach with no one around ?

Could it be they parked their car up then masked up and walked along the prom amongst other people and then 

decided to have a quick wander along the shoreline as they head back to their car?

We are advised to avoid touching masks when they are on and if they had no hand sanitiser on them ,it could be said

that they were trying to do the right thing at that time.

If we are given rules that seem odd then we can expect to see things that seem odd .

 

That could be the case. Personally, walking in the open, with not that many people around, I can't see who you are protecting by wearing a mask, so why wear one in the first place?

Anyway, just a personal choice.

[Adawn47]

1 hour ago, Harry Peterson said:

Whatever laws you bring in about masks, or anything else for that matter, if there’s no effective way to enforce them it’s a pointless exercise.

 

You can’t expect shop staff to enforce the law, and the police obviously don’t have the resources, so what are you left with? Common sense? And we all know how much of that there is in this country, whatever government ministers might like to pretend.

 

 

I wear a mask when out and don't have an issue with it. However it doesn't stop me from contracting the virus. So what is the use of bringing in this new rule tomorrow when the supermarkets are still allowing customers in without a face covering regardless? Nothing has changed. They talk a good talk that's all.

Avril 

Edited July 23, 2020 by Adawn47

[kalos]

 

24 minutes ago, wowzz said:

That could be the case. Personally, walking in the open, with not that many people around, I can't see who you are protecting by wearing a mask, so why wear one in the first place?

Anyway, just a personal choice.

That was my point Wowzz they possibly masked up when they were in the crowds before then walking the beach .

We will never know but as you have said ..just a personal choice.

Edited July 23, 2020 by kalos

[AnnieC]

Has anyone seen anything on TV or any media outlets telling us how to handle a mask properly? I haven't, but don't watch much. Perhaps Public Health England are too busy reducing the size of chocolate bars and the amount of salt in everything.

[kalos]

1 hour ago, AnnieC said:

Has anyone seen anything on TV or any media outlets telling us how to handle a mask properly? I haven't, but don't watch much. Perhaps Public Health England are too busy reducing the size of chocolate bars and the amount of salt in everything.

 

[Clodia]

20 hours ago, Windsurfboy said:

I will be first in queue for the vaccination if I  can.

 

Vaccination is not just for yourself  but to protect everyone else. it should be a free choice, get vaccinated or stay home.

I don't think we need to judge other people. I will definitely have the vaccination asap, as it will help everyone return to normal and enable me to cruise again.

I have a disability which makes it impossible for me to tolerate a mask or face covering, and I get very upset when people are judgemental or bully me for something I cannot change. As Lockdown eases for most, it becomes a greater prison for me.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Clodia

[Goosebear Mum]

1 hour ago, AnnieC said:

Has anyone seen anything on TV or any media outlets telling us how to handle a mask properly? I haven't, but don't watch much. Perhaps Public Health England are too busy reducing the size of chocolate bars and the amount of salt in everything.

 

Yes, been loads on the BBC online news