Jump to content

Yet Another cruise is testing positive


Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, yogimax said:

I also could go on and cite evidence that supports exactly the opposite, but what's the point?  I think a good number of people, if not the majority, have their minds made up.  My sense is that much of it is based, not on science, but politics!

 

How's this for science?  

 

https://fee.org/articles/npr-mounting-evidence-suggests-covid-not-as-deadly-as-thought-did-the-experts-fail-again/?fbclid=IwAR1ighA94btod6K7TV_iRsc5O1sLWRCHd4IrXHQ9lVnzWaQ4zmZEBmZANb4

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/5/2020 at 9:08 PM, livingonthebeach said:

The only cruise to sail out of the US was the UnCruise out of Alaska (under 250 passengers, not under CDC regulations) which had to turn back around due to a Covid19 case.

https://www.seatrade-cruise.com/environmental-health/uncruise-covid-19-case-alaska-negative-retest

 

 

A passenger on UnCruise Adventures' first Alaska sailing who tested positive for coronavirus has subsequently tested negative.

'Zero transmission on board'

'There was zero transmission on board,' a company spokeswoman told Seatrade Cruise News Wednesday night.

 

Recapping what transpired

Upon being informed of the positive test results on Aug. 4, UnCruise had immediately ended the sailing and returned Wilderness Adventurer to Juneau where passengers went into quarantine in a hotel and crew were quarantined on board. The ship carried 36 passengers and 30 crew.

 

The man with the divergent test results had tested negative before the trip and underwent another required test upon arriving in Alaska, the same day he embarked Wilderness Adventurer with four traveling companions. That was Aug. 1. On Aug 4, he got a call that his test on arrival in Alaska was positive.

 

UnCruise not only cut short the voyage but canceled the rest of the season, four other weeklong Glacier Bay cruises. These wilderness-focused itineraries had no port calls apart from the Juneau turnarounds and they were likely the only cruises to operate in Alaska this year. 

 

What happens next?

'We are now focused on what this means for American small businesses like ours and where we go from here,' the UnCruise spokeswoman said. 

CEO Capt. Dan Blanchard is scheduled to brief media Thursday night on what was learned in concert with state and local officials, independent and state testing and epidemiologists' reviews.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^ same thing happened to NASCAR driver Jimmie Johnson, his sole false positive test kept him starting a race for the first time in his long career.

 

Biker, who could see the same thing happening on bigger ships.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Biker19 said:

 

Wow...how awful for this cruise company.  I saw the video of the restart -- what stood out the most was all the hope and enthusiasm the crew had in sailing again and being a pioneer for the cruise industry -- then their hopes were dashed. This confirms the fact that there are going to be false positives as well as false negatives and the flaws and imperfections of testing.  Hopefully, we will come up with quicker, more reliable tests in the future. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2020 at 2:05 PM, MrsKC08 said:

I don't think anyone has to worry about the vaccine becoming mandatory. But I can assure you that there will be a ton that will choose other vacations over getting this vaccine. I'm in that group. There is no chance in the world I would EVER take this vaccine, and I am not an anti-vaxer at all. The problem with this vaccine is that it is being "rushed" and not properly tested. Not to mention that the mortality rate for this virus doesn't warrant the need to take the vaccine.

 

Um, ok. Not sure what is so wrong about someone who refuses to take a vaccine that has not been properly tested and that is being rushed. I cannot imagine why someone would rush to get this vaccine without knowing the long term effects. But...that doesn't make me want to not be around that person.

 

I'm a numbers gal, and a realist. I do my own research and don't follow the crap the media wants to feed you. The numbers do not warrant the shut down. The numbers do not warrant the fear mongering. And while I'm on the topic of numbers, it has been proven over and over again that the numbers have been inaccurate in many MANY states. As for the delays, the fact is they need to just open up. If people feel UNSAFE, then by all means, stay home or choose another vacation. I don't see anyone playing any games. These cruiselines are at the mercy of the CDC unfortunately, and they are trying to do everything in their power to reopen. This is such a fluid situation and things can change daily. You can bet there are plenty of folks that would get on a cruise ship this weekend, even if it went out in the ocean and floated around. Sure beats sitting around watching the ridiculousness of what is happening around most of our country right now.

 

There is no way to "contain" the virus. People seem to think it will just go away...

 

No negatively here. I feel everyone is entitled to their opinions. After all, those that don't agree with you have their own opinion, why not be able to have your own. I too feel quite the same as you do.

Argentina news Chanels said yesterday Argentina and Mexico will started manufacturing a  vaccine for Oxford Not testing manufacturing to be sold in Latina American for $3 or $4 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, moda cruise said:

Argentina news Chanels said yesterday Argentina and Mexico will started manufacturing a  vaccine for Oxford Not testing manufacturing to be sold in Latina American for $3 or $4 

Please read the following which states nothing is going to start until the FIRST HALF OF 2021.  In addition everything will be based on "successful clinical trials."

 

"The two countries will produce between 150 million and 250 million doses of AstraZeneca and the University of Oxford's adenovirus-based vaccine at no profit starting in the first half of 2021.

The local production pacts are contingent on successful clinical trials, and Argentina's health minister told Bloomberg the country would target the elderly, patients with pre-existing conditions, and front-line health care workers with the first doses." 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2020 at 11:41 AM, yogimax said:

It's not just bad math (which it is), it's an attempt to play with the numbers to make an unsupported political point.

I think we are wasting our time here.  What some are saying defies all sense of logic.  But because I'm a glutton for punishment, here goes.

 

First of all, when you measure how deadly a virus is by using the "death rate"  you are essentially asking, "What are my chances of dying if I get this virus?"  Using the deaths per capita as a measure of "death rate" for this very purpose is stupid logic.  When you calculate deaths per capita, you are including everyone, even those that didn't get the virus.  Deaths per capita is not only a measure of how deadly this virus is but also how well a country is doing to prevent infections in the first place.  It stands to reason that the fewer people that get it, the fewer that will die from it .  So the .045 per capita or whatever was used is totally meaningless as a measure of how deadly it is and ultimately whether we should try and prevent people from getting it.

 

Another point.  People love to state how well Sweden did with their response and how not locking down or shutting down their economy in response was a great success.  Even their Chief Medical experts say that they would have done things differently:

 

 

Now for those that like to downplay the severity of this Virus by saying:  "Look at the total number of deaths, they are low.  We did not have to shut down".  Again stupid logic.  Deaths were low because we shut down.  Because we took measures.  A more relevant stat would be to look at the number of deaths "if we didn't do anything" If life went on as normal.  Because that would let you know whether a lockdown or shutdown was really warranted. (And please, don't use Sweden as an example because life was not exactly normal.  They did take some measures and by all accounts they had more compliance than other country would have had).  But of course, very few countries would ever have thought of "just doing nothing".  Sweden's model would have worked much better if they tweaked it a little.  Had more restrictions.  But culturally they tend to listen to what the government tells them that they need to do.  Sweden's "tweaked" model may not have worked in the US.  Also the low number of deaths are entirely incumbent on our abilities to provide treatment.  If we let things explode and the hospitals get overwhelmed then the total number of deaths would go up.

 

Lastly, people like to use deaths as a stat to gauge the impact of Covid.  Totally discounting the long term effects that this virus has had on those that survived.  For those that got Covid but survived though required hospitalization or treatment, many have had long lasting effects from this.  I've personally known two people that have had Covid and survived but are still not feeling quite right.  In fact its been over 6 months and they still have trouble breathing.  Are they going to have to live with a 60% lung capacity for the rest of their lives?    

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, fisherguy said:

I think we are wasting our time here.  What some are saying defies all sense of logic.  But because I'm a glutton for punishment, here goes.

 

Lastly, people like to use deaths as a stat to gauge the impact of Covid.  Totally discounting the long term effects that this virus has had on those that survived.  For those that got Covid but survived though required hospitalization or treatment, many have had long lasting effects from this.  I've personally known two people that have had Covid and survived but are still not feeling quite right.  In fact its been over 6 months and they still have trouble breathing.  Are they going to have to live with a 60% lung capacity for the rest of their lives?    

I want to thank you for your well thought out response.

 

We are certainly learning new facts every day, especially in regard to the long term effects on those who survive.  As far as i know there are no statistics for that, but there will certainly be studies done which will last for years.  Indeed, we have no idea how the life expectancy of the survivors will be affected.

 

As you say, tough, we may be wasting our time.  Everyone seems to have made up their minds, some logically turning to science, others to political posturing and still others to the ostrich syndrome!

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, fisherguy said:

Lastly, people like to use deaths as a stat to gauge the impact of Covid.  Totally discounting the long term effects that this virus has had on those that survived.  For those that got Covid but survived though required hospitalization or treatment, many have had long lasting effects from this.  I've personally known two people that have had Covid and survived but are still not feeling quite right.  In fact its been over 6 months and they still have trouble breathing.  Are they going to have to live with a 60% lung capacity for the rest of their lives?  

I totally agree.  So many people are focused on flattening the curve, hospitalizations, ICU usage, and deaths, all of which are short-term numbers.  Those are obviously of critical importance.  But there are so many unknowns regarding the long-term effects of this virus.  There seems to be growing evidence of significant problems that can result in people that have had the virus in the past.  People need to not lose sight of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2020 at 4:13 PM, livingonthebeach said:

Wow...how awful for this cruise company. 

Not just this company:

 

 

UnCruise Adventures tried to do all the right things as the first line to sail from the US after stateside cruises ceased during the coronavirus pandemic.
 

Protocols were honed, including requiring a negative test to embark, Wilderness Adventurer carried a reduced load of just 36 passengers and 30 crew, and the nature-focused Glacier Bay itinerary had no ports apart from the Juneau turnaround.

 

Ultimately, one positive test halted the first cruise four days in, ending what was planned as a five-week season — likely the only Alaska cruising in 2020. This cost UnCruise millions of dollars and had a knock-on effect for other domestic lines hoping to sail.

 

COVID PCR positive must be respected

While the positive test was followed by a negative one, UnCruise CEO Capt. Dan Blanchard said the Alaska state COVID PCR test that produced the positive must be respected.

Science says there's a much higher likelihood of a false negative than a false positive, he explained. The chance of a false positive is very low.

'So I have to call it a positive. I believe this was a positive, not a false positive.'

 

Some validation of safe sailing protocols

Assuming the man did have coronavirus — he remained asymptomatic — UnCruise has provided some validation of safe sailing protocols since no one else got sick.

'Our plan worked,' Blanchard said. 'It worked flawlessly.'

 

State epidemiologists and contact tracers thought everyone on a small boat could potentially be exposed if someone fell ill. But the way UnCruise developed its program, with people frequently off the boat in small groups for nature activities, that wasn't the case, according to Blanchard.

Travelers were separated so, for example, contact tracing identified a person who shared a skiff ride with the infected man, and that person remains in quarantine. Others who didn't have close contact were cleared.  

 

What happened is nuanced, so sit tight for the explanation.

 

Passengers had to present a negative test in order to embark. A man who tested negative at home on July 28 was retested on arrival at the Juneau airport Aug. 1, as Alaska requires since there was more than a 72-hour gap from his prior test. Results pending, he embarked Wilderness Adventurer that same day as it set off for the first cruise.

 

On Aug. 4, the state informed the man he was positive. The man and four traveling companions were retested aboard ship, and Wilderness Adventurer returned to Juneau Aug. 5 where all passengers were put into a hotel for quarantine and crew were quarantined on board. The following day, everyone was tested.

 

On Aug. 7, all the tests that came back were negative, including the man who'd tested positive, however six passenger tests were apparently lost at the lab. The state of Alaska subsequently cleared 32 of the 36 passengers to leave quarantine, including the six whose test results were lost since contact tracing showed they had no close contact with the man who'd tested positive. The man himself was allowed to go when he passed the 10-day period in which infected people are contagious.

 

The four travelers who remain in quarantine had close contact with the man and must wait 14 days. Nobody is showing signs of illness.

 

So why didn't the traveler's last negative test mean he and everyone was in the clear?

Again, UnCruise relied on the science that false positives are extremely rare. 'We have to follow science, and not public opinion,' Blanchard said.

 

Juneau official praises UnCruise

Robert Barr, Juneau's emergency operations center planning chief, praised how Blanchard handled the situation, immediately and continuously communicating with the city. And he appreciated UnCruise amplifying the message of standing on the science.

'The last thing we want is for people to start to believe that for the testing we're doing, that positives aren't positives.' Barr said. 'We need people to understand that positives are positives.'

For UnCruise and beyond, though, that positive was a heavy blow.

 

'Once the word got out, that killed us,' Blanchard said. The line immediately halted operations, canceling the five planned weeks in Alaska and five in the Pacific Northwest to follow.

It wasn't possible to continue due to the 'demonization of anything called cruise — even though we're about as far from a standard cruise as can be — the demonization that's gone on has just raised a frenzy in the news of a positive test, and we had major fallout in bookings right away.'

 

Call for rapid, reliable testing

What would have prevented this, he said, is reliable, rapid testing with a four-hour return or less. Rapid testing at the Juneau airport would have made the difference in not boarding the guest, and the trip would have run.

 

Blanchard isn't seeking any recourse with the state or testing authorities.

'This isn't about finger-pointing,' he said. 'This is about working to be better at everything we do, as a state, as a small business and as a country.

 

'Things are way too chaotic in the testing world. If I had the president and the Congress in front of me right now, I'd say ... Rapid testing, please, if you want to get this economy going. It should be at the airports, and it should be readily available and reliable.'

 

Lobbying the US

In March, eight small US passenger vessel operators led by Blanchard formed the US Overnight Passenger Small-Boat Operators Coalition to make sure they didn't miss out on government stimulus money and that they were recognized as a US industry, not overlooked because of the negative media foreign-flag operators were getting.

 

Blanchard said the group is in constant contact with lawmakers from many states and in Washington, urging a 'nationwide, consistent rapid testing program if we're really going to fire the economy back up.'

UnCruise, he added, exemplifies every small business in the US suffering from COVID-19.

 

Millions of dollars lost

Blanchard's line is out a couple million dollars this year because of the 10-week cancellation, though some revenue will carry forward to 2021. Along with the losses of six other companies that were planning to operate, he tallied probably 'tens or twenties of millions of dollars' in cancellations due to the one positive UnCruise case.

 

Federal decision

Blanchard thinks lawmakers are listening to the rapid testing plea, but 'but there must be a much stronger collective pull to trust science, to make decisions that are federal, not just state by state, to really lick this thing.'

 

UnCruise missed its brief shot for some business this year. What about 2021? What's the sentiment in Alaska for small- and big-ship cruising? Do the communities want it?

Some don't, Blanchard said, but he believes tourism is so important to the state that most Alaskans would welcome visitors as long as there's a reliable vaccine or reliable, rapid testing.

 

Big ships and port calls a 'huge challenge'

'Big ships and maybe small ships that make a lot of port calls, that's going to be a huge challenge,' he added. 'Anytime you're mixing people that haven't been tested with people that have ... How are you going to get over that?'

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

For context, over 50 river cruise ships have been sailing since July.

 

Two passengers and five crew from CroisiEurope's Douro River vessel Vasco da Gama have coronavirus, Portugal's tvi24 reports.
 

At least one of the passengers has been hospitalized, while the crew are in isolation on board the vessel, which is quarantined at the Sardoura Wharf in Castelo de Paiva, according to tvi24.

 

67 passengers and 27 crew

Vasco da Gama reportedly had been carrying 67 passengers of Belgian and French nationality, and 27 crew. The two passengers who tested positive are French.

 

According to tvi24, one of the passengers first presented symptoms on Monday, the last day of the cruise, when everyone but he and his wife had already disembarked.

The Association of Maritime Tourist Activities of the Douro told the station that measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 were maintained throughout the cruise, including daily checks of the passengers and crew. It was not clear if the passengers who had returned home are being tested.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2020 at 12:10 PM, TheMastodon said:

.......Anyways, even if its mid 2021 a nice chunk of the population will have already had Rona through their system.   The virus simply won't have many places to go eventually......

 

It doesn't matter if people have already had it. Turns out some have been infected again. BTW, what's up with Rona? Another cute fad name? Not so cute. 🙄

 

On 8/3/2020 at 12:25 PM, moda cruise said:

less cruisers   less ships  less trust every day LESS LESS LESS AND LESS till it becomes something non recognizable  

less trust in cruise companies  in government  in doctors  in special interest  in medical org etc

And your point is? 

Edited by ReneeFLL
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ReneeFLL said:

It doesn't matter if people have already had it. Turns out some have been infected again. BTW, what's up with Rona? Another cute fad name? Not so cute. 🙄

 

And your point is? 


It does matter if people have already had Rona.  Turns out, one person has been reinfected.  Was it a false positive, over sensitive tests? Who knows.  I would have thought more people would have been getting it twice by now.   

I don’t know what my point was because this is from 8/3 - over a month ago

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheMastodon said:


It does matter if people have already had Rona.  Turns out, one person has been reinfected.  Was it a false positive, over sensitive tests? Who knows.  I would have thought more people would have been getting it twice by now.   

I don’t know what my point was because this is from 8/3 - over a month ago

More than 1 person has gotten it again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, BND said:

And a small percentage of people get chicken pox twice.  

This hasn't been around nearly as long as the chicken pox so we don't know how many will end up getting it again. I think more people have gotten it twice but haven't reported it or didn't know they had it again just the same as people not knowing they initially had it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ReneeFLL said:

More than 1 person has gotten it again.

 

Some believe the test is so sensitive it picks up dead virus.  Or they never had it in first place because of false positive.   But you are right we are only in the first quarter of the game of Covid19 .

 

Edited by TheMastodon
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ReneeFLL said:

This hasn't been around nearly as long as the chicken pox so we don't know how many will end up getting it again. I think more people have gotten it twice but haven't reported it or didn't know they had it again just the same as people not knowing they initially had it.

Point is, there are other viruses that you can catch more than once especially if you had a mild case the first time.  It's not unique to this virus.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are plenty of  US citizens / residents  living in Europe -- I was one of them when attending University.  There are not that many living right now through this pandemic and probably few living there and also taking a cruise.  Thanks Morgan for your series of videos on the Mein Schiff!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2020 at 3:48 PM, lovescats5 said:
  • What would you expect.  You make people stay home, thus increasing domestic abuse, and all the other things that drive people nuts.  Then you open a little of stores or cruise lines or whatever and now everyone is upset because there is an increase.  I am one of those people everyone dislikes.  I do not believe in masks, I think we need to let life get back to whatever normal will be.  If you do not want to take a chance on sailing, stay home.  I am in the high risk group because of age but am so tired of hearing and listening to people complain about not wanting to live until a vaccine is developed.  I had a niece die from the flu, and she got a flu vaccine.  There is no vaccine that will keep everyone safe.  Check the numbers on the swine flu and the regular flu.  Less than 1% of people have died from Covid.  Do I want people to die, no, but I am tired of having someone tell me how to live my life and what I should do.  Go ahead, give me your negative comments, tell me I am wrong in what I believe.  Won't change my mind like I won't change your mind.  I want to cruise, if you are afraid of cruising stay home in your house and let life pass you by.  My opinion only, which I am entitled to.

Of course you are entitled to your opinions.  However, we all know that wearing a mask is not about us but to protect those around us.  Do I want to stay home in my house, no.  I have health issues and because I worry about coming in contact with someone not wearing a mask and catching the virus I am forced to do just that.  I want to go out and I really, really miss my cruises but until it is safe I cannot go back to the way it was.  I remember when seat belts were an issue but somehow we adjusted. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • Q&A with the Quark Expeditions Team: New Ship Ultramarine
      • Register Now for Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Explore the Remote World with Hurtigruten!
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...