Jump to content

1st cruise after Covid......a success


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

 

How can it be negative when it is positive? For a test to be positive, there has to be some bad juju in the sample.

 

False negative is far more likely - you were tested, but the tester failed to pick bad juju on the sample.

I am all for acting on the cautious side, so I agree with MSC's approach.

 

But testing positive does not guarantee you have it - no test is 100% accurate.  There is no "bad juju" in the sample, just bad luck.  Or something similar (but safe) that detects the same.  Or just crappy protocols.  Like the local guy who got arrested a few years ago for meth - the "white crystalline" substance in his car was sugar coating from a glazed donut he had just eaten, and the cop's portable test kit got it wrong, and the lab messed up.

 

Any test can have false negatives and false positives in different proportions, and the rate of false results in either direction becomes most sensitive when it approaches (or obliterates) the corresponding actual true rate - i.e. if a test generates 10% false positives, but 90% of the population does not have it, then 10% will test positive because they actually have it, and another 9% will test false positive, which messes with perceived accuracy. 

 

And if false negatives are also 10%, then 1/10th of that 10% that actually have it will test negative (i.e. 1% of overall population), which makes the number of false positives the same as the detected positives - 9% of general population.

 

Not good optics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, ProgRockCruiser said:

I am all for acting on the cautious side, so I agree with MSC's approach.

 

But testing positive does not guarantee you have it - no test is 100% accurate.  There is no "bad juju" in the sample, just bad luck.  Or something similar (but safe) that detects the same.  Or just crappy protocols.  Like the local guy who got arrested a few years ago for meth - the "white crystalline" substance in his car was sugar coating from a glazed donut he had just eaten, and the cop's portable test kit got it wrong, and the lab messed up.

 

Any test can have false negatives and false positives in different proportions, and the rate of false results in either direction becomes most sensitive when it approaches (or obliterates) the corresponding actual true rate - i.e. if a test generates 10% false positives, but 90% of the population does not have it, then 10% will test positive because they actually have it, and another 9% will test false positive, which messes with perceived accuracy. 

 

And if false negatives are also 10%, then 1/10th of that 10% that actually have it will test negative (i.e. 1% of overall population), which makes the number of false positives the same as the detected positives - 9% of general population.

 

Not good optics.

 

The false negative will always be greater. A person could have been exposed recently and not had time to start shedding the virus.

 

Some people who are positive allegedly aren't contagious, but I don't know if I believe that, and there is no way a cruise line could know that.

 

Then yes, you could have a contaminated test, but then I would think the testing company would be the one with liability.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

 

How can it be negative when it is positive? For a test to be positive, there has to be some bad juju in the sample.

 

False negative is far more likely - you were tested, but the tester failed to pick bad juju on the sample.

 

The ambulance chasers are waiting, no doubt, but nobody can file a class action suit. A (Florida) judge would have to grant class action status. I'm sure Carnival lawyers have been working on ways to indemnify Carnival.

Really, there cannot be false positives?

 

The Governor of Ohio tested positive when he was supposed to visit the President, and then of course was kept away from the President. But, it turned out to be a false positive.

 

Baseball in its testing has had some positive tests that were later proven to be false.

 

And those are just some prominent ones that I know of.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

Really, there cannot be false positives?

 

The Governor of Ohio tested positive when he was supposed to visit the President, and then of course was kept away from the President. But, it turned out to be a false positive.

 

Baseball in its testing has had some positive tests that were later proven to be false.

 

And those are just some prominent ones that I know of.

 

There are definitely some false positives. But I agree that the false negative rate is greater. The problem with a negative test is that you can test negative throughout the incubation period which lasts up to two weeks and still have it. And then you can still have a false negative due to testing errors. There certainly are and have been false positives but those are only testing errors. I will say though, with MSC doing a second test if you if test positive (and it was a different type of test), that seems like it would greatly reduce the likelihood of someone getting refused boarding based on a false positive. All of the false positive stories I've heard of were from people who tested frequently and it was like negative, negative, positive, negative. I don't think a false positive is likely to result from two different types of tests taken in a row.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ontheweb said:

Really, there cannot be false positives?

 

The Governor of Ohio tested positive when he was supposed to visit the President, and then of course was kept away from the President. But, it turned out to be a false positive.

 

Baseball in its testing has had some positive tests that were later proven to be false.

 

And those are just some prominent ones that I know of.

They say if you have even small particles in your nasal passage you can test positive, maybe you breathed in air that had particles, idk, but just have some in your nasal passages doesnt mean you come down with the virus. Idk how you could have some in your nasal passages though if you hadn't breathed some in. ... talking about nasal swab tests. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ontheweb said:

Really, there cannot be false positives?

 

The Governor of Ohio tested positive when he was supposed to visit the President, and then of course was kept away from the President. But, it turned out to be a false positive.

 

Baseball in its testing has had some positive tests that were later proven to be false.

 

And those are just some prominent ones that I know of.

 

Once you test positive, they keep retesting you until you are negative. It is possible to test positive (and be positive) and the next time test negative (and be negative).

 

If I were the governor of Ohio I would have faked it and I wouldn't be surprised if he did, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

 

 

If I were the governor of Ohio I would have faked it and I wouldn't be surprised if he did, too.

If I am not mistaken, the Governor of Ohio is a member of the same political party as the President, so I do not understand your statement.

 

Note this is not meant as a political post of any sort, just a statement of fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

If I am not mistaken, the Governor of Ohio is a member of the same political party as the President, so I do not understand your statement.

 

Note this is not meant as a political post of any sort, just a statement of fact.

He speaks of disdain for the President, the Governor is a throw in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the OP that this cruise was a success, and it gave me a lot of encouragement. Yes, those who said pax from that cruise could still test positive at home are correct, and shall see, but even if that were to happen, the fact that the ship sailed a whole week without a case is fantastic! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/28/2020 at 4:29 PM, OceanZena said:

While this is tentatively good news I thought it takes about a week or more for symptoms to start. I think a negative test upon debarking the ship can still potentially turn positive days later. Correct me if i'm misinformed on that. 

 

For me personally, I think after 2 or 3 months of no issues, then i'd be more comfortable sailing again. 

I don't think there will ever be a point of no issues at least not until we reach herd immunity.  The virus exists so it's going to be hard to go back to a point where it doesn't exist at all, if ever.  I think the key is going to be how it's handled if and when there is a case.  isolating that person as quickly as possible is going to be the key thing to do on a ship

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
      • SPECIAL EVENT: Q&A with RiverCruising.co.uk
      • Q&A: Cruise Insurance with Steve Dasseos of TripInsuranceStore.com
      • 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
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...