Jump to content

Will vaccines now be required?


Recommended Posts

On 12/6/2020 at 7:12 AM, bouhunter said:

Having to wear them at work and being forced to wear them on a paid vacation are two entirely different things.  Maybe it's REALLY not a big deal to you, but a high percentage of people on cruise critic have said masks are a deal breaker for cruising.  And that is from cruise addicts at a cruise forum.  I do agree, it's likely cruises will be masked up for at least a year.  Question is does that mean from now, or from whenever they finally start sailing..... 😞  

People for whom wearing a mask is a deal breaker simply won't be on the ship.

The problem takes care of itself.

I want to cruise again. I'll wear a mask if that's what it takes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, emmas gran said:

Why are people on this thread getting so argumentative???????????????

 

Its a vaccine people will either get it or not it's a personal choice

 

Well, if cruise lines require it for you to be on board, then you'll need to decide if you really want to cruise or not.  Granted, that still an "IF", but I can see it being a requirement if they want to sail again.

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

Maybe I will get the nurse or lab technician to use my phone and take a picture of the vaccine vial with the label and a second picture (or video) of them injecting it into my arm.  And I will have them sign and date my arm and take a picture of the injection site.  I would have my arm notarized but maybe that would hurt with that notary stamp thing.  Hopefully they will use washable ink on my arm too.😀

I think you're kidding, but who knows?  😉  BTW....The Notary stamp won't hurt...but the price for a notary may.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Oceangoer2 said:

I think you're kidding, but who knows?  😉  BTW....The Notary stamp won't hurt...but the price for a notary may.

My husband’s a notary and loves to cruise - do I sense a business opportunity??! Set him up at the dock or on the curb next to the luggage porters? He will have to get a stamp from the state of Florida... hey, it could happen!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TeeRick said:

I mostly agree and that will definitely be the case at some point when everybody has had the opportunity to make the choice and be vaccinated or not.  But that point of time is dependent on the doses available and the country.  So even if I am lucky enough to be vaccinated that might not be the case for those still waiting.  

Very true, we look to be in a favourable position in the UK at the moment which may put us in a better position for travel. Personally we won’t be travelling abroad next year anyway, our first foreign holiday will be the Asia cruise in Feb 2022. Hopefully everyone will have been vaccinated by then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, nomad098 said:

 

Interesting court judgement from Portugal in regards to tests. 97% false positives at 35 cycles surely that cannot be right?

https://www.portugalresident.com/judges-in-portugal-highlight-more-than-debatable-reliability-of-covid-tests/

 

Possible bad news for lateral flow tests showing more false negatives

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4744

 

 

Sorry, can’t resist opportunity to talk about the tests.

Lateral flow is just not a great technology, one, and secondly sample type has crucial differences from optimal sample type for PCR. When you read a study comparing lateral flow to PCR, you really have to get in the weeds, to see if proper sampling was done for each. That rarely happens because you need to sample pts with 2 different swabs - who signs up for that? Best case for lateral flow is 90% agreement with PCR - and you only get that in highly symptomatic pts. Real world, all comers with more mild more non-specific symptoms, the agreement is about 80%.

 

As for the Portugal court case, that 97% false positive is asking the question, when do you call something negative. Normally, the lower limit of detection (the LOD) of a PCR test would be determined by comparison to viral culture results and by clinical observations- graphing clinical disease to test results. It’s tricky in PCR because PCR may be more sensitive than culture. When you are talking about quarantining people, perhaps retesting after a couple of days, you might want to observe and retest, even if there is a 97% chance that initial result was falsely positive. In normal clinical practice that would likely be the point at which the lab would just call the test “negative”, even if they were wrong 3 times out of 100.

You can begin to see the problems with asking lab tests to be accurate in a way that they were never designed to be - even a test system as sensitive and specific as PCR, which is accepted as DNA evidence in murder cases! Clinical lab tests are meant to be used as a piece of a diagnostic puzzle by clinicians who have training, experience and context to interpret that result. People, the press, politicians are assuming 100% sensitive and specific, 100% of thectime

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, cangelmd said:

Sorry, can’t resist opportunity to talk about the tests.

Lateral flow is just not a great technology, one, and secondly sample type has crucial differences from optimal sample type for PCR. When you read a study comparing lateral flow to PCR, you really have to get in the weeds, to see if proper sampling was done for each. That rarely happens because you need to sample pts with 2 different swabs - who signs up for that? Best case for lateral flow is 90% agreement with PCR - and you only get that in highly symptomatic pts. Real world, all comers with more mild more non-specific symptoms, the agreement is about 80%.

 

As for the Portugal court case, that 97% false positive is asking the question, when do you call something negative. Normally, the lower limit of detection (the LOD) of a PCR test would be determined by comparison to viral culture results and by clinical observations- graphing clinical disease to test results. It’s tricky in PCR because PCR may be more sensitive than culture. When you are talking about quarantining people, perhaps retesting after a couple of days, you might want to observe and retest, even if there is a 97% chance that initial result was falsely positive. In normal clinical practice that would likely be the point at which the lab would just call the test “negative”, even if they were wrong 3 times out of 100.

You can begin to see the problems with asking lab tests to be accurate in a way that they were never designed to be - even a test system as sensitive and specific as PCR, which is accepted as DNA evidence in murder cases! Clinical lab tests are meant to be used as a piece of a diagnostic puzzle by clinicians who have training, experience and context to interpret that result. People, the press, politicians are assuming 100% sensitive and specific, 100% of thectime

 

Part of the problem seen in Liverpool was that lateral flow tests carried out by lab trained personnel was around 76% accurate and throwing up a lot of false negatives. When performed by the average person this dropped to 50% with a higher rate of false negatives.

 

False negatives would cause far greater problems for cruise lines than false positives. 

 

One of the best explanations for RT-PCR test I've seen for us trying to learn more thank you 

Edited by nomad098
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, nocl said:

The reasons why the advice evolved is actually pretty simple and pretty logical.

 

At the start nothing was known about this virus. With the lack of information the advice was based upon using other viruses behaviors.  As more was learned, at a very rapid pace, the advice changed to be more specific to this virus. Now there is a lot more known, so it is not surprising that the advice has changed considerably.

 

It is how science works going from the unknown to the known.  There is still a lot more to be learned, so expect future changes as well.

 

 

Well said. 

See the source image

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TeeRick said:

Or a branding iron?

Remember the scar we all carried from childhood on our arms from the smallpox vaccine?  Or are you too young for that?

 

I remember there were a few times we had to prove to school authorities we had had the vaccination by simply showing the scar, since it was so distinctive.  However, my mother did not want her children to have those big scars, so she had ours injected on the underside of our arms.  When I was in the fifth grade with a broken arm and a cast almost up to my shoulder, I couldn't show the scar.  They didn't believe I had the scar, I asked them to bring in my two younger siblings to show their scars.  Of course now, many years later, the scar is long gone.

 

Back to our regularly scheduled program ... 

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

 

You put a tattoo in the right ear of a heifer when you vaccinate them for brucellosis... 🤯

Ow! I helped my dad paint them with “purple medicine” crystal violet, when they got tagged.

5 hours ago, nomad098 said:

 

Part of the problem seen in Liverpool was that lateral flow tests carried out by lab trained personnel was around 76% accurate and throwing up a lot of false negatives. When performed by the average person this dropped to 50% with a higher rate of false negatives.

 

False negatives would cause far greater problems for cruise lines than false positives. 

 

One of the best explanations for RT-PCR test I've seen for us trying to learn more thank you 

Thanks, didn’t read as clearly to me. I tried a longer one, but it was too long.

Our experience with lateral flow Covid and even the Abbott IdNow, is that there is nothing to doing the test, but there are little tricks about sample handling that maybe techs are more tuned in to? All the instruction is virtual and it just isn’t the same as having someone who has lots of real experience on real patient specimens coming in and training the staff - it’s more about that, than the initials behind the operators name. These tests are intended to be run by high school grads. LOL, as we say, if the Med Director can be trained, anyone can do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Edinburghgirl1 said:

NCL are looking into having had the vaccine a prerequisite for cruising. Wonder if Celebrity  will follow suit?  
 

https://www.travelweekly.com/Cruise-Travel/Norwegian-is-looking-into-the-legality-of-vaccination-requirement

 

That's the only path that makes sense to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this on a RCL thread but I thought it would add to the conversation here looking at the different regulatory approaches 

 

Looking at the FDA recommendations it is different to the UK ones.

 

WHAT SHOULD YOU MENTION TO YOUR VACCINATION PROVIDER BEFORE YOU GET THE PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE?

Tell the vaccination provider about all of your medical conditions, including if you:

• have any allergies

• have a fever

• have a bleeding disorder or are on a blood thinner

• are immunocompromised or are on a medicine that affects your immune system

• are pregnant or plan to become pregnant

• are breastfeeding

• have received another COVID-19 vaccine

 

WHO SHOULD GET THE PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE?

FDA has authorized the emergency use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine in individuals 16 years of age and older.

 

WHO SHOULD NOT GET THE PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE?

You should not get the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine if you:

• had a severe allergic reaction after a previous dose of this vaccine

• had a severe allergic reaction to any ingredient of this vaccine

 

It looks like North America are going to be the phase IV (marketing trial) for most of the rest of the world this is not having a go at North America but pointing out that they will be testing the vaccine on previously untested groups. And without any sarcasm and with genuine feeling good luck to them.

 

If more people can be tested safe to have the vaccine than it would make having a vaccine requirement more appealing in the short term but negate the need in the longer term.

 

https://www.fda.gov/media/144414/download

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Lady Chew said:

 

I remember there were a few times we had to prove to school authorities we had had the vaccination by simply showing the scar, since it was so distinctive.  However, my mother did not want her children to have those big scars, so she had ours injected on the underside of our arms.  When I was in the fifth grade with a broken arm and a cast almost up to my shoulder, I couldn't show the scar.  They didn't believe I had the scar, I asked them to bring in my two younger siblings to show their scars.  Of course now, many years later, the scar is long gone.

 

Back to our regularly scheduled program ... 

Lady Chew- great story!  Thanks for sharing!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/5/2020 at 3:15 PM, cl.klink said:

Once a critical mass of us have been vaccinated, or if vaccination is a pre-requisite to cruise, when do you think that the cruise experience itself changes back (or close to) what we had before -- no masks, no distancing, free to do what you like in ports?

 

- Joel

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Department of Defense announced on Friday that they will purchase 100 million additional doses of Moderna's coronavirus vaccine candidate. 

...The purchase will bring the total doses of Moderna's vaccine owned by the federal government to 200 million, HHS said... 

An FDA advisory panel is scheduled to meet Dec. 17 to review the application. 

By the end of 2020, it expects to have approximately 20 million vaccine doses available in the U.S... 

“Securing another 100 million doses from Moderna by June 2021 further expands our supply of doses across the Operation Warp Speed portfolio of vaccines,” said HHS Secretary Alex Azar said in a statement Friday. 

“This new federal purchase can give Americans even greater confidence we will have enough supply to vaccinate all Americans who want it by the second quarter of 2021.”

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, nomad098 said:

I posted this on a RCL thread but I thought it would add to the conversation here looking at the different regulatory approaches 

 

Looking at the FDA recommendations it is different to the UK ones.

 

WHAT SHOULD YOU MENTION TO YOUR VACCINATION PROVIDER BEFORE YOU GET THE PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE?

Tell the vaccination provider about all of your medical conditions, including if you:

• have any allergies

• have a fever

• have a bleeding disorder or are on a blood thinner

• are immunocompromised or are on a medicine that affects your immune system

• are pregnant or plan to become pregnant

• are breastfeeding

• have received another COVID-19 vaccine

 

WHO SHOULD GET THE PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE?

FDA has authorized the emergency use of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine in individuals 16 years of age and older.

 

WHO SHOULD NOT GET THE PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE?

You should not get the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine if you:

• had a severe allergic reaction after a previous dose of this vaccine

• had a severe allergic reaction to any ingredient of this vaccine

 

It looks like North America are going to be the phase IV (marketing trial) for most of the rest of the world this is not having a go at North America but pointing out that they will be testing the vaccine on previously untested groups. And without any sarcasm and with genuine feeling good luck to them.

 

If more people can be tested safe to have the vaccine than it would make having a vaccine requirement more appealing in the short term but negate the need in the longer term.

 

https://www.fda.gov/media/144414/download

It is interesting that the FDA did go ahead and approve the Pfizer vaccine for 16 and 17 years too.  That was the big debate at the Advisory Committee meeting and why a few members had reservations about limited safety data in this group and voted against the vaccine.  Since the under 18 group is for the most part not at risk of severe COVID and will not even get the vaccine for many months anyway, I was surprised by FDA authorization in the EUA to include them at this time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, yorky said:

Very true, we look to be in a favourable position in the UK at the moment which may put us in a better position for travel. Personally we won’t be travelling abroad next year anyway, our first foreign holiday will be the Asia cruise in Feb 2022. Hopefully everyone will have been vaccinated by then.

Our next scheduled cruise is on Silhouette out of Southampton in Aug 2021 to Norway so we are watching the UK situation with keen interest for an number of reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • ICYM Our Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Explore the Remote World with Hurtigruten!
      • Q&A with the Quark Expeditions Team: New Ship Ultramarine
      • 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...