Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 3/24/2021 at 11:55 AM, D C said:

Is that actually a thing?   Certified stamps?  

And who certifies the information that THEY have, in particular with covid vaccines when there isn't necessarily a means of automatically entering vaccination info into a centralized database? 

Notary maybe..?

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

I live near a university research hospital and have volunteered and taken all 3 vaccines at this point. Odds are extremely small I received all 3 placebos, so I think I'll be safe to cruise again soon :classic_love:

Really?

hard to see them allowing this. 
safe travels. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/25/2021 at 2:09 PM, Syracusefan44 said:

Received this from a friend who was inquiring about the Princess cruises in the UK. 
 

 

B702D393-005F-4ACB-ACF3-7A62712F7149.jpeg

 

Funny thing is UK government just announced that over 70's will be offered a booster jab come September to help fully vaccinate against covid and it's variants, so would this mean that over 70's are not fully protected until they have had their booster shot in September?

 

Another strange one Princess require people to be vaccinated based upon their own definition for cruises out of the UK for cruises around the UK, where the vaccine uptake will be around 70%+ but according to their own information there is no vaccination requirement for all the other cruises they presently have on sale in areas where uptake looks to be a lot lower

 

 **Vaccine policy Given the advanced progress of the UK vaccination programme and strong expressed preference on the part of our guests for this limited series of UK coastal cruises, these UK sailings on Regal Princess and Sky Princess (running from July 31 through to September 28) will be for UK resident, COVID-19 vaccinated guests only. For these cruises the definition of “vaccinated” is a minimum of seven days following the second dose of the currently approved COVID-19 vaccines being administered. Proof of vaccination and the dates given will be required (approved forms of evidence will be confirmed closer to time of departure) and this will be required to be shown at the terminal prior to boarding. Failure to provide this evidence will result in denial of boarding. There is no age restriction on this series of UK coastal cruises but all guests of all ages must meet the requirements of the COVID-19 vaccination policy. All other Princess Cruises holidays currently on sale do not require guests to be vaccinated. 

 

Seems to me that Princess are setting their policy by social media posts and the personal beliefs of their executives rather than sound scientific advice or advice from the UK government.

 

 

 

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

so would this mean that over 70's are not fully protected until they have had their booster shot in September?

No, it's because no one knows at present how long any of the vaccines will keep you protected. The possibility of a top up vaccine in September is, if you like, a belt and braces measure,  to prevent any possible increased demand on the NHS next winter. 

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

 

Funny thing is UK government just announced that over 70's will be offered a booster jab come September to help fully vaccinate against covid and it's variants, so would this mean that over 70's are not fully protected until they have had their booster shot in September?

......

 

 

 

 

Nobody is fully protected after the vaccine, just mostly protected to the tune of around 95% in some cases. The studies to see just how long the vaccine protection lasts are on-going so a booster jab is simply being extra careful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, smellycruzer said:

I live near a university research hospital and have volunteered and taken all 3 vaccines at this point. Odds are extremely small I received all 3 placebos, so I think I'll be safe to cruise again soon :classic_love:

 

I don't understand how they could have possibly allowed you to participate in more than one study.  As a participant in a trial, this is definitely mentioned as something you should not do for a variety of reasons.  They periodically check your blood and run other tests to check for antibodies and other things (like spike proteins).  How would they know how effective their vaccine is if you may have others in your system?  Also having injections of multiple vaccines hasn't been proven as safe and may in fact be harmful.  There are trials in the UK studying whether or not giving one vaccine initially and a different one as a booster may be effective but that has just started.  I sure hope you have been forthcoming with these studies about your participation in other trials so as not to distort the data.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, azbirdmom said:

There are trials in the UK studying whether or not giving one vaccine initially and a different one as a booster may be effective but that has just started.  

Well, not really trials. I had my first shot in  the middle of February, and my second vaccine will be in early May,  12 weeks later.  

Evidence now indicates that a 12 week gap between vaccinations leads to a greater level of protection than just 3  or 4 weeks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, azbirdmom said:

 

I don't understand how they could have possibly allowed you to participate in more than one study.  As a participant in a trial, this is definitely mentioned as something you should not do for a variety of reasons.  They periodically check your blood and run other tests to check for antibodies and other things (like spike proteins).  How would they know how effective their vaccine is if you may have others in your system?  Also having injections of multiple vaccines hasn't been proven as safe and may in fact be harmful.  There are trials in the UK studying whether or not giving one vaccine initially and a different one as a booster may be effective but that has just started.  I sure hope you have been forthcoming with these studies about your participation in other trials so as not to distort the data.

Got to agree azbirdmom, something is smelly(cruzer) here. I don't think we're getting all the scoop and without background, this might be a post intended to stir things up. I'm just going to ignore it for now unless smelly "splains it".

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

Well, not really trials. I had my first shot in  the middle of February, and my second vaccine will be in early May,  12 weeks later.  

Evidence now indicates that a 12 week gap between vaccinations leads to a greater level of protection than just 3  or 4 weeks.

Ontario .& a few other provinces have decided to go 16 eeeks between shots. Not my choice and in past week they are re evaluating this decision. Possibly not effective decision for seniors. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, beg3yrs said:

Got to agree azbirdmom, something is smelly(cruzer) here. I don't think we're getting all the scoop and without background, this might be a post intended to stir things up. I'm just going to ignore it for now unless smelly "splains it".

Same. Interesting name, though 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, wowzz said:

No, it's because no one knows at present how long any of the vaccines will keep you protected. The possibility of a top up vaccine in September is, if you like, a belt and braces measure,  to prevent any possible increased demand on the NHS next winter. 

 

2 hours ago, beg3yrs said:

Nobody is fully protected after the vaccine, just mostly protected to the tune of around 95% in some cases. The studies to see just how long the vaccine protection lasts are on-going so a booster jab is simply being extra careful.

 

The problem with vaccinating large numbers of people quickly is that you can force a virus to mutate in unexpected ways to survive, UK and US scientists have been talking about this for a while now.

 

Studies out of the US are showing yearly influenza vaccines are blunting the effectiveness of the vaccines

 

Booster jabs may sound like a good idea but until you have authoritative scientific information you could be making a rod for your own back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nomad098 said:

The problem with vaccinating large numbers of people quickly is that you can force a virus to mutate in unexpected ways to survive

But when hundreds of people are dying every day, it seems logical to stem the immediate problem,  and then develop new vaccines for mutant strains. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, wowzz said:

Well, not really trials. I had my first shot in  the middle of February, and my second vaccine will be in early May,  12 weeks later.  

Evidence now indicates that a 12 week gap between vaccinations leads to a greater level of protection than just 3  or 4 weeks.

 

Using different vaccines is what I was referencing and here's one article that discusses that:  https://www.biopharmadive.com/news/uk-to-start-study-testing-pfizer-astrazeneca-vaccines-together/594549/ .  It also talks about the longer intervals between jabs and I know that has been happening for quite some time in the UK.  But even with the longer interval, you're still getting the same vaccine in each dose.

Edited by azbirdmom
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, azbirdmom said:

 

Using different vaccines is what I was referencing and here's one article that discusses that:  https://www.biopharmadive.com/news/uk-to-start-study-testing-pfizer-astrazeneca-vaccines-together/594549/ .  It also talks about the longer intervals between jabs and I know that has been happening for quite some time in the UK.  But even with the longer interval, you're still getting the same vaccine in each dose.

Sorry, I didn't realize you were talking about different vaccines.

Yes, you are right, there are trials with regard to mixing vaccines.

Obviously in the UK, given that 50% of the population have now received one dose,  we are in a fortunate position with regards to looking at vacccine efficacy levels. 

Unfortunately France and Germany are so far behind with their vaccine programmes, that their CV19 death rates are increasing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Celebrity has announced their protocols for their summer cruises from St. Maarten and Greece.  Looks like a lot of testing and vaccinations will be required for those over 18.  You may have to take a test to fly to the foreign country - and if you are planning to visit there for a week or so before the cruise - get another one. That could be a real pain if Princess follows suit. 

This is from cruiseradio.net  - not sure if that is allowed on here or not.

https://cruiseradio.net/celebrity-still-negotiating-health-protocols-for-summer-cruising/

 

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

 

 

Another strange one Princess require people to be vaccinated based upon their own definition for cruises out of the UK for cruises around the UK, where the vaccine uptake will be around 70%+ but according to their own information there is no vaccination requirement for all the other cruises they presently have on sale in areas where uptake looks to be a lot lower

 

 

 

By the time these other cruises actually sail, Princess might change the requirement to needing a vaccine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, caribill said:

 

By the time these other cruises actually sail, Princess might change the requirement to needing a vaccine.

 

IMO, I think all cruise lines will, if only because they need to represent to the passengers and to the public at large that they're VERY serious about safety.

 

Yes, masks will probably still need to be worn is heavily congested ares of the ship (i.e. disembarkation at port as people wait) and social distancing will be need (albeit at 3 feet and not 6).  This is not a bad thing, regardless of the political bent it has taken.  

 

People want to cruise, so we need to do what we need to do to make it safe.  A little inconvenience is not a big deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, K.T.B. said:

 

IMO, I think all cruise lines will, if only because they need to represent to the passengers and to the public at large that they're VERY serious about safety.

 

Yes, masks will probably still need to be worn is heavily congested ares of the ship (i.e. disembarkation at port as people wait) and social distancing will be need (albeit at 3 feet and not 6).  This is not a bad thing, regardless of the political bent it has taken.  

 

People want to cruise, so we need to do what we need to do to make it safe.  A little inconvenience is not a big deal.

Agree

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, K.T.B. said:

 

 

Yes, masks will probably still need to be worn is heavily congested ares of the ship (i.e. disembarkation at port as people wait) and social distancing will be need (albeit at 3 feet and not 6).  This is not a bad thing, regardless of the political bent it has taken.  

 

 

 

Why masks are still needed:

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, caribill said:

 

The vaccines do not provide 100% protection.  Until everyone, and I do mean EVERYONE, is vaccinated, masks should be worn.  I think by 2023 they can ease those restrictions, but masks are probably here to stay for the foreseeable future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, K.T.B. said:

 

The vaccines do not provide 100% protection.  Until everyone, and I do mean EVERYONE, is vaccinated, masks should be worn.  I think by 2023 they can ease those restrictions, but masks are probably here to stay for the foreseeable future.

"everyone" 😷... good luck with that ..as masks restrictions are being eased 🏁

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, K.T.B. said:

 

The vaccines do not provide 100% protection.  Until everyone, and I do mean EVERYONE, is vaccinated, masks should be worn.  I think by 2023 they can ease those restrictions, but masks are probably here to stay for the foreseeable future.

Unfortunately with all the people with vaccine resistance the best we can hope for is 70-75% vaccination rate. At some point those who won’t get vaccinated will be not allowed to do certain activities and the rest of us will go on with our lives

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, voljeep said:

"everyone" 😷... good luck with that ..as masks restrictions are being eased 🏁

 

Unfortunately you're probably correct.  Look how many refused to follow existing restrictions.  Too many people have no concept of doing something for the public (and their personal) good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, K.T.B. said:

 

The vaccines do not provide 100% protection.  Until everyone, and I do mean EVERYONE, is vaccinated, masks should be worn.  I think by 2023 they can ease those restrictions, but masks are probably here to stay for the foreseeable future.

Which should mean that masks would not be required on a ship where everyone is vaccinated.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Thank You for 25 Years - Click for Fun Stuff!
      • Forum Assistance
      • Q&A: Cruise Insurance with Steve Dasseos of TripInsuranceStore.com - June 2021
      • ICYM Our 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...