HAL needs to drop Covid Testing

[terrydtx]

9 minutes ago, Gail & Marty sailing away said:

As of today????

As of last week when I checked.

[aeraen]

30 minutes ago, NavyCruiser said:

 

Just replace "cruise ships" above with:  airplanes, airports, trains, buses, shopping malls, grocery stores, sports stadiums, etc...

These other superspreader events/venues currently doesn't require testing...

 

While most of your examples are not those of "superspreader events", baring the sports stadium example, one typically departs airplanes, airports, trains, buses, malls, grocery stores and sports stadiums within a few hours, mitigating exposure.  On a cruise, one is typically subject to exposure to one's fellow passengers for a week or more, day in and day out.  Not to mention the exposure experienced by the hard-working crew, who feeds and cleans up after us. 

While one must continue to live their lives, shop for food, travel to work, etc., cruises are luxuries that are not necessary (although highly desirable).  Exposing others, especially the low-paid workers on the cruise ships, indiscriminately and without the slightest consideration, is unconscionable.  For their sake alone, I will happily pay $20 for a test and suffer through having a q-tip invade my sinus cavity.  I'm sure they appreciate it far more than non-testers appear to appreciate them.

 

[Mary229]

24 minutes ago, aeraen said:

I offered you the a link to the entire paper.  You choose not to read it, but I can advise that the subject that this thread is about is testing, which is the first mitigation measure. 

 

So, you demand that others supply a peer review study backing up their conclusions.  I do.  You decline to even read the study you insisted on, and you admit that there is not a study to back up your misguided conclusion. Okey, dokey, then.  No sense wasting my time here. 

I wanted to mention one more thing about your study that perhaps you missed. The data was pre-vaccine, all done in 2020.  Maybe you missed that salient fact

[mfanderso]

42 minutes ago, terrydtx said:

As of last week when I checked.

When I answer the questions on CVS site, it says that the test will cost so I don't go any further.  Does it tell you that also and then you put in your Medicare information and Medicare pays for it?  

[Guest ldtr]

58 minutes ago, tuolumne couple said:

oh, we agree, and we are not complaining, and I am all for testing. Test away, test every day if you need to. Bring it on. I am not sure how recently you have cruised, but I am coming up on my third cruise for the year. I am still Covid free. Testing before a cruise is a challenge in a new city to meet the requirements. Say all you want of the free testing and online proctoring, if you are not in that position, it is neither convenient nor cheap to get a pre-cruise test done. I am nervous about Canada, but I have my options scoped out. Will it stop people from getting Covid when then go on land and eat out or let their guard down and bring a virus back on board? Likely not. Will it save people the hassle of fulfilling this requirement, even if they test us again pre-cruise? Yes. People are going to do what they are going to do, and of course we are all afraid of the ramifications of testing positive. All we can do is control the controllable (follow masking and safety protocol like we all have the for past few years) and be cognizant of protecting not only ourselves, but those around us. Covid is not new. But in my humble opinion, dropping the pre-cruise testing will save a lot of people some time and money. Tests only assure you do not have Covid two days before you sail. But if you become transmissible on the day of sailing, it was all for not, right?

Have done 6 cruises, as well as multiple international trips. Have used e-med without any problem. and at relatively low cost.

 

Based upon test data and incubation times it can be expected to keep about 50% of cases off of the ship.  Is reducing the number of potential points of infection at the start of the cruise worthwhile?

 

We know that cruise lines are willing to deal with some cases.  The question is how many.  If they do not care how many occur on board (and its potential impact upon the opinions of their customers, as well as the health of the crew and potential impact upon staffing) then they will most likely drop it, if they have a limit on how many cases they are willing to have occur on ship then they will probably keep it.  The same with masking and with requiring vaccinations.  They have dropped masking in most cases (except when cases rise above what they are willing to accept).  We will see about testing.

 

 

[Guest ldtr]

41 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

I wanted to mention one more thing about your study that perhaps you missed. The data was pre-vaccine, all done in 2020.  Maybe you missed that salient fact

Considering  that pretty much all cruise ships have been requiring testing the study you are asking for would have been almost impossible to produce since one would need both tested and untested populations of sufficient size to produce a statistically significant result.  To do such a study one would also have to have to do blinded testing on the front end (positive results allowed to board), compared to reported testing (positive results kept off ship), as well as testing everyone at the end of the cruise to get an comparison that was not dependent upon self reporting.

 

On the other hand there are plenty of studies concerning spread that would certainly indicate that an increase number in the amount of potential infectious sources in a population will result in more spread in that population, everything else being equal, especially when N, the number of sources at the start, is relatively small compared to the size of the population.

[Tennessee Titan]

20 minutes ago, mfanderso said:

When I answer the questions on CVS site, it says that the test will cost so I don't go any further.  Does it tell you that also and then you put in your Medicare information and Medicare pays for it?  

A CYA. Medicare DOES pay for all testing if the vendor will submit it. Two different things...

[Guest ldtr]

3 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

I am questioning the boldly stated claim that testing mitigates.  There is no proof that testing does that.  Supposing, assuming, speculating is not proof.  There is no proof that testing does anything to prevent the spread. If you can’t support a claim do not state it as fact

It is pretty clear that testing identifies a percentage of cases that would otherwise board a ship. One can debate what that percentage of cases is.

 

Epidemiology studies and texts books are also pretty clear that less spread occurs from fewer source cases, more spread occurs when there are more source cases. (as long as the number of source cases is a relatively low number compared to the population in which spread is occurring. 

 

So while not proven in terms of the specific cases of cruise ships (by your required blinded trial), if it does not would be worthy of a major paper on its own to determine why they would be an exception to pretty well defined rules that have been pretty consistent in the study of epidemiology.

 

Literature has not indicated papers indicating any reasons why cruise ships would prove to be such an exception.

[Mary229]

Just now, ldtr said:

It is pretty clear that testing identifies a percentage of cases that would otherwise board a ship. One can debate what that percentage of cases is.

 

Epidemiology studies and texts books are also pretty clear that less spread occurs from fewer source cases, more spread occurs when there are more source cases. (as long as the number of source cases is a relatively low number compared to the population in which spread is occurring. 

 

So while not proven in terms of the specific cases of cruise ships (by your required blinded trial), if it does not would be worthy of a major paper on its own to determine why they would be an exception to pretty well defined rules that have been pretty consistent in the study of epidemiology.

 

Literature has not indicated papers indicating any reasons why cruise ships would prove to be such an exception.

I am not going to go round and round.  I don’t think it is useful and is a bit silly to state facts where they don’t exist.   There is no proof that testing mitigates.  Show me a study of any infectious disease where testing mitigates transmission - any disease, forget covid.    Testing is effective for  diagnosis not prevention.  At best it prevents early stage disease from becoming worse.

[syesmar]

I wonder if, in the future, dogs will ever be used to screen cruise passengers for SARS-CoV-2? With accuracy above 90%, it would seem worth exploring. Those who don’t pass the sniff test would then take a rapid test to confirm. https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2022/05/trained-scent-dogs-detect-airline-travelers-covid-19

[grammi]

3 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

I am not going to go round and round.  I don’t think it is useful and is a bit silly to state facts where they don’t exist.   There is no proof that testing mitigates.  Show me a study of any infectious disease where testing mitigates transmission - any disease, forget covid.    Testing is effective for  diagnosis not prevention.  At best it prevents early stage disease from becoming worse.

It’s not the testing that mitigates, it’s the quarantine after a positive test that mitigates. 
 

But I’m ready to be done with testing as long as full vaccinations are  still required. 

[Mary229]

15 minutes ago, grammi said:

It’s not the testing that mitigates, it’s the quarantine after a positive test that mitigates. 
 

But I’m ready to be done with testing as long as full vaccinations are  still required. 

That quarantine may mitigate is shown historically with other diseases when we understand transmission.  I can accept that it likely true with Covid.  My argument is with those who make up the facts to suit their argument 

 

as to cruise ships I don’t think they should be held to a higher standard than the rest of society.  I personally think vaccines are a good idea

Edited July 25, 2022 by Mary229

[albingirl]

Put quite simply, I'm all for testing if it prevents invected people from boarding the ship. Logically, of course it doesn't prevent all invections while sailing, but it is one step that can prevent some illness.  The cruiseline is trying to keep the numbers down.

[BermudaBound2014]

11 minutes ago, albingirl said:

Put quite simply, I'm all for testing if it prevents invected people from boarding the ship. Logically, of course it doesn't prevent all invections while sailing, but it is one step that can prevent some illness.  The cruiseline is trying to keep the numbers down.

 

Cruise lines need ships which generate a profit. Arnold Donald said that threshold number is now 95% due to the amount of debt CCL has taken on.  Wanting to keep the numbers down isn't going to be the deciding factor. Cruise lines will likely do whatever it takes to get the most bodies onboard. I see mandatory testing going away quite soon.

 

I recently read that both Princess and RCL have 'far more' vaccine exemption requests than their current 10% policy allows. I suspect mandatory vaccines will be next. It's business. 

[Blue Eyes]

Didn’t I read that the U S, Canada and Athens Greece are the only embarkation ports that require a negative Covid test?   I agree with dropping testing…and wearing a mask, too.  

[grammi]

20 minutes ago, albingirl said:

Put quite simply, I'm all for testing if it prevents invected people from boarding the ship. Logically, of course it doesn't prevent all invections while sailing, but it is one step that can prevent some illness.  The cruiseline is trying to keep the numbers down.

I’m double boosted and will wear the N95 mask when not in my stateroom. I’ve isolated for months at a time to protect my mother and I have a very old microbiology degree. 
 

The Covid Virus is all over that ship. An unlucky few will test positive and be ejected but many more are carrying the virus and will test negative. The most effective way to avoid becoming Ill (having symptoms that affect your activities of daily living) is to be fully vaccinated and wear the aN95 mask. 
 

Taking the test is a crap shoot. 

 

24 minutes ago, albingirl said:

Put quite simply, I'm all for testing if it prevents invected people from boarding the ship. Logically, of course it doesn't prevent all invections while sailing, but it is one step that can prevent some illness.  The cruiseline is trying to keep the numbers down.

 

[albingirl]

2 minutes ago, grammi said:

I’m double boosted and will wear the N95 mask when not in my stateroom. I’ve isolated for months at a time to protect my mother and I have a very old microbiology degree. 
 

The Covid Virus is all over that ship. An unlucky few will test positive and be ejected but many more are carrying the virus and will test negative. The most effective way to avoid becoming Ill (having symptoms that affect your activities of daily living) is to be fully vaccinated and wear the aN95 mask. 
 

Taking the test is a crap shoot. 

 

 

Actually, what you are really saying is that the most effective way to stay healthy is to be fully vaccinated and masked and basically just stay home.  If taking the test is a "crap shoot", as you call it, then my guess is that you no longer wish to cruise. Pure conjecture, but that's how it sounds to me.
 

[kilkoyne]

2 hours ago, Tennessee Titan said:

What will you say when the guy who was not tested infects you or a member of your fanmily???

 

Probably the same thing he would say if he was infected by someone untested in the airport, restaurant, grocery store, shopping mall, amusement park, etc.

[Mary229]

12 minutes ago, grammi said:

The Covid Virus is all over that ship. An unlucky few will test positive and be ejected but many more are carrying the virus and will test negative.

Exactly, testing has proven to be problematic, lack of training, questionable results, false results and timing..  IMHO Testing has done nothing. The clean ship and air filtration systems are likely to be the most beneficial program.  If people were as diligent about hand washing….

[grammi]

9 minutes ago, albingirl said:

Actually, what you are really saying is that the most effective way to stay healthy is to be fully vaccinated and masked and basically just stay home.  If taking the test is a "crap shoot", as you call it, then my guess is that you no longer wish to cruise. Pure conjecture, but that's how it sounds to me.
 

Well yes, the safest activity is to stay home but I want to cruise so I will take all measures within my power to keep the virus or any illness from interrupting my trip. I will also not rely on false protocol made to give passengers a false sense of security. So your conjecture is incorrect. 

[Wakepatrol]

I have the CEO on the phone, please be patient

[LMaxwell]

They may, they may not.  Time will tell. 

[albingirl]

1 minute ago, grammi said:

Well yes, the safest activity is to stay home but I want to cruise so I will take all measures within my power to keep the virus or any illness from interrupting my trip. I will also not rely on false protocol made to give passengers a false sense of security. So your conjecture is incorrect. 

I'm afraid that "taking all measures within your power to keep the virus or any illness from interrupting your trip" is near to impossible these days.  "False protocol and false sense of security" are your opinion only and not shared by so many who feel that testing is a valid form of insuring that some, not all, can have a fair chance of staying healthy.

[Mary229]

4 minutes ago, Wakepatrol said:

I have the CEO on the phone, please be patient

Which one, the outgoing or the incoming.   😀. If we do hear something I imagine it will be part of one or the other’s transition remarks

Edited July 25, 2022 by Mary229

[Guest ldtr]

1 hour ago, Mary229 said:

I am not going to go round and round.  I don’t think it is useful and is a bit silly to state facts where they don’t exist.   There is no proof that testing mitigates.  Show me a study of any infectious disease where testing mitigates transmission - any disease, forget covid.    Testing is effective for  diagnosis not prevention.  At best it prevents early stage disease from becoming worse.

Too funny considering that medical practice going back to the 1700's that identification of infected individuals, as well as close contacts, in conjunction with quarantine is a mainstay of disease control. Major examples include outbreaks of many different diseases including small pox, typhoid, Cholera for example.  Some examples are Yellow Fever in Philadelphia 1793, Typhoid is Sydney in 1814, Cholera in New York in 1832, Small pox Sydney 1881 and so on.

 

In the case of cruise ships identification of cases prior to boarding is basically quarantining those cases from the rest of the population on board ship, since they are not onboard ship.  Any good Epidemiology 101 text book has the basic formulas concerning spread in a population based upon a number of factors including number of source cases.

 

Covid is a bit different in that it is one of the few diseases that is infectious even with asymptomatic individuals, as such testing is used more often, since a diagnosis by symptoms itself may not be possible. However the way it has been handled with other illness is to quarantine any close contacts, with or without testing, until after the incubation period has passed for that disease.