Ebola making a difference in your next cruise?

[kiwicruiser55]

I was so surprised last night when I suggested we buy airline tickets to FLL for a holiday cruise and not book the ship till the last minute looking for a deal. If the ships were full, that would be fine and we would enjoy Florida sunshine!

 

The surprise was when DW said, I prefer to not travel until we learn more about the Ebola situation.

 

Anyone else amending their travel plans?

 

I was going to book our flights to Vancouver when the deals come out but I am now thinking we might leave it until closer to our departure date of May 2015. I have paid a deposit on Alaska cruise and a motorhome for 7 weeks in Canada, so far.

[DrTee]

I never catch colds at home, but I often do on a cruise. I'm worried about that. I'm also worried about eating too much bread pudding and my clothes shrinking.

[cruisemom42]

I generally don't consult wedmd but I am aware that there are bodily fluids expelled during sneezing. I do not think anyone is an expert on ebola, at this point, and it is clear that the information is far from clear from the experts.

It is, nonetheless, a very scary disease.

 

Actually, the CDC has been studying the virus since it was discovered in 1976 and quite a bit is known about it. It is scary, yes, but all the fearmongering on the news is really getting things out of perspective.

 

It's very misleading for so-called "experts" on TV to suggest the virus could mutate in such a way that its method of infection changes. Sure, it's a mathematical possibility, but NO VIRUS EVER STUDIED has so far made such a radical change -- including HIV, hepatitis C, influenza, and many others.

 

The "airborne" thing is also very misleading. It's not like someone could just sneeze "near" you and infect you. The virus particles do not remain airborne, and basically a very sick person would have to sneeze or cough almost directly on you (and have enough virus in their system to be infective) for there to even be a CHANCE of enough contact for infection to occur.

[sail7seas]

Actually, the CDC has been studying the virus since it was discovered in 1976 and quite a bit is known about it. It is scary, yes, but all the fearmongering on the news is really getting things out of perspective.

 

It's very misleading for so-called "experts" on TV to suggest the virus could mutate in such a way that its method of infection changes. Sure, it's a mathematical possibility, but NO VIRUS EVER STUDIED has so far made such a radical change -- including HIV, hepatitis C, influenza, and many others.

 

The "airborne" thing is also very misleading. It's not like someone could just sneeze "near" you and infect you. The virus particles do not remain airborne, and basically a very sick person would have to sneeze or cough almost directly on you (and have enough virus in their system to be infective) for there to even be a CHANCE of enough contact for infection to occur.

 

 

 

So, are you saying that if someone in the airplane seat beside you sneezes 'on you', you could be infected with the virus? Some of the MD's I've heard on TV have reluctantly said it is possible. Having a 'seatmate' sneeze on you on an airplane is a very viable possibility.

 

How does this whole taking temperatures thing at SOME U.S. airports provide protection for anyone? We all have learned an infected person can incubate for up to three weeks with no symptoms. They well could have a normal temperature when they are permitted to enter. The gentleman who died in Texas had no fever when he flew and entered U.S.

 

I am not a trained medical professional but how many of us here really think we have all the answers as pertains to ebola. CDC doesn't; why would we think we do? What we do have as capable adults is the ability to weigh risks as we see them and make our own choices.

 

 

 

 

]

Edited October 13, 2014 by sail7seas

[CruisermanVA]

So, are you saying that if someone in the airplane seat beside you sneezes 'on you', you could be infected with the virus? Some of the MD's I've heard on TV have reluctantly said it is possible. Having a 'seatmate' sneeze on you on an airplane is a very viable possibility.

 

I don't recall that ever happening to me in 50 years of flying.

[sail7seas]

 

I don't recall that ever happening to me in 50 years of flying.

 

You've been lucky and, of course, just because it has not happened to you doesn't mean it never happens. I actually have sneezed on an airplane and while I try to grab a tissue in time, it's a closed and congested environment. I certainly could have spread germs without intending to.

 

Surely in all your years of flying you have heard a passenger or flight attendant sneeze during at least one flight? :D :D

 

[sunsetbeachgal]

Many folks, myself included, often come down with something after a long flight. We returned from Europe two weeks ago, and I picked up a virus somewhere that struck shortpy after we returned and is just now working its way out of my body after making me miserable.

 

While we are not altering travel plans due to the fear of Ebola yet, I am getting worried about the possibility of terrorism by those ISIS nut jobs. The threat of terrorism will most definitely affect our travel plans.

Edited October 13, 2014 by sunsetbeachgal

[cruisemom42]

So, are you saying that if someone in the airplane seat beside you sneezes 'on you', you could be infected with the virus? Some of the MD's I've heard on TV have reluctantly said it is possible. Having a 'seatmate' sneeze on you on an airplane is a very viable possibility.

 

How does this whole taking temperatures thing at SOME U.S. airports provide protection for anyone? We all have learned an infected person can incubate for up to three weeks with no symptoms. They well could have a normal temperature when they are permitted to enter. The gentleman who died in Texas had no fever when he flew and entered U.S.

 

I am not a trained medical professional but how many of us here really think we have all the answers as pertains to ebola. CDC doesn't; why would we think we do?

 

 

 

]

 

Certainly not trying to say anyone has all the answers, but on the other hand, there is a lot of paranoia and plenty of things are known about the virus. Reading information directly from the WHO and CDC and medical journals is likely to get one closer to actual correct information than television or newspaper reports quoting people who are quite often overnight "experts".

 

Ebola is not infectious until people begin to show symptoms such as fever. So if someone has no fever, the chance that he/she is infectious is very, very, very small. Hence the reason for testing for fever. Is it foolproof? Of course not. And if you are on a 15-hour flight, the person next to you could go from being afebrile to having a fever. There are no 100% guarantees in life (other than death and taxes, I guess....:cool:)

 

Also, while there is always a chance of someone coughing or sneezing on you, coughing and sneezing are not part of the symptoms of Ebola.

 

As you said in an earlier post, everyone has a different perception of risk. Some people find a new disease to be very scary, even if the absolute risk of infection is tiny. Others, like myself, look more comparatively at the risks. If the risk is comparatively small, I am not going to worry about it.

[CruisermanVA]

You've been lucky and, of course, just because it has not happened to you doesn't mean it never happens. I actually have sneezed on an airplane and while I try to grab a tissue in time, it's a closed and congested environment. I certainly could have spread germs without intending to.

 

Surely in all your years of flying you have heard a passenger or flight attendant sneeze during at least one flight? :D :D

 

 

Of course, but not directly on me. If someone with Ebola sneezed on me and I inhaled the droplets or they went into my eyes, I'd be in trouble. But if someone sneezes 10 feet away from me the droplets are not going to reach me - they will fall to the ground. In that situation I won't get infected (according to all the legitimate medical sources I've looked at).

 

My bottom line - unless new information comes out indicating that Ebola is much more contagious than they say it is now I don't intend to change my plans.

Edited October 13, 2014 by cruisernewbieman

[Folk Singer]

I was so surprised last night when I suggested we buy airline tickets to FLL for a holiday cruise and not book the ship till the last minute looking for a deal. If the ships were full, that would be fine and we would enjoy Florida sunshine!

 

The surprise was when DW said, I prefer to not travel until we learn more about the Ebola situation.

 

Anyone else amending their travel plans?

 

 

It should not be problem unless you go to East Africa. Simple precautions like washing your hands and sanitizer.

[Lizzie68]

There is a mass hysteria reaction to the Ebola issue, not helped by the authorities bungling, or by the media. More people die every day from the flu, or in accidents. So no, it would not change my plans unless I was scheduled to land smack bang in the middle of an infectious area. Common sense is needed.

[sail7seas]

It should not be problem unless you go to East Africa. Simple precautions like washing your hands and sanitizer.

 

I'm sure it's a typo and while there is still time, you may wish to change East Africa to West Africa.

 

 

 

 

There is a mass hysteria reaction to the Ebola issue, not helped by the authorities bungling, or by the media. More people die every day from the flu, or in accidents. So no, it would not change my plans unless I was scheduled to land smack bang in the middle of an infectious area. Common sense is needed.

 

You have put your finger on a good deal of the problem. The authorities have bungled the release of information, some health care workers seem to have bungled diagnosis and early treatment and medical professionals are making contradictory statements. Even CDC representatives have had to correct things they have said and make apologies. It makes the public weary of what to believe.

 

I had heard of at least one case in Spain but have not heard any updates. Have there been more reported there?

 

 

[Roz]

I've flown and cruised while horror stories about AIDS, SARS, terrorists, mad cow disease, Norwalk virus, West Nile virus, bird flu, and monkey pox swirled around me. Ebola no different.

 

Roz

[RJ2002]

There is a mass hysteria reaction to the Ebola issue, not helped by the authorities bungling, or by the media. More people die every day from the flu, or in accidents. So no, it would not change my plans unless I was scheduled to land smack bang in the middle of an infectious area. Common sense is needed.

 

Well put.

 

In another CC forum yesterday, I read that a group of 4 cancelled their trip out of Amsterdam to the British Isles due to the scare, and their cruise is next May. The reason cited was that there were direct flights from West Africa to Amsterdam.

 

Certainly agree that people need to judge for themselves. Depending on one's perspective, though, you would wonder if they would travel anywhere by air. Today, a plane was met by ambulances at Boston Logan, yesterday it was LAX. Thankfully, both situations were apparently not Ebola-related.

 

Common sense is needed.

[loerie]

yes absolutely Ebola makes a differnce!!!!!Have just booked a cruise going up the west coast of africa the "bad " ports have been changed .What a deal- could not turn it down.Now to do last minute airfares.

[Sundagger]

I'm flying to FLL later this week, then taking a cruise through the Caribbean and Panama and Costa Rica. I'm far more concerned about catching Chikungunya from a mosquito there than from Ebola on a flight. I barely survived one bout with Dengue Fever and really, really don't want to get it again, or anything similar. I'd only change travel plans if I had intended to go to West Africa.

 

It may seem surprising to many, but Minneapolis has a large population of both East and West Africans (including my Medicare agent). Hospitals here are preparing for treating Ebola.

 

People are far more likely to acquire dozens of other potentially fatal diseases than they are to contract Ebola. I worked in medical laboratories for 34 years and I feel I know when to take an epidemic seriously enough to change my plans.

[Typhoon1]

If I were flying to Africa, I might worry.

 

Otherwise, I see the current media frenzy as a lot of hype about nothing. Of course, there's reason for concern, but not panic.

[albingirl]

Actually, I am going to concur with Sail's postings. This is certainly a difficult situation, but I am going to go one step further and say that CDC is one more Federal Agency in which I have so little faith. Like anything else, err on the side of caution and be ever aware.

[Seago2]

The "it's more dangerous to drive in the car to and from the cruise" argument holds no weight for me. That risk is static and has not changed in recent years. What has changed for me is the Ebola outbreak and the enterovirus outbreak. Flu has always been on my paranoia radar but I get a flu shot and pray the vaccine is for the right strain of flu that rages during any given winter.

 

For me, and this is just MHO, Ebola is not a matter of if but of when. The risk is here. We all know of the nurse who contracted it in the US. Obviously we are not getting near an ill person's bodily fluids on a cruise (although we could) but it's possible that we could board with a healthy person and three days into the cruise be packed in, 5000 of us including crew, with a very sick person. "Isolation" and "containment" are not words we could ever associate with a cruise ship.

 

I think the OP's original question was whether Ebola has made a difference in my cruise plans. My answer is: not yet but final payment isn't due for a few weeks. It may.

 

ETA: as re the CDC: their mission appears to be to stem panic and reassure us at the cost of enacting and encouraging rules that would actually stem the virus.

Edited October 13, 2014 by Seago2

[Watson's aunt]

Hi

 

If i was afraid to travel because of some trouble in far off places I would never leave my home. I would not go cheer the Boston Marathon because it was borned or even go into Boston. Cruise somewhere because of terroiest. I refuse to let them win. If it happens it happens. there is nothing I can do about it. But I feel silly if that wonderful cruise comes back with no incendent and everyone on board had a wonderful time, while I stay home scared. Not going to happen to me. I would be careful to cruise where they are having problems. But cruiseing to Alaska, South America, Caribbean, and others. I am more worried about the Noro Virus due to a medicial condition..

any typos blame on glass of wine I am drinking

Mary

[bert425]

Hi

 

If i was afraid to travel because of some trouble in far off places I would never leave my home. I would not go cheer the Boston Marathon because it was borned or even go into Boston. Cruise somewhere because of terroiest. I refuse to let them win. If it happens it happens. there is nothing I can do about it. But I feel silly if that wonderful cruise comes back with no incendent and everyone on board had a wonderful time' date=' while I stay home scared. Not going to happen to me. I would be careful to cruise where they are having problems. But cruiseing to Alaska, South America, Caribbean, and others. I am more worried about the Noro Virus due to a medicial condition..

any typos blame on glass of wine I am drinking

Mary[/quote']

 

well said.

 

and I agree with everything

 

(in particular about drinking :))

[Lizzie68]

Hi

 

If i was afraid to travel because of some trouble in far off places I would never leave my home. I would not go cheer the Boston Marathon because it was borned or even go into Boston. Cruise somewhere because of terroiest. I refuse to let them win. If it happens it happens. there is nothing I can do about it. But I feel silly if that wonderful cruise comes back with no incendent and everyone on board had a wonderful time' date=' while I stay home scared. Not going to happen to me. I would be careful to cruise where they are having problems. But cruiseing to Alaska, South America, Caribbean, and others. I am more worried about the Noro Virus due to a medicial condition..

any typos blame on glass of wine I am drinking

Mary[/quote']

 

Well said, Mary! And I'll have one with you.:D

[sail7seas]

Well put.

 

In another CC forum yesterday, I read that a group of 4 cancelled their trip out of Amsterdam to the British Isles due to the scare, and their cruise is next May. The reason cited was that there were direct flights from West Africa to Amsterdam.

 

Certainly agree that people need to judge for themselves. Depending on one's perspective, though, you would wonder if they would travel anywhere by air. Today, a plane was met by ambulances at Boston Logan, yesterday it was LAX. Thankfully, both situations were apparently not Ebola-related.

 

Common sense is needed.

 

 

 

A comment about another consideration of travel during this Ebola situation...

 

The plane referenced in this post in Boston today was Emirates Airlines and had flown 14 hours from Dubai (I think). There were five passengers reported as 'not feeling well' and they were taken off the plane by fully suited people in protective coverings. The other passengers on that flight remained seated for about 3 hours before they were permitted off the plane.

 

One never knows about such unexpected, unplanned and probably unwelcome inconveniences these days.

 

[Watson's aunt]

Hi

 

Yes I am just wonderding why these 5 people were allowed on the plane. They had to be be sick before the got on plane if you listen to the passenger on the plane talking to Boston reporters. They reported that they were sick the whole flight

 

Mary my 2,000 post

[Linda&Vern]

We do not plan to change our cruise plans at this time. We will not be flying, which to us is a great relief. We will be very extra cautious during our travels the next few months. That said, I think it would be dangerous to think Ebola is a quickly passing news headline.

 

I think it is a very serious situation and greatly favor mandatory quarantine for anyone wanting to come into the U.S. from the affected areas. I know most will not agree with me on this - but it is MY opinion.

 

I do not think most have considered the economic impact this will have on those of us in the U.S. Who's going to end up paying for all the airport extra screenings, all the hospital preparations and treatments, decontaminations, etc.? We are sending troops to the affected areas to help! This will have a huge economic impact when all is said and done.

 

It would be interesting to find this thread in 6 months for an update on all of our thoughts.

Edited October 13, 2014 by Linda&Vern