Changes in Onboard Behavior & Procedures after Cruises restart sailing again...

[clo]

6 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

For me, the sad aspect of that is:  I'd still like to do them!  I'm just thankful that I can do what I can do.

Let me tell you about the trip we had to cancel for March/April. Fly to Oslo, spend a couple of days in a hotel, take a glorious sounding train ride to Bergen for two more days, then a 6 day Norwegian coastal cruise (something that I think will continue for a number of reasons), then fly to Paris for 5 nights. We were going to have an airbnb cause we like to cook and after not cooking for a couple of weeks we'd have been ready. But you could stay in a hotel. Then fly home. We'd like to think we can do that type of travel for quite a bit longer.  xoc

[cruisemom42]

4 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

And I have to acknowledge (without discussing my age) that there are things we do now that we sure as hell will not be able to do 20 years from now.  

 

It's one reason I'm so glad I have traveled throughout my life rather than waiting until I retire. Some of the things I've done already seem strenuous to me and will only become more so in the next 20-30 years -- always assuming I'm granted those years.

 

 

[SRF]

17 hours ago, cdwise said:

There has never been a vaccine for any coronavirus as far as I can find from researching the subject, No I'm not a doctor or other medical professional but I have been extensively trained and have decades in experience when it comes to research. Coronaviruses account for 40% of the common cold, primarily winter colds. The rest are mostly rhinoviruses. SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV are examples of previous cornonavisues  Covid-19 aka the "novel" or new SARS-CoV-2 that appeared in 2019 belongs to that same family, SARS hit Asia hard in 2003 while MERS 2012 & 2015 was even more deadly just less contagious. Neither has a vaccine. Ebola another pandemic illness took 19 years before a vaccine was available.  

 

 

I have seen reports that a SARS vaccine was developed, but not deployed.  There were only about 9,000 identified SARS cases, so it was not needed.

[SRF]

15 hours ago, cdwise said:

Unfortunately I didn't bookmark the page where the CDC declared that influenza in the US for the 2018-2020 flu season passed the level set for a pandemic in the US as of December 18, 2019 but it seems to have disappeared. I did still find the one for 2017 influenza season https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2018/02/09/this-flu-season-has-now-reached-pandemic-levels-but-its-not-technically-a-pandemic/ which does say that it isn't "technically" a pandemic just reached and subsequently surpassed pandemic levels.

 

Whether the shutdown of the world was or was not necessary will be something for forensic scientists to determine when we do have data comparing countries that didn't shut down with those that did. In the meantime given that there has never been a successful vaccine for a coronavirus I'm not going to put everything on hold for one.

. 

 

Estimates for the US 2019 - 2020 flu season is for 39 to 56 million cases.  410,000 - 740, 000 hospitalizations, and 24,000 to 62,000 deaths.

 

Worldwide, annual flu cases range from 240 million to 1.6 billion cases and 290,000 to 650,000 deaths.

 

 

[ilikeanswers]

1 hour ago, SRF said:

I have seen reports that a SARS vaccine was developed, but not deployed.  There were only about 9,000 identified SARS cases, so it was not needed.

 

Actually I read there were a number of potential vaccines for SARS developed but they never made it to human trials. They claim that because so many years had pssed since a serious SARS epidemic it wasn't considered a big enough threat. Now they are dredging up the research to see if it is any use for COVID19.

[Toofarfromthesea]

On 4/28/2020 at 11:29 AM, gusbeall said:

 

For the record, Gus doesn't fully understand how the forum software works and nothing shown in that "quote" from me was actually written by me.  It is an easy mistake for a newby to make and I'm not upset at all of Gus, but I want the record clear.

[Toofarfromthesea]

Here is an optimistic report on something we have been discussing.  There have been concerns about the possibility of getting reinfected after recovery - and the ominous implications that would have for both post-infection immunity and the likelihood of an effective vaccine.  Turns out that the "re-infections" were actually false positives caused by the inability of the test to distinguish between live and dead versions of the genetic sequence being tested for.  That is terrific news, if it holds up.

https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-reinfections-were-false-positives.html

[ontheweb]

2 hours ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

Here is an optimistic report on something we have been discussing.  There have been concerns about the possibility of getting reinfected after recovery - and the ominous implications that would have for both post-infection immunity and the likelihood of an effective vaccine.  Turns out that the "re-infections" were actually false positives caused by the inability of the test to distinguish between live and dead versions of the genetic sequence being tested for.  That is terrific news, if it holds up.

https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-reinfections-were-false-positives.html

Good news, I was not aware you were allowed to post good news in these forums.

 

I'm sure the "world is about to end and there will never be a vaccine" crowd will find reasons to attack these findings.

[clo]

52 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

Good news, I was not aware you were allowed to post good news in these forums.

 

I'm sure the "world is about to end and there will never be a vaccine" crowd will find reasons to attack these findings.

FWIW I checked and livescience.com is considered reputable. I check this stuff 🙂

Edited May 2, 2020 by clo

[ontheweb]

11 hours ago, clo said:

FWIW I checked and livescience.com is considered reputable. I check this stuff 🙂

Gee, I thought the definition of a reputable source was someone who agrees with you. For instance in another thread I quoted Dr. Fauci as saying there could be a vaccine in January. The reply was no, stay with 12-18 months that he had previously said, and the new quotation must be that there was a threat to fire him.

 

Now earlier today I saw on the news (NBC from NY City) that there are presently 14 clinical trials all proceeding at "warp speed".  Will there be a vaccine by January? I don't know, but there sure is a better chance than there was back in March.

[ilikeanswers]

49 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

Now earlier today I saw on the news (NBC from NY City) that there are presently 14 clinical trials all proceeding at "warp speed".  Will there be a vaccine by January? I don't know, but there sure is a better chance than there was back in March.

 

I read an article today that pharmaceuticals companies are trialing COVID 19 vaccines just to get their stock prices up, apparently it is a common practice during epidemics. So out of the 14 trial only 3 might be genuine the others are just show trials to manipulate the stock market. Nothing like a crisis to show you the best and unfortunately worst of humanity😩.

[clo]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

I don't know, but there sure is a better chance than there was back in March.

You're absolutely correct. This is all moving so fast.

[Toofarfromthesea]

54 minutes ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

I read an article today that pharmaceuticals companies are trialing COVID 19 vaccines just to get their stock prices up, apparently it is a common practice during epidemics. So out of the 14 trial only 3 might be genuine the others are just show trials to manipulate the stock market. Nothing like a crisis to show you the best and unfortunately worst of humanity😩.

 

If you are going to cite an article it would be nice if you included a link so we could evaluate the source for ourselves.  Because without that this is just blah blah blah with no details, no idea who is making the claim or why, what it is based on, etc.  The very epitome of context-less "information" - besides either you or the article reporting something as fact which clearly is opinion, i.e., the motivations of the pharma companies. 

Even if vaccine trials bobble the stock price, something asserted but not demonstrated, trials are expensive to run, and the payoff is not running the running of the trials it is coming to market with an effective vaccine.  A pharma company that is just going through the motions and wasting corporate assets to do what you or the article call 'show' trials for a short-term stock bump would be killed by their investors, most of whom are very sophisticated institutional money managers who have research departments who follow this kind of thing closely.

So I'd love to have a link.

[cruisemom42]

34 minutes ago, ilikeanswers said:

 

I read an article today that pharmaceuticals companies are trialing COVID 19 vaccines just to get their stock prices up, apparently it is a common practice during epidemics. So out of the 14 trial only 3 might be genuine the others are just show trials to manipulate the stock market. Nothing like a crisis to show you the best and unfortunately worst of humanity😩.

 

Can you please give us a source?

 

I've worked for several reputable pharmaceutical companies and none of them would contemplate such a thing. First of all clinical trials are very expensive. Secondly (at least in the US and Europe) trials in humans are extremely regulated and there is a great deal of transparency as to the protocols being used, goals of the trial, endpoints (what they are testing), etc.

 

Perhaps if we are talking about some crazy start-up company somewhere, but...

 

I am aware of at least the following reputable institutions and companies (and keep in mind that many therapies these days are developed as the result of collaborations between various entities -- could be a university plus pharmaceutical company....):

 

• CureVac and BioNTech (German vaccine companies; partnered with pharma giant Pfizer)**
• Translate Bio Inc (therapeutics company; partnered with pharma giant Sanofi)
• Jenner Institute at the University of Oxford (partnered with pharma giant AstraZeneca)**
• Johnson & Johnson (partnered with US Govt)
• Moderna (Biotech firm; partnered with US NIH)**
• Inovio Pharmaceuticals (backed by both the Gates Foundation and CEPI)**
• Academy of Military Medical Sciences (China; partnered with Hong Kong-listed biotech firm CanSino) Bio**
• Sinovac Biotech Ltd (funded by China's govt)

** As of a few days ago, these 5 all have vaccines now in clinical trials, according to the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation (CEPI) and are the most advanced.

[JRG]

This is a really good write-up and I just want to add that there are really two races here:

 

1) for the Vaccine

2) for the Treatments if infected.

 

What is incredible to witness is how rapidly the FDA is granting pre-market approval, compared to previous standards.

 

 

 

Edited May 2, 2020 by JRG

[Toofarfromthesea]

4 minutes ago, JRG said:

This is a really good write-up and I just want to add that there are really two races here:

 

1) for the Vaccine

2) for the Treatments if infected.

 

What is incredible to witness is how rapidly the FDA is granting pre-market approval, compared to previous standards.

 

 

 

 

Um, WHAT, is a pretty good write-up?  Did you mean to include a link?  I do that all the time.  Email my cyber-security daughter about an article I've read that she would find interesting and then forget to paste the link.

[JRG]

Sorry,  I see your point.   I was referring to Cruisemoms comment.

 

Of course a link would help authenticate,  I was thinking about her write-up and research comments.  

 

My Bad if you see what I mean.

 

 

 

[JRG]

19 minutes ago, JRG said:

Of course a link would help authenticate,  I was thinking about her write-up and research comments

 

Just to finish my train of thought here...

 

There is alot hypersensitivity with regards to this sector (biotech) .   So yes it would be interesting to validate the article.

 

If you are an investor or looking to become more knowledgeable,  then it is helpful to make a distinction between those are Vaccine Related and those that are Therapeutic.   Not to mention the fact that SEC regs do not encourage such actions if firms were attempting to manipulate stock prices.

 

But I am in agreement that a source or link would be nice.   A highly credible source would be better.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 2, 2020 by JRG

[TheOldBear]

42 minutes ago, JRG said:

This is a really good write-up and I just want to add that there are really two races here:

 

1) for the Vaccine

2) for the Treatments if infected.

 

What is incredible to witness is how rapidly the FDA is granting pre-market approval, compared to previous standards.

 

 

 

I chased some links last week, and ended up in a Scientific American article focused on the person behind many vaccine developments in the 50’s, 60’s & 70’s.

One example of his effectiveness was forcing the 1957 “Hong Kong” flue vaccine from development to distribution in four months (with extremely primitive technology of the day)

[JRG]

Today I saw on TV,  with my own eyes,   German Shepherds being trained in what looked line scent detection for Covid-19.  Now maybe I am wrong,  maybe it was for blood-sugar level changes or contraband or something else..

 

If it is true then I think it is a good thing.  

 

And I may not be barking up the wrong tree here.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 2, 2020 by JRG

[taglovestocruise]

40 minutes ago, JRG said:

Today I saw on TV,  with my own eyes,   German Shepherds being trained in what looked line scent detection for Covid-19.  Now maybe I am wrong,  maybe it was for blood-sugar level changes or contraband or something else..

 

If it is true then I think it is a good thing.  

 

And I may not be barking up the wrong tree here.

 

 

 

 

Scientists are training dogs to identify COVID-19 by following their noses.

A new program at the University of Pennsylvania's School of Veterinary Medicine (Penn Vet) is putting noses to the grindstone for disease detection. Researchers are working with dogs to see if the canines' superior sniffers can help with early diction of cover 19. 

Dogs that can pinpoint the scent of COVID-19 could identify infection in people who are asymptomatic, and could play a valuable role in disease response as people return to work and social-distancing restrictions are relaxed, Penn Vet representatives said in a statement.

In the Penn Vet program, eight dogs will initially be trained in a laboratory setting. Over three weeks, they will first learn to recognize the smell of COVID-19 in saliva and urine samples from infected patients, through a technique known as odor imprinting, according to another Penn Vet statement. The dogs will then be tasked with differentiating between those samples and samples collected from people who do not have the disease. 

"The potential impact of these dogs and their capacity to detect COVID-19 could be substantial," Otto said. "This study will harness the dog's extraordinary ability to support the nation's COVID-19 surveillance systems, with the goal of reducing community spread."

 

 

[JRG]

12 minutes ago, taglovestocruise said:

"The potential impact of these dogs and their capacity to detect COVID-19 could be substantial," Otto said. "This study will harness the dog's extraordinary ability to support the nation's COVID-19 surveillance systems, with the goal of reducing community spread."

 

 

One shiny ray of hope in a gloomy nightmare.   

 

 

[ilikeanswers]

@cruisemom42 and @Toofarfromthesea sorry for the confusion this is my fault my wording I realise doesn't make sense. It would probably help I could find the article again and link it. I used the term "show trial" because that is what the financial expert used but it was obviously something he made up since it clearly means something different to you both. The article was saying that there are pharma companies announcing that they have a drug they want to take to trial but in reality they are not doing anything with the drug so there is no fake trial and maybe they are start up companies, I didn't recognise the names of the companies but then I don't really know pharmaceutical companies that well. The point of the article was that when you see a headline like "21 coronavirus drug trials" the journalists are getting the numbers from announcements not checking if the companies are actually taking a drug to trial. 

 

[Donray]

So, should airlines only allow 12 passengers per flight? 

 

Would you pay 200% more for all these safety requirements people want when there is no pandemic??????

 

People will not want to pay the cost once this is over.

 

It is like the stupid people that don't want to pay rent and the landlord go broke instead. 

[clo]

1 minute ago, Donray said:

So, should airlines only allow 12 passengers per flight? 

 

Would you pay 200% more for all these safety requirements people want when there is no pandemic??????

For real?