CRUISE COVID TESTING

[Ocean Boy]

10 minutes ago, pcur said:

This doesn't make sense.  We all need to wear masks ANYWHERE there are other people in a confine space.  Period.

 

As far as testing is concerned, cruise lines should require proof of a negative test within 3-5 days before sailing, and a signed document at boarding that the passenger has been social distancing and wearing a mask since receiving the results.  Of course people will lie, and therefore cruise lines should require masks on board until a vaccine is available.

 

THEN, they should require written proof that the passenger has been vaccinated.

 

My husband and I just got tested last Friday.  It is now Monday, Memorial Day, and our negative test results were emailed to us this morning.  The test was free with Project Baseline.  

 

(Oh, anyone planning on getting the test, here's a hint:  when the swab comes at you, breathe in once, hold your breath and be still while the swab goes up.  This eliminates almost all the stinging effect.)

@hazencemade plenty of sense, now you on the other hand.....

 

If all that is required to go on a cruise the ships shouldn't be sailing.

[Germancruiser]

Can someone put the kettle on - so we can all have nice relaxing cup of tea and take a deep breath...

[sugcarol]

10 hours ago, orville99 said:

Then your first one should have said bear not bare😉

Isn't sick bay on the same deck as where we get on and off at ports?

[Tree_skier]

17 minutes ago, pcur said:

This doesn't make sense.  We all need to wear masks ANYWHERE there are other people in a confine space.  Period.

 

As far as testing is concerned, cruise lines should require proof of a negative test within 3-5 days before sailing, and a signed document at boarding that the passenger has been social distancing and wearing a mask since receiving the results.  Of course people will lie, and therefore cruise lines should require masks on board until a vaccine is available.

 

THEN, they should require written proof that the passenger has been vaccinated.

 

My husband and I just got tested last Friday.  It is now Monday, Memorial Day, and our negative test results were emailed to us this morning.  The test was free with Project Baseline.  

 

(Oh, anyone planning on getting the test, here's a hint:  when the swab comes at you, breathe in once, hold your breath and be still while the swab goes up.  This eliminates almost all the stinging effect.)

If this is your baseline for getting back on a cruise ship you will never cruise again.

[pcur]

11 minutes ago, Ocean Boy said:

@hazencemade plenty of sense, now you on the other hand.....

 

If all that is required to go on a cruise the ships shouldn't be sailing.

There's lots more:  I was responding to the points I quoted, not the whole post.   All that I stated IS required to keep each other safe from this nasty thing, IMO.

 

If they had us sign a document about Noro Virus for the past umpteen years,  then what I've stated is the next step for COVID19, which doesn't just make you throw-up and poop a lot, but can KILL you.  

 

Stay safe. Wash your hands.  Wear a mask.  Hug your housemates.

[Ocean Boy]

1 minute ago, pcur said:

There's lots more:  I was responding to the points I quoted, not the whole post.   

Lots more?!!😯😯😯😯

[orville99]

10 hours ago, sugcarol said:

Isn't sick bay on the same deck as where we get on and off at ports?

Yes, but access to sick bays are generally closed off when ships are in port.

[boatseller]

Testing for sc2 will never be required to board a cruise ship, or enter a theme park.  They might offer it at the terminal to resolve any questionable symptoms, but what if you have some other disease, like influenza which no one ever cared about before.

 

My thinking is that it won't be required or offered due to liability.  Realistically, the cruise lines want you to expect sc2, influenza, noro, etc to be onboard so that it's clear it's your choice to be there.  It is impractical to expect any public venue to offer a sterile environment.  Heck even hospitals can't do that.

[Milwaukee Eight]

11 hours ago, Ocean Boy said:

@hazencemade plenty of sense, now you on the other hand.....

 

If all that is required to go on a cruise the ships shouldn't be sailing.

But it’s their Zip Code I’m worried about. Media repotting SC has had an increase in cases since they began opening the State. I wonder if that is Fake News. 

[Iamcruzin]

11 hours ago, pcur said:

 

As far as testing is concerned, cruise lines should require proof of a negative test within 3-5 days before sailing, and a signed document at boarding that the passenger has been social distancing and wearing a mask since receiving the results. 

This is a total waste of time and will not guarantee that you will not be infected before you board a ship. You can become infected on the plane, in the airport on your travel to the lab and don't forget about all of  people who have their nails done and get a haircut just before the cruise.

Edited May 26, 2020 by Iamcruzin

[TeeRick]

Nice to see all the usual speculation and back & forth arguments here from all of us experts---but I will wait to see the actual requirements from the CDC and similar health authorities that will need to be put in place by all cruise lines to resume operations.

[Biker19]

30 minutes ago, Milwaukee Eight said:

Media repotting SC has had an increase in cases since they began opening the State.

Many states are reporting an increase in positive tests, but that could be due to increased testing, not that the virus is spreading more. A much more useful statistic is hospitalizations.

Edited May 26, 2020 by Biker19

[mayleeman]

Cruiselines' decisions on reopening, and what tests if any to require, will likely be seriously affected by more definitive results of research into two issues, whether asymptomatic spread is common and whether recovered persons acquire any immunity.  The jury is still out.

[Roger88]

I was just reading an article about Japanese immidiete covid testing booths. Its not always accurate and you need 3 to 4 testings before getting a final result. Moreover it costs around 20-40 $ which is very expensive. I dont see a reason behind it for the companies to start the same practise for passangers getting on board the cruisers. First it will take 3 times more time embark the ship and it will cost them a lot of money. So I dont think it will be practised at all 

[TheMastodon]

19 hours ago, bouhunter said:

😁😁  Funny.

 

What's also funny is that there are people here so addicted to the "cruising lifestyle", they would sign up for that today.

 

And make a youtube video about it (dorks)

[TheMastodon]

14 hours ago, pcur said:

This doesn't make sense.  We all need to wear masks ANYWHERE there are other people in a confine space.  Period.

 

As far as testing is concerned, cruise lines should require proof of a negative test within 3-5 days before sailing, and a signed document at boarding that the passenger has been social distancing and wearing a mask since receiving the results.  Of course people will lie, and therefore cruise lines should require masks on board until a vaccine is available.

 

THEN, they should require written proof that the passenger has been vaccinated.

 

My husband and I just got tested last Friday.  It is now Monday, Memorial Day, and our negative test results were emailed to us this morning.  The test was free with Project Baseline.  

 

(Oh, anyone planning on getting the test, here's a hint:  when the swab comes at you, breathe in once, hold your breath and be still while the swab goes up.  This eliminates almost all the stinging effect.)

 

 

There has never been a vaccine for a Coronavirus (MERS, SARS, etc etc).  The "flu shot" doesn't prevent the flu nor will it ever eradicate it.   So don't put all your eggs in that basket.  Further more, a mask is not going to prevent the spread on a ship.  I think you are done cruising Karen.

 

 

 

 

[sugcarol]

1 hour ago, Biker19 said:

Many states are reporting an increase in positive tests, but that could be due to increased testing, not that the virus is spreading more. A much more useful statistic is hospitalizations.

I don't agree with that. Somebody gets tested and is positive, but not too serious to be hospitalized but is supposed to self quarantine for 14 days and at least half will disregard and proceeds to spread the virus to the old and/or sick and THEY get hospitalized. This does not include the asymptomatic people and they infect people without even knowing it. It's hard to fight something that is invisible. 

[pcur]

3 hours ago, Iamcruzin said:

This is a total waste of time and will not guarantee that you will not be infected before you board a ship. You can become infected on the plane, in the airport on your travel to the lab and don't forget about all of  people who have their nails done and get a haircut just before the cruise.

 

I formed my SUGGESTIONS about what should be required by cruise lines based on my own experience.  

 

I'm pretty sure I came home from our b2b2b cruises in mid-February with COVID19.  It was trifecta:  sailing out of a US hotspot (unknown at the time), over Chinese New Years with a ship full of international Asian passengers, and coming down with pneumonia by the end of the cruises.  I won't ever know for sure until/unless I get tested for antibodies.  What I do know is it woke me up to what I was doing wrong, and how these things can be spread around.

 

So, fast-forward 3 months and I get tested for COVID19 after following the CA guidelines for shelter-in-place, social distancing, wearing masks, and hygiene.  We both tested negative.

 

It's my OPINION, based on watching the COVID19 statistics in our local area, and where my family live, that this virus is easily passed around.  I live within 10 miles of where the first case in my county showed up.  There were media articles about the woman:  no travel, no known contact with an infected person, and she's got COVID19.

 

Then, I watched the spread through my county from there.

 

So, if the CDC says we should wear masks, I know if we don't what can happen.  A test for the virus prior to boarding, WITH social distancing after the test, can go a long way to keeping all passengers safe.

 

If people think that cruising is going to be the same as it was pre-COVID19, they are not being realistic.  I've already read many articles by the cruise travel industry about the measures that will be taken, and I'm not the least bit surprised. 

 

The cruise lines MUST go back to sailing to survive, and they MUST NOT have a repeat of what happened this past Feb/Mar when the virus was spreading.  So, I think they will err on the side of caution, and if my opinion is correct, I'm ready for it.  

 

We will see when/if they start sailing late this summer/early fall.

[TheMastodon]

1 hour ago, sugcarol said:

I don't agree with that. Somebody gets tested and is positive, but not too serious to be hospitalized but is supposed to self quarantine for 14 days and at least half will disregard and proceeds to spread the virus to the old and/or sick and THEY get hospitalized. This does not include the asymptomatic people and they infect people without even knowing it. It's hard to fight something that is invisible. 

 

Wrong

 

 

[BecciBoo]

On 5/25/2020 at 7:51 AM, botbot said:

 

Agree on most...I am an unrequited Libertarian...I believe in Thoreau's quote, that which governs least governs best...I listened in History.  But I still intend to be obedient to the law of the land.  Thought this is interesting though....one of my friends just had a mutual acquaintence whose MIL just died in a car accident and after a couple weeks they received the Death Cert. and guess what the powers that be listed as cause???  Yep, Covid....now I have proof that all that silly reporting is suspect....HIGHLY suspect!

Edited May 26, 2020 by BecciBoo

[sugcarol]

3 hours ago, TheMastodon said:

 

Wrong

 

 

Holy cow,  What a wakeup call this is, I had no idea it was that low. You just taught an old dog a new trick. Thank you!

[Shipof6Fools]

BecciBoo I 100% agree with you. And as another nail in the coffin I read that the hospital gets 30k for each death by Covid. To me this discredits by a large margin the true number of deaths caused by this virus.

 

https://spectator.us/lockdown-wrong-matt-labash-toby-young-debate/

[TeeRick]

23 hours ago, Biker19 said:

Many states are reporting an increase in positive tests, but that could be due to increased testing, not that the virus is spreading more. A much more useful statistic is hospitalizations.

Agree with this.  My opinion here.  Feel free to disagree.  At this point in the pandemic it is all about the healthcare system being in a position to handle COVID-19 patients, not positive test numbers.  Early on the healthcare system was unprepared, and ill-equipped. Worried rightly so about surge capacity.   Now it has come a long way quickly.  Very few hospitals are anywhere near capacity.  Without a vaccine our healthcare system just needs to be equipped for hospitalizations even if we see spikes here and there.  Like most other infectious diseases, COVID needs to be managed at this point. 

[SRF]

On 5/25/2020 at 8:48 AM, botbot said:

Testing has advanced in the last 4 weeks, and the projection is that there will be a "pregnancy" type test available for "If you have it", in exactly the same way as the current test they have for "if you have had it".

Emirates are trialling testing before you get on a plane, with an answer in 20 minutes.

 

Not forgetting of course, 8 weeks ago there wasn't a true test, now there is.

In another 8 weeks, the tests will be 99.99% accurate.

 

 

You are backwards.

 

There has been a quick test for "if you have it currently" for some 6 weeks.  Pres even showed it.

 

There is not yet a quick test for "if you had it previously."  And the current tests have a high error rate.

[TheMastodon]

19 hours ago, sugcarol said:

Holy cow,  What a wakeup call this is, I had no idea it was that low. You just taught an old dog a new trick. Thank you!

 

Data don't lie!  Lots of sheep in this country.