ITV 2 July 2100 - Billion Pound Cruise Industry: All at Sea

[AchileLauro]

Call me a cynic if you like but I'm rather loath to accept on face value official statistics on covid virus at the moment, especially U.S. statistics.

 

I think it could be some time before truly accurate data will become available.

[zap99]

22 minutes ago, AchileLauro said:

Call me a cynic if you like but I'm rather loath to accept on face value official statistics on covid virus at the moment, especially U.S. statistics.

 

I think it could be some time before truly accurate data will become available.

The official UK ONS statistics are not supportive of the scary figures mentioned in previous posts. Like you, I am cynical regarding much of the stuff picked out of the ether to support a particular view. Nobody knows what the next few weeks will bring. I will keep an open mind.

[zap99]

1 hour ago, Bazrat said:

True I would think they would be more inclined to pick an itinerary rather than a particular cruise line

Many folk do that, us included. Who goes where, when, and how much. We are loyal to all of the cruise lines we use 😁

[Harry Peterson]

21 minutes ago, zap99 said:

The official UK ONS statistics are not supportive of the scary figures mentioned in previous posts. Like you, I am cynical regarding much of the stuff picked out of the ether to support a particular view. Nobody knows what the next few weeks will bring. I will keep an open mind.

These are the official UK ONS statistics:

 

Age                     Deaths

Up to 14                2
15-44                     531
45-64                   4738
65-74                   7282
75-84                   15962
85+                       20852
 

Not so very different.  No real risk for the young, but substantial risks for older people.

[wowzz]

2 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

These are the official UK ONS statistics:

 

Age                     Deaths

Up to 14                2
15-44                     531
45-64                   4738
65-74                   7282
75-84                   15962
85+                       20852
 

Not so very different.  No real risk for the young, but substantial risks for older people.

How many of those deaths were directly attributable to CV19, and how many were deaths where the deceased had CV19 ? 

[zap99]

4 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

These are the official UK ONS statistics:

 

Age                     Deaths

Up to 14                2
15-44                     531
45-64                   4738
65-74                   7282
75-84                   15962
85+                       20852
 

Not so very different.  No real risk for the young, but substantial risks for older people.

Does your calculator show 15962÷531 =1500?. If it does you need a new one. You can get the at the pound shop for 🤔 £1500.

[Harry Peterson]

9 minutes ago, wowzz said:

How many of those deaths were directly attributable to CV19, and how many were deaths where the deceased had CV19 ? 

The ONS says this about those stats, but it's not really the totals that I was referring to - more the age split.  Statistically you're pretty unlikely to die from Covid if you're in the younger age groups, but substantially more likely to die in the older age groups that tend to cruise.

 

And it's not just the deaths - it's the evidence now emerging of substantial long-term health problems even for those who survive.

 

Deaths involving COVID-19

Up to 19 June 2020, there were 49,371 deaths registered in England and Wales involving the coronavirus (COVID-19) (27,185 men and 22,186 women).

The majority of deaths involving COVID-19 have been among people aged 65 years and over (44,096 out of 49,371).

Our data are based on deaths registered in England and Wales and include all deaths where “COVID-19” was mentioned on death certificates.

[Harry Peterson]

13 minutes ago, zap99 said:

Does your calculator show 15962÷531 =1500?. If it does you need a new one. You can get the at the pound shop for 🤔 £1500.

No new calculator needed - look at the age groups when you're comparing the two.  Ignore all the figures if you like, but are you really suggesting there isn't a dramatic ramping up of risk as you get older?

 

15962/2 = 7981 by the way, and 15962/10.64 = 1500  

10.64 may well be about right for the under-25s

Edited July 4, 2020 by Harry Peterson
Figures added

[zap99]

14 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

No new calculator needed - look at the age groups when you're comparing the two.  Ignore all the figures if you like, but are you really suggesting there isn't a dramatic ramping up of risk as you get older?

 

15962/2 = 7981 by the way, and 15962/10.64 = 1500  

10.64 may well be about right for the under-25s

You said 75 year olds are at 1500 times more risk than 25 year olds. That is so untrue as to be laughable.

[terrierjohn]

25 minutes ago, wowzz said:

How many of those deaths were directly attributable to CV19, and how many were deaths where the deceased had CV19 ? 

When you consider that the average length of stay in a care home is under 2 yrs, you can expect that they have a very high mortality rate even in normal times. Still very sad that covid probably brought this forward for many people, but not really unexpected.

[Harry Peterson]

18 minutes ago, zap99 said:

You said 75 year olds are at 1500 times more risk than 25 year olds. That is so untrue as to be laughable.

I said this:

 

It may, but the hard fact remains that the older you get the greater the risk of serious outcomes from Covid.  The risk of death is around 600 times greater for 65-75 year olds than for under 25s, and 1500 times greater for 75-85 year olds.

 

Those figures came from official US statistics, which you challenged, claiming that the UK figures didn't support them.

 

These are the official UK statistics, with the under 25 figure (because risk increases quite rapidly with age) likely to be much closer to 2 than 531.  It only has to be 10.64, which it may well be, to substantiate the American-based 1500 times figure which you, on the basis of no evidence at all, claim to be 'so untrue as to be laughable'.

 

Age                     Deaths

Up to 14                2
15-44                     531
45-64                   4738
65-74                   7282
75-84                   15962
85+                       20852

 

You can believe what you like. If you choose to think the risk isn't dramatically higher for over 70s than young people (despite what the government believes), that's your choice.

 

I'm wasting no more time on this.  I understand risk, and I understand statistics. I'll go with the statistics - you go with your gut reaction.  

 

 

 

[grapau27]

52 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

These are the official UK ONS statistics:

 

Age                     Deaths

Up to 14                2
15-44                     531
45-64                   4738
65-74                   7282
75-84                   15962
85+                       20852
 

Not so very different.  No real risk for the young, but substantial risks for older people.

Cancer,heart attacks etc as your body and organs get older would contribute largely to this data.

[zap99]

10 minutes ago, Harry Peterson said:

I said this:

 

It may, but the hard fact remains that the older you get the greater the risk of serious outcomes from Covid.  The risk of death is around 600 times greater for 65-75 year olds than for under 25s, and 1500 times greater for 75-85 year olds.

 

Those figures came from official US statistics, which you challenged, claiming that the UK figures didn't support them.

 

These are the official UK statistics, with the under 25 figure (because risk increases quite rapidly with age) likely to be much closer to 2 than 531.  It only has to be 10.64, which it may well be, to substantiate the American-based 1500 times figure which you, on the basis of no evidence at all, claim to be 'so untrue as to be laughable'.

 

Age                     Deaths

Up to 14                2
15-44                     531
45-64                   4738
65-74                   7282
75-84                   15962
85+                       20852

 

You can believe what you like. If you choose to think the risk isn't dramatically higher for over 70s than young people (despite what the government believes), that's your choice.

 

I'm wasting no more time on this.  I understand risk, and I understand statistics. I'll go with the statistics - you go with your gut reaction.  

 

 

 

When In a hole, best to stop digging 😂

Edited July 4, 2020 by zap99
Spellcheck

[kruzseeka]

https://www.express.co.uk/travel/cruise/1305019/cruise-ship-cruises-news-deals-holidays-eu-rules

 

Decision may not be ours alone!

[davemorton]

Since we are all looking at numbers and statistics, I was having a little delve into them yesterday.  I live in the area of the UK (outside of London I believe) that has been hit hardest by the virus, yet in all of June, there was only 9 people tested positive for the virus. 

It has changed my view slightly. 

[wowzz]

27 minutes ago, davemorton said:

Since we are all looking at numbers and statistics, I was having a little delve into them yesterday.  I live in the area of the UK (outside of London I believe) that has been hit hardest by the virus, yet in all of June, there was only 9 people tested positive for the virus. 

It has changed my view slightly. 

9 out of how many?

[Selbourne]

4 hours ago, terrierjohn said:

I doubt that the CLIA will agree to follow all the EU cruise proposals wowzz/Selbourne, for the very reasons you suggest, that they would seriously impact on the enjoyment of a cruise.  Maybe it's a bit too early to decide how restrictive things will be, perhaps we should wait for the the CLIA to put forward their ideas before we start writing off cruising until a vaccine is available.

I agree that any restrictions / changes to the cruise experience are pure speculation at present John, but that’s not the driving factor behind our not wanting to book a cruise until we are vaccinated. The whole cruise experience involves being up close and personal to thousands of others in a relatively contained environment, whether that be embarkation / disembarkation / tenders / restaurants / bars / theatres / lounges / cinemas etc etc.
 

We’ve never had Norovirus, even when it’s been on board (we primarily put that down to never using the buffet), but we have sometimes succumbed to the cruise cough or cold that seems to do the rounds. That’s irritating enough, but Covid 19 is a different matter altogether. Some of the potential changes may in fact make for a better cruise experience, but others may make it seem too controlled and unnatural. We will keep an open mind until we know and will keenly read feedback from those who go on the first cruises under the new regulations, but we feel that, until we are vaccinated, we are best to spend our holidays away from mass crowds.

[AchileLauro]

1 hour ago, terrierjohn said:

When you consider that the average length of stay in a care home is under 2 yrs, you can expect that they have a very high mortality rate even in normal times. Still very sad that covid probably brought this forward for many people, but not really unexpected.

I take it that when you say "average length of stay in a care home is under 2 years" you specifically mean care home and do not include residential homes also.

News reports do not seem to differentiate between care  homes and and residential homes which more often than not these days also provide a significant degree of care.

[davemorton]

27 minutes ago, wowzz said:

9 out of how many?

I am presuming 341,366(ish)

[wowzz]

2 minutes ago, davemorton said:

I am presuming 341,366(ish)

So in your area they carried out that many tests, and all were negative bar 9?

[davemorton]

1 minute ago, wowzz said:

So in your area they carried out that many tests, and all were negative bar 9?

*Sigh* No, there are that many people living in my area, and there was 9 confirmed positive tests.  

[terrierjohn]

30 minutes ago, Selbourne said:

I agree that any restrictions / changes to the cruise experience are pure speculation at present John, but that’s not the driving factor behind our not wanting to book a cruise until we are vaccinated. The whole cruise experience involves being up close and personal to thousands of others in a relatively contained environment, whether that be embarkation / disembarkation / tenders / restaurants / bars / theatres / lounges / cinemas etc etc.
 

We’ve never had Norovirus, even when it’s been on board (we primarily put that down to never using the buffet), but we have sometimes succumbed to the cruise cough or cold that seems to do the rounds. That’s irritating enough, but Covid 19 is a different matter altogether. Some of the potential changes may in fact make for a better cruise experience, but others may make it seem too controlled and unnatural. We will keep an open mind until we know and will keenly read feedback from those who go on the first cruises under the new regulations, but we feel that, until we are vaccinated, we are best to spend our holidays away from mass crowds.

We also have never had Noro while on board Selbourne, and we use the buffet every day, often several times, and fortunately we rarely suffer from a cough or cold.  We do spend quite a bit of time in our cabin and on the balcony, so that would be no different to normal.

How different and disturbing the other changes would be we will have to wait and see.  But I am hoping we will be able to go on our Iona cruise in Feb, assuming as I do do that FCO advisories are revoked and that our insurance cover is valid and adequate.

[wowzz]

49 minutes ago, davemorton said:

*Sigh* No, there are that many people living in my area, and there was 9 confirmed positive tests.  

So, if they  carried out 18 tests, 50% were positive!

[Denarius]

6 hours ago, Harry Peterson said:

Given, John, that the current FCO advice means that anyone over 70 or with various underlying health conditions will be uninsured if they choose to cruise, maybe the cruise companies are banking on a much younger market who will be less inclined to compare what’s on offer now with pre-CV days.
 

British nationals aged 70 and over, and those with underlying health conditions such as chronic diseases and diabetes, have been advised not to travel on cruise ships in response to the coronavirus outbreak.
 

Harry

Not necessarily so. Depends on the precise wording of your policy's exclusions. My own annual policy for example, merely states "your travel to a country or specific area or event to which the Travel Advice Unit of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office or the World Health Organisation has advised the public not to travel."

Edited July 4, 2020 by Denarius

[davecttr]

I did a little calculation the other day. How many hours per week do I currently spend closer than 2 metres from people and compared this with a 7 night cruise including travel to the port. The cruise would be equivalent to 120 current land weeks - scary😲