Are vaccines the light at the end of the tunnel?

[Christine Frances]

1 hour ago, LGW59 said:

The "freedumb" comment was so not necessary.  Well obviously the current situation in the US is much different than in Canada.  Where did you get Miami from in my post, never said where I am sailing from in MAY 2022!  Hint, it is not Miami.  You can be happy in Canada where you cannot sail, based on your comments.  I am ready to start living again, been the good boy and been 💯 in the bubble for 14 months, time to get on with my 2 Vax life.

 I used Miami as an example    The “eg” was not that obvious sorry.   I defiantly can cruise (have 2 booked) but Canada will not allow cruises until 2022 so Alaska is out for everyone.  
You don’t like my words but you should not be proud of your sarcastic comment either.    Truce

[LGW59]

1 minute ago, Christine Frances said:

 I used Miami as an example    The “eg” was not that obvious sorry.   I defiantly can cruise (have 2 booked) but Canada will not allow cruises until 2022 so Alaska is out for everyone.  
You don’t like my words but you should not be proud of your sarcastic comment either.    Truce

Truce indeed and along with my apologies!

[Ken the cruiser]

So, back to vaccines and being able to cruise again from a US port. Am I understanding this correctly. Each cruise ship seeking to start restricted cruising from a US port, such as the Edge from Ft Lauderdale, must declare which vaccination option they are going to opt for prior to/in conjunction with their Phase 2A protocol plan submission to the CDC. Is that a valid assumption?

 

If so, then is the opposite also true? Until a cruise line chooses which option they plan to opt for regarding a particular ship they want to eventually schedule restricted cruises for out of a US port, they won't be able to submit their Phase 2A plan to CDC. Am I understanding the options correctly?

[markeb]

I think that’s close, Ken. I’m sort of guessing that unless they declare they’re going to require and verify vaccination, the assumption is they’re doing test cruises. So if they submit a plan that meets the vaccine requirements, they can drive on with that plan. So far, I think only NCL has stated it plans to start with a vaccinated population, but I don’t think even they have submitted that as a plan. 

[Ken the cruiser]

9 minutes ago, markeb said:

I think that’s close, Ken. I’m sort of guessing that unless they declare they’re going to require and verify vaccination, the assumption is they’re doing test cruises. So if they submit a plan that meets the vaccine requirements, they can drive on with that plan. So far, I think only NCL has stated it plans to start with a vaccinated population, but I don’t think even they have submitted that as a plan. 

Hopefully, we'll start seeing some movement by Celebrity in the next week or two regarding the Edge. At least that's our hope as we have a B2B2B scheduled to start July 24th.

[D C]

4 hours ago, Christine Frances said:

So if an outbreak happens because people want “freedumb” you are 💯 sure that the ship will be allowed to return to Miami?    Eg.    You will be happy sailing in circles while confined to your cabin?

Do you 'mask up' between bites?  Seriously wondering since that's the post to which you replied. 

[hcat]

Vaccine thread has morphed into another mask thread and alot of back and forth potshots.

 

I have learned alot from the " experts" posting here abt the vaccines

 

.. mask issues are fading to a seasonal rec..as per dr fauci  

[Ken the cruiser]

Looks like the FDA has given the thumbs up for the Pfizer vaccine to be administered to everyone 12 years of age and older. It will definitely be interesting to see how/if the cruise lines fold this new development into their restart plans.

 

FDA authorizes Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine for adolescents | TheHill

 

[docsneeze]

2 hours ago, Ken the cruiser said:

Looks like the FDA has given the thumbs up for the Pfizer vaccine to be administered to everyone 12 years of age and older. It will definitely be interesting to see how/if the cruise lines fold this new development into their restart plans.

 

FDA authorizes Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine for adolescents | TheHill

 

Can't see why not?  Wouldn't everyone feel more safer knowing that others are fully vaccinated?  I am looking forward to the day where we are not only able to cruise safely, but to not have to wear a mask to do so!  That likely won't happen until almost all of us are vaccinated before getting on a ship.

[TeeRick]

11 hours ago, docsneeze said:

Can't see why not?  Wouldn't everyone feel more safer knowing that others are fully vaccinated?  I am looking forward to the day where we are not only able to cruise safely, but to not have to wear a mask to do so!  That likely won't happen until almost all of us are vaccinated before getting on a ship.

It is tricky.  Many parents will not vaccinate their kids as we have discussed here on this thread.  Kids have a different risk for COVID than adults especially older adults.  I believe many parents will evaluate that in their decision and compare to unknown or long term risk of the COVID vaccines.  Even if none have been yet identified.  It will be wait and see for many parents.  Unless of course their school district requires the vaccine.  These parents are vaccine hesitant but not anti-vaccine.  It is a conservative approach and I believe will be by the majority of parents.  Especially since grandma and grandpa are vaccinated and protected.

[K.T.B.]

1 hour ago, TeeRick said:

It is tricky.  Many parents will not vaccinate their kids as we have discussed here on this thread.  Kids have a different risk for COVID than adults especially older adults.  I believe many parents will evaluate that in their decision and compare to unknown or long term risk of the COVID vaccines.  Even if none have been yet identified.  It will be wait and see for many parents.  Unless of course their school district requires the vaccine.  These parents are vaccine hesitant but not anti-vaccine.  It is a conservative approach and I believe will be by the majority of parents.  Especially since grandma and grandpa are vaccinated and protected.

 

They're anti-vaccine until they're not.  If they want their kids to go back to school, odds are they'll need to be vaccinated.

 

And, unless I misheard it this morning, kids are having a far better reaction to the vaccine than adults in terms of fighting off the virus.

[TeeRick]

4 minutes ago, K.T.B. said:

 

They're anti-vaccine until they're not.  If they want their kids to go back to school, odds are they'll need to be vaccinated.

 

And, unless I misheard it this morning, kids are having a far better reaction to the vaccine than adults in terms of fighting off the virus.

Kevin it is my definition.  I put the true anti-vaccine people (anti-Vaxxers) in a very different category.  They choose not to get any vaccine for themselves or their families based upon their beliefs.  But that is different than the COVID vaccine hesitant people.  They are making a risk decision for vaccine versus COVID for themselves and their kids.  They are evaluating this particular vaccine using what they understand (or not understand) about the risk.  Many are wait and see but probably eventually get vaccinated.  It is estimated that the true Anti-Vaxxers are about 15-20% of the US population.  Higher in some other countries particularly in Europe.

[mayleeman]

@TeeRick Vaccine hesitancy because of not knowing vax long-term effects, when it exposes children to a deadly pandemic that has also caused thousands of serious ancillary conditions in children, is just as irresponsible as being anti-vax.

 

Here is my reasoning: Hesitancy is due to what we do not yet know about the vaccine long-term. That lack of information will not be cured until decades go by. Only if data arises proving a negative effect would we know something about LT effects because isn't there always the possibility something could happen? They are citing what we don't know and ignoring what we do know, which is not a comparison of risks. What we know is that the vaccines are extremely effective with extrememy low rates of complications, and that the disease they prevent can be devastating, a risk that can almost be eliminated.

 

It is comparing fear based on conjecture with known risk. That is a weighing arising out if a desire to confirm the vax is harmful. I have not yet met anyone taking this approach whose fear is based on anything but well-publicized rumors or "my friend told me about someone . . ." 

 

I hope you would not give that same thoughtful consideration to people avoiding childhood vaccines in general because of Jenny McCarthy and the debunked/defrocked/fraud-pushing Lancet "study" on autism author.

Edited May 11, 2021 by mayleeman

[markeb]

The two military hospitals in the area administering vaccine have posts out today that they won't be scheduling the 12-15 year old group until there are recommendations from the vaccine advisory group. I would expect that soonest.

 

This really pushes us into dealing with perceived risks. And perceived risks involving parents and their children. That's an area where emotion is capable of overwhelming logic, and logic is still fuzzy. All evidence submitted to the FDA is that the vaccine is safe and effective. There really doesn't appear to be a any reason to expect long term negative effects to the vaccine. But the perceived risk of significant disease in children is still low (maybe not as low as perceived). If the vaccines continue to be successful, they'll be the next unvaccinated group, and you'll see them rise in the percentage of hospitalizations, but it would take a major change for them to take on the percentages seen in any of the older age groups. I think the benefit of vaccination exceeds any perceived risks, but I don't have kids...

[TeeRick]

58 minutes ago, mayleeman said:

@TeeRick Vaccine hesitancy because of not knowing vax long-term effects, when it exposes children to a deadly pandemic that has also caused thousands of serious ancillary conditions in children, is just as irresponsible as being anti-vax.

 

Here is my reasoning: Hesitancy is due to what we do not yet know about the vaccine long-term. That lack of information will not be cured until decades go by. Only if data arises proving a negative effect would we know something about LT effects because isn't there always the possibility something could happen? They are citing what we don't know and ignoring what we do know, which is not a comparison of risks. What we know is that the vaccines are extremely effective with extrememy low rates of complications, and that the disease they prevent can be devastating, a risk that can almost be eliminated.

 

It is comparing fear based on conjecture with known risk. That is a weighing arising out if a desire to confirm the vax is harmful. I have not yet met anyone taking this approach whose fear is based on anything but well-publicized rumors or "my friend told me about someone . . ." 

 

I hope you would not give that same thoughtful consideration to people avoiding childhood vaccines in general because of Jenny McCarthy and the debunked/defrocked/fraud-pushing Lancet "study" on autism author.

What you say is my personal feeling as well.  But it is an opinion based on my own vaccine and research knowledge.  But I was simply pointing out my own distinction and definition of true Anti-vaccine (Jenny McCarthy) activists as opposed to the vaccine hesitant people for this particular disease and vaccine.  Even if I don’t personally agree with their reasoning for being hesitant, I do understand why some are hesitant.  I am not going to judge other people.  My own well educated brother refuses to get the vaccine.  I have spent a lot of time trying to convince him.  But no success.  I am using science and data.  Reasonable to me.  Not reasonable to him.  Unknown fears which he cannot even define.  But he is not at all an Anti-Vaxxer.  He is waiting to see if other safety issues are discovered and feels relatively safe from COVID for his own reasons.

[Oceangoer2]

1 hour ago, mayleeman said:

Here is my reasoning: Hesitancy is due to what we do not yet know about the vaccine long-term. That lack of information will not be cured until decades go by.

And here is my reasoning.....if you had a potentially serious heart condition that required surgery and there was a newly and reasonably tested operation that would give you a 95% chance, would you not take it because decades hadn't passed wherein it was tested long term and proven to be life-saving?  We can't wait decades to get our WORLD, not just your country, going...... economically and socially.  Life presents chance and I think this vaccine gives me the protection as best it can for now.  The boosters will be required no doubt to update and further protect.

Edited May 11, 2021 by Oceangoer2

[docsneeze]

24 minutes ago, markeb said:

The two military hospitals in the area administering vaccine have posts out today that they won't be scheduling the 12-15 year old group until there are recommendations from the vaccine advisory group. I would expect that soonest.

 

This really pushes us into dealing with perceived risks. And perceived risks involving parents and their children. That's an area where emotion is capable of overwhelming logic, and logic is still fuzzy. All evidence submitted to the FDA is that the vaccine is safe and effective. There really doesn't appear to be a any reason to expect long term negative effects to the vaccine. But the perceived risk of significant disease in children is still low (maybe not as low as perceived). If the vaccines continue to be successful, they'll be the next unvaccinated group, and you'll see them rise in the percentage of hospitalizations, but it would take a major change for them to take on the percentages seen in any of the older age groups. I think the benefit of vaccination exceeds any perceived risks, but I don't have kids...

Cruise ship.  We need to focus on this subject in the context of a cruise ship.  Lot of brilliant people on this thread but still need to acknowledge the potential increased risk of a cruise ship and vaccinate 12-15 y/o accordingly.  If you want to cruise, you need the shot.  As a researcher, this is no brainer as 12 and above usually evaluated with adults.  Studies so far show 100% efficacy!  As parent of 3 y/o, will vaccinate my child but additional safety data will be available by late Fall when that decision is made.  As pediatric immunologist, this vaccine is apparently the safest and most effective one developed.  Key word apparently.  Where would we be if we had the same attitude about the.polio vaccine in the 50s?

[markeb]

5 minutes ago, docsneeze said:

Where would we be if we had the same attitude about the.polio vaccine in the 50s?

 

I do not disagree with anything you say. Different medical background, but no arguments on the medicine. I have no doubt the actual benefits demonstrated outweigh the actual demonstrated risks. We'll see if that's relevant.

 

It's not the 50's. I expect the vaccine advisory group to recommend the vaccine to the 12-15 age group. Every parent out there is being bombarded with information. Much of it of questionable value, but still information. If their personal pediatrician recommends the vaccine, and they trust them, many if not most of those will have their child vaccinated. If the pediatrician waffles,  which some will, they likely won't. I will be shocked if school districts require it in much of the country.

 

And the cruise lines have their own set of decisions. They're requiring them for the Caribbean based departures this summer, but to date none of them have submitted vaccine requirements as part of their plans under the conditional sail order for potential US departures.

[docsneeze]

9 minutes ago, markeb said:

 

I do not disagree with anything you say. Different medical background, but no arguments on the medicine. I have no doubt the actual benefits demonstrated outweigh the actual demonstrated risks. We'll see if that's relevant.

 

It's not the 50's. I expect the vaccine advisory group to recommend the vaccine to the 12-15 age group. Every parent out there is being bombarded with information. Much of it of questionable value, but still information. If their personal pediatrician recommends the vaccine, and they trust them, many if not most of those will have their child vaccinated. If the pediatrician waffles,  which some will, they likely won't. I will be shocked if school districts require it in much of the country.

 

And the cruise lines have their own set of decisions. They're requiring them for the Caribbean based departures this summer, but to date none of them have submitted vaccine requirements as part of their plans under the conditional sail order for potential US departures.

In California, the state universities and colleges have mandated vaccines for students to return to campus.  I anticipate cruise ships will do the same.  Interestingly, Dr. Gottleib is a frequent commentator and very accurate in his forecasts.  Sits on board at Pfizer and advisor to NCL so likely he will push to vaccinate before cruising.  Of course, as we all know, if you put 10 medical experts in a room, you will get 10 different opinions.  

[markeb]

1 minute ago, docsneeze said:

In California, the state universities and colleges have mandated vaccines for students to return to campus.  I anticipate cruise ships will do the same.  Interestingly, Dr. Gottleib is a frequent commentator and very accurate in his forecasts.  Sits on board at Pfizer and advisor to NCL so likely he will push to vaccinate before cruising.  Of course, as we all know, if you put 10 medical experts in a room, you will get 10 different opinions.  

 

I've seen the college and university requirements. Public schools will be emotional. NCL appears to be moving to mandating vaccines, although it's unclear what they have or will propose under the CSO. They're certainly the only cruise line that's been somewhat public in that regard.

 

At least it's only 10 different opinions. The old joke is that if you put 2 lawyers in a room, you'll get at least 3 legal opinions...

[K.T.B.]

2 hours ago, TeeRick said:

Kevin it is my definition.  I put the true anti-vaccine people (anti-Vaxxers) in a very different category.  They choose not to get any vaccine for themselves or their families based upon their beliefs.  But that is different than the COVID vaccine hesitant people.  They are making a risk decision for vaccine versus COVID for themselves and their kids.  They are evaluating this particular vaccine using what they understand (or not understand) about the risk.  Many are wait and see but probably eventually get vaccinated.  It is estimated that the true Anti-Vaxxers are about 15-20% of the US population.  Higher in some other countries particularly in Europe.

 

I have friends who are not anti-vaxxers, but they didn't want to get vaccinated because of them being so "unknown".  BUT the moment they got a great deal on a cruise, they got their J&J shot.  Not kidding.

 

They didn't do it for their health, they did it 'cause they wanna cruise dammit!    Whatever it takes, I suppose.

[4774Papa]

48 minutes ago, TeeRick said:

What you say is my personal feeling as well.  But it is an opinion based on my own vaccine and research knowledge.  But I was simply pointing out my own distinction and definition of true Anti-vaccine (Jenny McCarthy) activists as opposed to the vaccine hesitant people for this particular disease and vaccine.  Even if I don’t personally agree with their reasoning for being hesitant, I do understand why some are hesitant.  I am not going to judge other people.  My own well educated brother refuses to get the vaccine.  I have spent a lot of time trying to convince him.  But no success.  I am using science and data.  Reasonable to me.  Not reasonable to him.  Unknown fears which he cannot even define.  But he is not at all an Anti-Vaxxer.  He is waiting to see if other safety issues are discovered and feels relatively safe from COVID for his own reasons.

TeeRick,

I agree with your post on anti vexers v. some being hesitant.

In particular, we all know the risk of death or serious complications from COVID19 is very, very low for children under 16.   Also, that the risk is much, much higher the older one is and with diabetes, HBP, obesity, etc.

Just look at the stats,  the vaccination rates for older people are way up there, with over 2/3 of seniors over 65 being fully vaccinated and something like 82% with a single dose.

CDC did a comparison for the risk:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investigations-discovery/hospitalization-death-by-age.html

 

I understand why some parents that are still young will chose not to be vaccinated and especially not vaccinate their kids.   Also, I have talked to many seniors, most have take the vaccine, however, I know a couple that have had COVID19 and were not hospitalized or seriously ill.  They have some immunity from the virus, at least for a while.   I don't agree, but I understand their choice.  The vaccines haven't been approved fully at this point.  Perhaps when the vaccines are fully approved, more will chose vaccination.

[lostchild]

The problem with non vaccinated kids are not as high for health problem but for the risk quarantine when one was found with covid because of symptoms.   My son is currently in quarantine from school because one of his classmate on his sport team tested positive.   That person just got back from Cuncan on a family vacation and came down with symptoms and tested positive after went back to school for a day.   So now everyone in the team and everyone in classes with the team are under quarantine for 10 days.   Our kid is fine without symptoms for 5 days already.   We will be taking him to do a test today.   But because of this exposure, we can't take him to visit grandma on Mother's Day.  We don't want him to pass covid to my nieces and nephews even though all the adults are vaccinated.

 

I don't want this to happen on a cruise.   I will not go back on a cruise unless the entire ship is vaccinated or if the cruise line will spell out exactly what will happen when someone is found with covid while cruising.

[K.T.B.]

52 minutes ago, Oceangoer2 said:

And here is my reasoning.....if you had a potentially serious heart condition that required surgery and there was a newly and reasonably tested operation that would give you a 95% chance, would you not take it because decades hadn't passed wherein it was tested long term and proven to be life-saving?  We can't wait decades to get our WORLD, not just your country, going...... economically and socially.  Life presents chance and I think this vaccine gives me the protection as best it can for now.  The boosters will be required no doubt to update and further protect.

 

Over a decade ago I had some rather major neck surgery performed on me.  I had very good odds of pulling through just fine, but there was a chance things could go wrong.  I had a blown disc pressing up against my spinal cord.  I forget the odds that I could end up paralyzed after the operation (I think 10-15% chance), but I had a 100% chance of eventually being paralyzed if I did nothing.  I know you didn't ask me that question, but hell yes I'd do it.  Just like I got my shot. 

 

Always got with the odds.  

[Ken the cruiser]

23 minutes ago, markeb said:

NCL appears to be moving to mandating vaccines, although it's unclear what they have or will propose under the CSO. They're certainly the only cruise line that's been somewhat public in that regard.

And yet none of their ships are near any US ports, such as the ones in Florida and Texas, where they are allowing crews to come ashore to get vaccinated. I wonder where they are getting their crews 100% vaccinated?