Will you cruise if vaccination is mandatory in order to board?

[wowzz]

2 minutes ago, Joebucks said:

Inversely, who is paying for all of the vaccines and booster shots

Well, in those parts of the world with a public health system, we, the tax payers are paying, although the repayment period will be decades long. 

Can't answer for the US.

[tpwolfe]

On 2/12/2021 at 3:58 PM, voljeep said:

has anyone posted NO yet ? - why would they ?

Because the vaccine was produced so quickly and who knows what the long term efforts are.  I will let all of you be the lab rats to see if there any problems long term.  My niece became paralyzed when she got her shot.  Thanks goodness she recovered.  For me cruising is not worth the risk of problems now or later.

[sverigecruiser]

8 minutes ago, wowzz said:

You do seem to have trouble grasping the difference between medicine and vaccine!

 

So far I see no reason to be afraid of the Covid vaccine.

 

What about the swine flu vaccine? Too many people got too serious side effects from that. Was it worth to get that shot?

[Hlitner]

3 minutes ago, tpwolfe said:

Because the vaccine was produced so quickly and who knows what the long term efforts are.  I will let all of you be the lab rats to see if there any problems long term.  My niece became paralyzed when she got her shot.  Thanks goodness she recovered.  For me cruising is not worth the risk of problems now or later.

Not wanting to get into a debate since a career in healthcare taught me that it is a waste of time to argue with anti-vaxers.  That being said what anti-vaxers forget to mention is what happens to those who do not get vaccinated.  In the case of COVID we know of over 2 million deaths (worldwide) and millions of more (nobody knows the true number) that are now suffering related morbidities (some of these will last a lifetime and also shorten life).   Are vaccines perfect?  Or course not.  But they are sure better then dying a horrible death alone in an isolation bed struggling to take every breath?  And I guess you could ask those that now are suffering from ruined lungs, failed kidneys. severe heart damage, etc. if they wish they had been able to be vaccinated prior to being infected with COVID.

 

Hank

[wowzz]

12 minutes ago, tpwolfe said:

Because the vaccine was produced so quickly

Speed is irrelevant,  it is the number of participants in the trial that is important. Not wanting to have any of the vaccines, when they have been more intensively trialled than any previous vaccines, is illogical.

Edited February 19, 2021 by wowzz

[wowzz]

15 minutes ago, sverigecruiser said:

 

So far I see no reason to be afraid of the Covid vaccine.

 

What about the swine flu vaccine? Too many people got too serious side effects from that. Was it worth to get that shot?

Perhaps you should read the truth about the swine flu vaccine.  

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200918-the-fiasco-of-the-us-swine-flu-affair-of-1976

[navybankerteacher]

The interesting thing about some of these posters who claim to not be anti-vaxxers - but say they are just urging caution.  They might change their minds in the future -- but then every human being is capable of doing that. 

 

At present, anyone who will not take steps to get the vaccine when available IS an antivaxxer.  

 

[tpwolfe]

5 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

At present, anyone who will not take steps to get the vaccine when available IS an antivaxxer.  

 

5 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

The interesting thing about some of these posters who claim to not be anti-vaxxers - but say they are just urging caution.  They might change their minds in the future -- but then every human being is capable of doing that. 

 

At present, anyone who will not take steps to get the vaccine when available IS an antivaxxer.  

 

 

5 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

The interesting thing about some of these posters who claim to not be anti-vaxxers - but say they are just urging caution.  They might change their minds in the future -- but then every human being is capable of doing that. 

 

At present, anyone who will not take steps to get the vaccine when available IS an antivaxxer.  

 

Shouldn’t people have right to choose what they put into their body without being classified?

[wowzz]

3 minutes ago, tpwolfe said:

 

 

Shouldn’t people have right to choose what they put into their body without being classified?

Well, if you are not pro vaccine,  you must therefore by definition be anti vax. 

 

 

 

Edited February 19, 2021 by wowzz

[tpwolfe]

1 minute ago, wowzz said:

Well, if you are not pro vaccine,  you must therefore by definition be anti vax. 

 

 

When did I said I wasn’t pro vaccine?  I been vaccinated all my 63 years.  I’m just not comfortable with this vaccine.  Like I said I want to give it more time to see how it goes.  Cruising isn’t worth it to me if the vaccine is required right now. I wish you can except someone else opinion without classifying them.  From your posts I could classify you but I am not because I  respect open dialogue   and different views.  

[wowzz]

7 minutes ago, tpwolfe said:

23 minutes ago, wowzz said:

Well, if you are not pro vaccine,  you must therefore by definition be anti vax. 

 

 

When did I said I wasn’t pro vaccine?  I been vaccinated all my 63 years.  I’m just not comfortable with this vaccine.  Like I said I want to give it more time to see how it goes.  Cruising isn’t worth it to me if the vaccine is required right now. I wish you can except someone else opinion without classifying them.  From your posts I could classify you but I am not because I  respect open dialogue   and different views.  

Expand  

I just go with the scientific facts. The vaccine is safe, but you seem to want to ignore the facts without any evidence. Your choice, but it is just irrational.

[tpwolfe]

2 minutes ago, wowzz said:

I just go with the scientific facts. The vaccine is safe, but you seem to want to ignore the facts without any evidence. Your choice, but it is just irrational.

Go ahead.  The science can also be wrong.  

[Hlitner]

18 minutes ago, tpwolfe said:

Go ahead.  The science can also be wrong.  

Yes, and so can the statistics on the number of dead (now over 2 million) and millions of morbidity issues which are generally undercounted.   As to "waiting" to get vaccinated you might consider that the longer you wait the greater the odds that you will contract COVID.

 

Hank

[Ride-The-Waves]

Good discussion in the Washington Post this  morning on this issue.  Excepts:

 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s official guidance is that vaccinated people need to keep masking, physical distancing and basically following all pre-vaccine precautions. Those eager to fly across the country to see loved ones might hesitate because they are warned against viewing vaccination as a “free pass to travel.” The only area where the CDC has relented is in its quarantine guidance: It now says that starting 14 days after receiving the second dose of vaccine, and for a period of three months, fully vaccinated people don’t need to quarantine after being exposed to someone with covid-19.

 

While that is surely a relief, it’s hardly a strong selling point. After all, the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are 95 percent effective at preventing symptomatic illness and nearly 100 percent at preventing severe disease. These are astounding results, and essentially mean that covid-19 in a vaccinated person is no worse than a bad cold or the flu.

 

However, because the research isn’t definitive on whether vaccinated people can transmit covid-19, people are advised that they shouldn’t change their lifestyles. Such caution is understandable, but the lack of guidance may cause so much frustration that some people go to the extreme: I’ve had patients talk about discarding masks and going barhopping. Others could question what the purpose of the vaccine is if their lives don’t change at all. It’s not enough to explain the societal goal of reaching herd immunity months or years down the line; we need to articulate freedoms people can enjoy now because of the vaccine.

 

 

I hope the CDC will provide more specific post-vaccination recommendations based on the best available data, even if they are incomplete. There is growing evidence that, just as with many other vaccines, those receiving coronavirus inoculations shed less virus and are less contagious after exposure. Two preliminary studies from Israel found a decline in viral load after the Pfizer vaccine. A preprint reported that the AstraZeneca vaccine reduced positive test results by 67 percent. Data from Moderna’s vaccine also suggest that it reduces asymptomatic infection. Together, these results should allow the CDC to provide a preliminary road map to post-vaccine life.

The easiest decision point is around essential activities people previously considered to be too high-risk. Those who put off medical appointments such as cancer screenings or dental visits should get them taken care of now. Those not working solely because of fear of exposure could return knowing that they’re reasonably protected from serious illness.

[Ride-The-Waves]

5 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

Yes, and so can the statistics on the number of dead (now over 2 million) and millions of morbidity issues which are generally undercounted.   As to "waiting" to get vaccinated you might consider that the longer you wait the greater the odds that you will contract COVID.

 

Hank

Or you could dress up as elderly women as two did in Orlando Florida:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/02/18/florida-women-dress-elderly-vaccine/

 

The coronavirus vaccine is so coveted that two women in Florida went to extremes Wednesday to get inoculated: They dressed as if they were elderly, health officials said.

The women, both younger than 45, “dressed up as grannies,” wearing bonnets, gloves and glasses to disguise themselves as older than 65, the age cutoff to be prioritized to get the coronavirus vaccine in Florida, according to Raul Pino, the director of the health department in Orange County, where Orlando is located. He attributed the deception to growing interest in the vaccine, giving the example of the women while explaining how high demand is in the area.

 

“This is the hottest commodity that is out there right now, so we have to be very careful,” Pino said at a news briefing Thursday.

The geriatric guise is the latest instance of people trying to cut the line to get vaccinated from the deadly virus. Last month, authorities identified a wealthy Canadian couple who had posed as locals in a remote Indigenous community to take doses meant for elders. Meanwhile, an Indiana health department issued a warning earlier this month against what it called “a substantial lack of morality” after people had lied to vaccination site workers about their addresses, jobs and ages.

[NikiPinkston]

I found this interesting & wonder what it portends for other states & future travel.  Hawaii has had strict quarantine and testing requirements, but will allow vaccinated travelers to visit without these restrictions as early March or April:

https://www.hawaii-guide.com/hawaii-covid-vaccine

 

“A potential Spring / Summer 2021 timeline has been proposed for Hawaii vaccination "passport" travel to begin/March - April timeline for Inter-Island Travel, potentially early May for trans-Pacific travel:

In mid-December 2020, we initially received word that Lieutenant Governor Josh Green, who is both a physician and is in charge of Hawaii's Safe Travels program, had said that he would ask the governor to approve travel both trans-Pacific and interisland for anyone who has had a COVID vaccination without further requirements starting in early 2021. For travelers who choose not to get vaccinated, we believe the current restrictions, testing requirements, and quarantine policy are likely to remain in effect for most, if not all, of 2021 and potentially beyond.”

 

BTW, totally on-board with getting the vaccine.  Just waiting to be called.

[broberts]

1 hour ago, tpwolfe said:

 

 

Shouldn’t people have right to choose what they put into their body without being classified?

 

Certainly people should be able to choose whether or not they receive a vaccine. But surely others have a right to know the risk posed to them by the unvaccinated? How could that be done without classification?

[Hlitner]

15 minutes ago, NikiPinkston said:

I found this interesting & wonder what it portends for other states & future travel.  Hawaii has had strict quarantine and testing requirements, but will allow vaccinated travelers to visit without these restrictions as early March or April:

https://www.hawaii-guide.com/hawaii-covid-vaccine

 

“A potential Spring / Summer 2021 timeline has been proposed for Hawaii vaccination "passport" travel to begin/March - April timeline for Inter-Island Travel, potentially early May for trans-Pacific travel:

In mid-December 2020, we initially received word that Lieutenant Governor Josh Green, who is both a physician and is in charge of Hawaii's Safe Travels program, had said that he would ask the governor to approve travel both trans-Pacific and interisland for anyone who has had a COVID vaccination without further requirements starting in early 2021. For travelers who choose not to get vaccinated, we believe the current restrictions, testing requirements, and quarantine policy are likely to remain in effect for most, if not all, of 2021 and potentially beyond.”

 

BTW, totally on-board with getting the vaccine.  Just waiting to be called.

We have been posting (for months) our belief (based on various news articles) that anti-vaxers will likely need to forget International travel for several years as Covid vaccinations will most likely be a requirement to enter most countries.   Some have even speculated that in the USA it could be a requirement for certain domestic related activities such as flying on commercial airlines, staying at some hotels, etc.    So nothing surprising about Hawaii taking a pro vaccine stance as their island status makes that easily enforceable.  I wonder if we will soon see a similar policy from Alaska.

 

Hank

[sverigecruiser]

1 hour ago, wowzz said:

Perhaps you should read the truth about the swine flu vaccine.  

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200918-the-fiasco-of-the-us-swine-flu-affair-of-1976

 

I'm not thinking about 1976 but 2009-10.

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, tpwolfe said:

Go ahead.  The science can also be wrong.  

Absolutely -- but certainly if the "science" can be wrong, it can also be right.

 

And an individual who chooses to go with his gut rather than with what the "science" overwhelmingly recommends has a right to his choice -- but he does not then retain the right to claim he is not an anti-vaxxer --- even a selective anti-vaxxer in that context is an anti-vaxxer.

[evandbob]

2 hours ago, wowzz said:

Well, if you are not pro vaccine,  you must therefore by definition be anti vax. 

 

 

Or, if you are not pro vax, you are a non cruiser.  Does that sound less pejorative or judgmental?  

[2wheelin]

1 hour ago, Hlitner said:

We have been posting (for months) our belief (based on various news articles) that anti-vaxers will likely need to forget International travel for several years as Covid vaccinations will most likely be a requirement to enter most countries.   Some have even speculated that in the USA it could be a requirement for certain domestic related activities such as flying on commercial airlines, staying at some hotels, etc.    So nothing surprising about Hawaii taking a pro vaccine stance as their island status makes that easily enforceable.  I wonder if we will soon see a similar policy from Alaska.

 

Hank

Just to be clear. I did not read in the previous post that Hawaii is requiring vaccination to visit. Just that it will exempt you from testing and possible quarantine or whatever other restrictions they continue.

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, 2wheelin said:

Just to be clear. I did not read in the previous post that Hawaii is requiring vaccination to visit. Just that it will exempt you from testing and possible quarantine or whatever other restrictions they continue.

As if a 14 day quarantine requirement, for example, might not significantly impact the rationale virtually all travelers to Hawaii have for getting on that flight in the first place.  

[Toofarfromthesea]

20 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

I suppose, if we accept these standards,  we will have to accept the fact that there are no facts.

 

 

That is why there is a whole branch of philosophy called epistemology devoted to this question.  Even mathematics, which operates on strict lines of Aristotelian logic to prove things rests on 5 unproven, unprovable, axioms.  We think they are true, but we can't prove that they are true.

[navybankerteacher]

6 minutes ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

 

That is why there is a whole branch of philosophy called epistemology devoted to this question.  Even mathematics, which operates on strict lines of Aristotelian logic to prove things rests on 5 unproven, unprovable, axioms.  We think they are true, but we can't prove that they are true.

In this context (as in virtually all other discussions regarding the application of science) validity trumps truth, which (almost universally) rests on the unprovable; so let’s stick to validity.