Jump to content

With the new Vaccine information when it will be possible to cruise normally


Traveler

Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, Ray said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-55244122

People with allergies advised NOT to get vaccine 

This is good to know, especially since they said it's similar to the flu shot. My younger daughter has a mild egg allergy and always gets a reaction to the flu shot that's a bit worse than most. So we'll know to keep an eye out when she gets her Covid shots down the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Ray said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-55244122

People with allergies advised NOT to get vaccine 

i wonder what constitutes "significant" allergies.  

Is a gluten allergy that results in severe reaction to gluten applicable?

Is a peanut allergy that results in an anaphylactic reaction applicable? 

Is you are allergic to a lot of different things but with a mild reaction is that "significant"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The virus hasn't changed so the only thing that will tame the virus is the vaccine.   Mass vaccinations will be required before the CDC will allow cruising.  Once 50% to 60% of America has been vaccinated numbers will begin the downward trend to the happy place where the CDC will allow cruising to commence.  I'm estimating the happy place for the CDC will be 2 to 3 months after 50% to 60% have been vaccinated.  That's when the data should be in evidence that the downward trend is continuing.  

We have been promised the vaccine will be available to the masses in the "summer".  The summer starts June 21 and runs through September 21. 

The best case scenario is June availability and first actual immunity in July based on the 28 days it takes to reach stated immunity.  Once it's known that 50% to 60% of America has reached immunity and the downward trend is in evidence the CDC might relax and allow test cruises to commence as early as September.

A less desirable scenario is September availability (still summer) and first actual immunity in October based on the 28 days to reach state immunity.  If that is when we reach 50% to 60% of America is immune the CDC could relax and allow test cruises to commence in December once the downward trend they seek is in evidence. 

There could be a delay if another wave through the unvaccinated commences in October like it did this year.  The downward trend from the vaccinated could be offset by the fall wave striking the unvaccinated causing numbers to decline more slowly.    

The worst case scenario involves the unvaccinated keeping numbers elevated through January and February of 2022 causing a delay to mass cruising through this time frame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, twangster said:

The virus hasn't changed so the only thing that will tame the virus is the vaccine.   Mass vaccinations will be required before the CDC will allow cruising.  Once 50% to 60% of America has been vaccinated numbers will begin the downward trend to the happy place where the CDC will allow cruising to commence.  I'm estimating the happy place for the CDC will be 2 to 3 months after 50% to 60% have been vaccinated.  That's when the data should be in evidence that the downward trend is continuing.  

We have been promised the vaccine will be available to the masses in the "summer".  The summer starts June 21 and runs through September 21. 

The best case scenario is June availability and first actual immunity in July based on the 28 days it takes to reach stated immunity.  Once it's known that 50% to 60% of America has reached immunity and the downward trend is in evidence the CDC might relax and allow test cruises to commence as early as September.

A less desirable scenario is September availability (still summer) and first actual immunity in October based on the 28 days to reach state immunity.  If that is when we reach 50% to 60% of America is immune the CDC could relax and allow test cruises to commence in December once the downward trend they seek is in evidence. 

There could be a delay if another wave through the unvaccinated commences in October like it did this year.  The downward trend from the vaccinated could be offset by the fall wave striking the unvaccinated causing numbers to decline more slowly.    

The worst case scenario involves the unvaccinated keeping numbers elevated through January and February of 2022 causing a delay to mass cruising through this time frame.

What chance of getting 50-60% of the US vaccinated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, KWofPerth said:

What chance of getting 50-60% of the US vaccinated?

Depends.  I'm surprised daily to learn of another example of someone who still thinks it's a hoax.  

I guess if I were one of them (which I am not) I would find no reason to take a vaccine for something that isn't real.  Combine that with long time anti-vaxxers and there may be enough to keep COVID numbers elevated longer than required.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, twangster said:

Depends.  I'm surprised daily to learn of another example of someone who still thinks it's a hoax.  

I guess if I were one of them (which I am not) I would find no reason to take a vaccine for something that isn't real.  Combine that with long time anti-vaxxers and there may be enough to keep COVID numbers elevated longer than required.  

There are obviously morons who would call COVID a hoax or are anti-vaxxers anyway but there are some who have reason to be skeptical of the vaccine and as a result, that could create issues in months to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peanut allergies are said to occur in 1.5% to 3% of children in the Western world.  

I have family members who have significant allergies that rise to the level where they might be ineligible for at least one vaccine.  

This is the risk when emergency use authorizations are employed.   The general public becomes part of the testing phase.  

As vaccine distribution continues there will hopefully be no more surprises but if there are that could also set us back.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, twangster said:

Peanut allergies are said to occur in 1.5% to 3% of children in the Western world.  

I have family members who have significant allergies that rise to the level where they might be ineligible for at least one vaccine.  

This is the risk when emergency use authorizations are employed.   The general public becomes part of the testing phase.  

As vaccine distribution continues there will hopefully be no more surprises but if there are that could also set us back.  

people with allergies will be getting the vaccine later, even now for other vaccine they can get it but under medical supervise for few hours we will see what will be done in Pfizer vaccine , maybe other vaccine will be more suitable.  

Now , after the FDA approved the Pfizer vaccine we will see how fast the process will be and how many people will be willing to get it .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will be ready for the back lash with this opinion but I got to say this!

I know this is a blog with opinions being the main responses from all of us, and I know I don't have to log in, open the web site or scroll thru all these OPINIONS, but in my opinion (ha ha) most of the time it's a great place to make us all feel better with hopeful post, that will lead to us all to cruising again.  

This horrible situation we are all in has affected everyone of us in some way or another!  

I am not usually like this with my kumbaya moment, but I hope it puts a smile on some people's faces today.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, twangster said:

Depends.  I'm surprised daily to learn of another example of someone who still thinks it's a hoax.  

I guess if I were one of them (which I am not) I would find no reason to take a vaccine for something that isn't real.  Combine that with long time anti-vaxxers and there may be enough to keep COVID numbers elevated longer than required.  

I dont know a lot of people that think its a hoax, i do know a fair number that have looked at the numbers and concluded that for those that are younger and in good health the results of getting it are generally in the cold/flu category and therefore arent convinced that taking a vaccine with unknown long term effects to avoid it may not be optimal. Generally of the opinion that people who are older/have underlying conditions should be taking it though as the risk/reward is very different at that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, jticarruthers said:

I dont know a lot of people that think its a hoax, i do know a fair number that have looked at the numbers and concluded that for those that are younger and in good health the results of getting it are generally in the cold/flu category and therefore arent convinced that taking a vaccine with unknown long term effects to avoid it may not be optimal.

This could be a dangerous gamble. There have been enough reports over the last 10 months of people who were otherwise healthy -- early / mid 20s, active, non-smokers, good diet, not overweight / asthmatic / other risk category -- yet landed in a hospital on a ventilator for 2-3 weeks, that those who are of this mindset really do need to be careful and not treat this cavalierly. I get not wanting to be a guinea pig for a totally new vaccine, but this virus triggers such randomly strong symptoms and immune reactions that no one should consider themselves safe or low-risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/10/2020 at 6:05 PM, twangster said:

i wonder what constitutes "significant" allergies.  

Is a gluten allergy that results in severe reaction to gluten applicable?

Is a peanut allergy that results in an anaphylactic reaction applicable? 

Is you are allergic to a lot of different things but with a mild reaction is that "significant"?

I can't recall where I read it, and you'll have to also factor in my ever-decreasing memory, but I'm fairly certain I read from a British news source that they were considering individuals with a history of anaphylactic reactions to be "significant."  Basically, if you should be carrying an Epipen (which I also believe was used to successfully reverse the reaction in both cases), you're at risk.  Of course, that list could be subject to grow as we learn more, or perhaps not. ??‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, USCG Teacher said:

I can't recall where I read it, and you'll have to also factor in my ever-decreasing memory, but I'm fairly certain I read from a British news source that they were considering individuals with a history of anaphylactic reactions to be "significant."  Basically, if you should be carrying an Epipen (which I also believe was used to successfully reverse the reaction in both cases), you're at risk.  Of course, that list could be subject to grow as we learn more, or perhaps not. ??‍♂️

I read the same article (link posted elsewhere in this thread, or a similar one, by @Ray). It's not anaphylaxis, but I can't remember the correct word now. Very close to anaphylaxis, but instead of going into respiratory distress as the throat swells shut, it's somewhat "milder" and doesn't pose an immediate risk of death; the article described it as something like generalized swelling / hives, some shortness of breath. Also noted that it does require monitoring by a medical doctor / nurse for a few hours to make sure it doesn't turn into anything, and that's why people who have a history of this particular reaction (and probably also those who have actual anaphylactic reactions to things) will have to wait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, JLMoran said:

This could be a dangerous gamble. There have been enough reports over the last 10 months of people who were otherwise healthy -- early / mid 20s, active, non-smokers, good diet, not overweight / asthmatic / other risk category -- yet landed in a hospital on a ventilator for 2-3 weeks, that those who are of this mindset really do need to be careful and not treat this cavalierly. I get not wanting to be a guinea pig for a totally new vaccine, but this virus triggers such randomly strong symptoms and immune reactions that no one should consider themselves safe or low-risk.

Agreed, there are risk's both ways. Wasnt saying i see it as a slam dunk either way, just that i think there is a legitimate discussion not just "you are an idiot anti-vaxer".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Once anti-vaxxers can't attend movie theaters, restaurants, bars, flights, cruises, hotels etc...that may change those whose minds were not fully made up or on the fence to get it...

 

I just hope the whole restrictions thing doesn't stay in place...masks, social distancing AND vaccincated...that wont sit well with me or many others..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Latest news from Richard Fain.

https://www.royalcaribbeanblog.com/2020/12/14/royal-caribbean-chairman-ceo-says-vaccines-not-new-protocols-will-be-what-gets-cruises

"vaccines, not new protocols, will be what gets cruises going again"

The question is at what point will we have vaccinated enough to start opening up society again.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/abc-news-coronavirus-poll

  • The majority of Americans indicate they intend to get the coronavirus vaccine… eventually.
  • Two in five (40%) say they will get the vaccine as soon as it is available, particularly those over 65 years in age (57%).
  • Almost half (44%) say they will wait a bit, particularly minority respondents (52%).
  • Fewer than one in five (15%) say the will never get the vaccine, particularly Republicans (26%).
  • Only about a third (39%) of Americans think states should make the vaccine mandatory for residents.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, twangster said:

Latest news from Richard Fain.

https://www.royalcaribbeanblog.com/2020/12/14/royal-caribbean-chairman-ceo-says-vaccines-not-new-protocols-will-be-what-gets-cruises

"vaccines, not new protocols, will be what gets cruises going again"

The question is at what point will we have vaccinated enough to start opening up society again.  

 

Well it started today in NYC , 1 down 382199999 to go ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, twangster said:

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/abc-news-coronavirus-poll

  • The majority of Americans indicate they intend to get the coronavirus vaccine… eventually.
  • Two in five (40%) say they will get the vaccine as soon as it is available, particularly those over 65 years in age (57%).
  • Almost half (44%) say they will wait a bit, particularly minority respondents (52%).
  • Fewer than one in five (15%) say the will never get the vaccine, particularly Republicans (26%).
  • Only about a third (39%) of Americans think states should make the vaccine mandatory for residents.

Now we need to do the same survey among cruisers ...   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting...as it seems like for the past 9 months, its all been about how we can cruise safely with protocols in place during the pandemic..now, that seems to be a moot point....ultimately it was probably always going to come down to wide-spread vaccine roll outs.

 

Seems like alot of money and time and resources went into plan A, which really never came to fruition. Will there be somethings they learned and implement from it?...probably..but at the end of the day, that will have had no bearing on cruising resuming...imho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it becomes about timing.  Not only availability timing but acceptance timing.

If only 15% refuse it in the long term that should be enough to make a serious impact and hopefully eradicate it.  

I'm hoping once more and more have been vaccinated the "delayers" will come around and get on board more quickly.  They intend to take it but are expressing concern.  Once millions and millions take it and survive that will hopefully show them it's okay.

26 minutes ago, Traveler said:

Now we need to do the same survey among cruisers ..

I suspect cruisers are well represented in national polling.  On numerous cruise forums we see the mask debate play out not far from how we see it play out in society.  People don't change their core thinking just because they travel.  This past weekend there were numerous mask issues on planes leading to people being removed.  The same would occur in America on cruise ships and the CDC knows it, they know Americans, they read the news too.   

The "resistors" will always resist which is their right in a free and open society.  Their actions will delay the inevitable (eridating the virus).

What I am hoping is that they have underestimated when general availability will occur to keep expectations low.  If we could reach the masses or the 40% identified in the poll above before the summer that would be huge.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In an interview today HHS Secretary Alex Azar reiterated the summer timeframe but went on to say that with the prospect of additional vaccines coming such as the J&J single dose vaccine he hopes that moves general availability into April or May.  

At this point every month matters.  If that comes to fruition it could impact the date of a restart and the subsequent mass cruise date.

Getting critical mass before a future potential wave next fall would be significant.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moderna is next to get the approval , 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/15/health/covid-moderna-vaccine.html#click=https://t.co/C2rHRZieHZ

"The review by the F.D.A. confirms Moderna’s earlier assessment that its vaccine had an efficacy rate of 94.1 percent in a trial of 30,000 people. Side effects, including fever, headache and fatigue, were unpleasant but not dangerous, the agency found."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just got approved here in Canada..168,000 doses by end of December...drop in the bucket as that's a 2 step vaccine....but its a start...gives us about 250,000 doses from Pfizer and Moderna(enough for 125,000 people)

 

Positive news....but now we need this rolled out in large numbers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, no one that I am aware of from any of the pharmaceutical companies that will have vaccines in circulation by January or from reputable virologists are talking about "eradicating" the SARS-CoV-2 virus. What vaccine producers and public health officials are hoping for is a reduction in the disease burden of the virus secondary to the introduction of vaccines.

I can see a scenario where new case numbers continue to increase at a lower rate but hospitalizations and deaths decline. These two data points - hospitalizations and deaths - are key markers for disease burden. If they decline, the vaccine is doing what experts thought it would.

Yet the media will be rife with reports that case numbers aren't declining as anticipated and the "dire consequences" of vaccine failure. State and local governments will continue to renew or implement new, more useless and unnecessary mitigation measures with little public health benefit derived from them. Cruising won't restart because the CDC is unlikely to end it's warnings for Americans to avoid cruising until such time as the US prevalence rate is well below 5% and probably below 3%.

I hate to be a buzz killer but people need to understand that the introduction of a vaccine, even at scale, is not a guarantee that the virus will be "eradicated." What we need to be tuned into and cheer is that fewer people are getting hospitalized and a whole lot less people are dying from COVID-19 complications. I think we are going to see measurable declines in both of these data points in 45-60 days.

Get ready to obtain your COVID vaccination or antibodies present passport to board a cruise ship. The requirement is probably legal. CLIA, the CDC and possibly DHS (which would require it through regulatory authority) will recommend it.  It's coming. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, JeffB said:

Just to be clear, no one that I am aware of from any of the pharmaceutical companies that will have vaccines in circulation by January or from reputable virologists are talking about "eradicating" the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

No one may be publicly talking about it, but it 100% should be the goal. Whether that goal is short- or medium-term, it needs to be an end goal. We eradicated Smallpox, we can eradicate Covid-19.

My $0.02

36 minutes ago, JeffB said:

What we need to be tuned into and cheer is that fewer people are getting hospitalized and a whole lot less people are dying from COVID-19 complications. I think we are going to see measurable declines in both of these data points in 45-60 days.

Totally agree with this, and it's absolutely going to be something to celebrate when we hit that mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KWofPerth said:

Joe, do you have any insight into how long it will take to know whether a vaccine confers immunity from infection (as opposed to immunity from the disease once infected)?  Or perhaps, how long until we know whether a vaccinated individual can still spread the virus if infected?

No, not a clue on that. I think that's something that will require long-term observation and analysis to know.

To be clear, my understanding (based on an undergrad class on immunology) is that no vaccine actually confers immunity from infection, since "infection" means that the virus/bacteria has gotten into your system and started replicating within your cells. All the vaccine does is prep your immune system so that it responds rapidly enough to wipe out that early infection before you reach the symptomatic stage and visible signs of the disease.

If there are others here on the board with better knowledge of vaccines and immunology, I'll be happy to learn whether that understanding is wrong or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, JLMoran said:

No, not a clue on that. I think that's something that will require long-term observation and analysis to know.

To be clear, my understanding (based on an undergrad class on immunology) is that no vaccine actually confers immunity from infection, since "infection" means that the virus/bacteria has gotten into your system and started replicating within your cells. All the vaccine does is prep your immune system so that it responds rapidly enough to wipe out that early infection before you reach the symptomatic stage and visible signs of the disease.

If there are others here on the board with better knowledge of vaccines and immunology, I'll be happy to learn whether that understanding is wrong or not.

OK, that makes sense actually. So what we don't know is if individuals can be asymptomatic spreaders before their immune system fights off the coronavirus that has just entered their system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KWofPerth said:

OK, that makes sense actually. So what we don't know is if individuals can be asymptomatic spreaders before their immune system fights off the coronavirus that has just entered their system. 

Disclaimer: I'm not a virologist or immunologist; I'm a Physician Assistant, now retired after 22 years of Emergency Medicine practice. I write about the SARS-CoV-2 and COVID in a completely unrelated blog that I manage. If there is something to read about the virus and the disease it produces, I've probably seen it and have reviewed it with a medical eye. I want to make sure that if I am asked about the virus or the disease it produces, COVID, and write about it, I'm not passing bad information.

Researchers believe that an infected individual will infect others in proportion to the viral load of that infected person. Multiple factors are determinants of a given viral load. Super-Spreader events are believed to have circumstances where very high viral loads are present and more people are easily infected in a ratio that exceeds the accepted R value of 1-3 (the average number of people one infected person will infect). Theoretically, the lower the viral load (virions) of an infected individual, the less people he/she will infect.

It is also believed that COVID severity is a function of the quantity of virions a SARS-CoV-2 infected individual actually make the trip from the infected persons exhalations to then be inhaled by and find a home in the respiratory tract of the naïve person. The more virions received by the new host, the faster and more plentiful the replication and this is especially true in a naïve host with no immunity at all to the virus.*

By extension it may be accurate to say that a vaccinated person, having already been prepared by the vaccine to build antibodies will respond much more rapidly to invading virions diminishing their number and potentially making that individual less infectious......theoretically, and asswering your question, diminishing asymptomatic spread. TBF, we just don't know if this will actually occur outside of a lab where these theories are developed. The lack of certainty here is what has made vaccine producers reluctant to make claims that the vaccines they developed will stop or slow the spread of the virus.  They might. They might not. It will be a while before scientists and medical researchers will be willing to say, yes, the vaccine is slowing the spread ..... and if that is the case, then, like some diseases, SARS-CoV-2 will be eradicated. But, lets take one step at a time. The goal right now is to reduce disease burden as defined by hospitalizations and deaths. 

* A comment on the human body's immune system. There are two parts: adaptive and innate. Vaccines target the adaptive system directly prompting antibodies to be developed and prepared to meet and defeat the real thing should it be contracted. Vaccines also have a stimulating effect on the innate system. There are several classes of innate cells. You may have heard of Killer T Cells. These are examples of an innate immune system cell. They can be provoked by the presence of a manufactured, synthetic look-alike virus (a vaccine). In part, the presence of these in a competent immune system can meet the virus, recognize it as foreign, neutralize it and completely prevent or lessen COVID symptoms. Replication of the virus is impeded, less virions are reproduced in the host, less illness ensues.

The 96 year old grandma who tested positive for COVID and was supposed to succumb to it but didn't get sick at all is demonstrative of this phenomena. Unfortunately not everyone has powerful innate immunity to SARS-CoV-2 but most healthy people have some; its thought that in the absence of a vaccine, the degree of innate immunity may determine, in part, the severity of COVID.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, JeffB said:

Disclaimer: I'm not a virologist or immunologist; I'm a Physician Assistant, now retired after 22 years of Emergency Medicine practice. I write about the SARS-CoV-2 and COVID in a completely unrelated blog that I manage. If there is something to read about the virus and the disease it produces, I've probably seen it and have reviewed it with a medical eye. I want to make sure that if I am asked about the virus or the disease it produces, COVID, and write about it, I'm not passing bad information.

Researchers believe that an infected individual will infect others in proportion to the viral load of that infected person. Multiple factors are determinants of a given viral load. Super-Spreader events are believed to have circumstances where very high viral loads are present and more people are easily infected in a ratio that exceeds the accepted R value of 1-3 (the average number of people one infected person will infect). Theoretically, the lower the viral load (virions) of an infected individual, the less people he/she will infect.

It is also believed that COVID severity is a function of the quantity of virions a SARS-CoV-2 infected individual actually make the trip from the infected persons exhalations to then be inhaled by and find a home in the respiratory tract of the naïve person. The more virions received by the new host, the faster and more plentiful the replication and this is especially true in a naïve host with no immunity at all to the virus.*

By extension it may be accurate to say that a vaccinated person, having already been prepared by the vaccine to build antibodies will respond much more rapidly to invading virions diminishing their number and potentially making that individual less infectious......theoretically, and asswering your question, diminishing asymptomatic spread. TBF, we just don't know if this will actually occur outside of a lab where these theories are developed. The lack of certainty here is what has made vaccine producers reluctant to make claims that the vaccines they developed will stop or slow the spread of the virus.  They might. They might not. It will be a while before scientists and medical researchers will be willing to say, yes, the vaccine is slowing the spread ..... and if that is the case, then, like some diseases, SARS-CoV-2 will be eradicated. But, lets take one step at a time. The goal right now is to reduce disease burden as defined by hospitalizations and deaths. 

* A comment on the human body's immune system. There are two parts: adaptive and innate. Vaccines target the adaptive system directly prompting antibodies to be developed and prepared to meet and defeat the real thing should it be contracted. Vaccines also have a stimulating effect on the innate system. There are several classes of innate cells. You may have heard of Killer T Cells. These are examples of an innate immune system cell. They can be provoked by the presence of a manufactured, synthetic look-alike virus (a vaccine). In part, the presence of these in a competent immune system can meet the virus, recognize it as foreign, neutralize it and completely prevent or lessen COVID symptoms. Replication of the virus is impeded, less virions are reproduced in the host, less illness ensues.

The 96 year old grandma who tested positive for COVID and was supposed to succumb to it but didn't get sick at all is demonstrative of this phenomena. Unfortunately not everyone has powerful innate immunity to SARS-CoV-2 but most healthy people have some; its thought that in the absence of a vaccine, the degree of innate immunity may determine, in part, the severity of COVID.    

Thanks for the detailed response JeffB. This has answered some nagging queries I have had since Pfizer first announced its interim Phase III results.

To summarise, we do not yet know if the vaccine will diminish an individual's ability to spread the virus, but in theory there is a strong likelihood that it will. And if so, this will reduce the virus' opportunities to replicate across the broader population, assuming we all take our shots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It ain't ever going away if you read and believe some of the articles out there. It is already mutating...(1100 cases in the UK they are following, spreading and mutating through animals etc)).....and we still need to distance and wear masks even after vaccinations we have been told....

 

I am only 43...but my experience with vaccines is that you don't get it, end of story... You cant give it and you cant get it.....(in layman's terms)

 

This sounds nothing like we are being told about Covid......either the government is lying or the science is lying....something doesn't add up at the end of the day.

 

I would say all my optimism has been replaced with skepticism very quickly.

 

If they have to shut down cruising in Singapore because ONE person on the ship got it and 5 ppl in the whole country have it.....based on that model..cruising will NEVER be viable again thanks to Covid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, KWofPerth said:

To summarise, we do not yet know if the vaccine will diminish an individual's ability to spread the virus, but in theory there is a strong likelihood that it will. And if so, this will reduce the virus' opportunities to replicate across the broader population, assuming we all take our shots.

I think this is an accurate summary.

Let's talk about vaccine facts involving the two vaccines we'll see in the US over the next 30 days. Both are mRNA vaccines. They are a new development on the vaccine front. Their composition includes incorporation of synthetically manufactured mRNA that once injected into a naïve host, appears to the adaptive and innate immune system as SARS-CoV-2. This provokes the production of antibodies in the adaptive response and has proven to provoke a robust innate immune system response in the form of T-Cells.

If you have a predilection for the science involved in the immune response to SARS-CoV-2, this is a good scientific paper that is written well enough for lay persons to understand. 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/11/201125091456.htm

Mutations: Researchers have found over 12000 variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus involving mutations of the virus RNA. There is anecdotal evidence that the virus mutates and can infect hosts other than humans. The lay press has extrapolated this evidence to incorrectly conclude and report to the public that the virus is more dangerous or lethal and can be transmitted by hosts other than humans. Transmission of the virus from an animal, for example, can occur but is exceedingly rare. The current news regarding minks and workers at mink farms, for example, contracting COVID-19 lacks controlled studies. Infected workers could have contracted C-19 by human to human transmission and this mode of transmission is probably more likely than it being transmitted from the minks. Experts in the field of virology and immunology have argued against the culling of commercially raised minks as ineffective with high economic costs and few public health benefits. 

Whether SARS-CoV-2 mutations confer longer virus life or lethality has been aggressively studied.  According to this paper released in the UK, none of them have created circumstances where the life of the virus is extended/made more resistant to containment or eradication or makes it more infectious/lethal. Morbidity and mortality produced by C-19 is a function of viral load and the human immune response to exposure to SARS-CoV-2, not mutations of the virus.

Mutations in a virus are to be expected, not feared. The core targets of vaccines (the S or spike proteins) predict that regardless of common RNA mutations, the SAR-CoV-2 virus, exactly like the H1N1 family of influenza viruses and it's variants, will remain susceptible to degradation and by extension, severity of C-19 or Influenza symptoms through vaccination. 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/11/201125091456.htm

CDC vacccine facts:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/vaccine-benefits/facts.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, WAAAYTOOO said:

 

Does this vaccine change your DNA or have the ability to alter your DNA ?

Not a doctor here but...ha.....This is a legit fear and question...the medical experts will tell you that it wont of course..but we all know that the "science" changes as things come to light and more people experience it or report it....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you might see in the different threads I am trying to be very optimistic and believe the vaccine will help to go back to normality which part of it will be ability to cruise again,  but I think there  might be one problem that can create some setbacks in returning to cruise.
While we are still discussing how fast everyone will get the vaccine in US /Canada/UK and other places (hey , in my country they are talking about almost 50% of people to get the vaccine by April) its seems that its not going to be that fast in the countries were the majority of RCL employees coming from ...

As the vaccine currently  not being sold to private companies I do not even see how the cruise industry buy it for their  employees , I know that Indonesia is starting to use one of the Chinese vaccines but not sure how fast , India trying to develop their own vaccine but it still at early phase.

I wonder if companies like RCL will try to buy some vaccine (the Sputnik5  is for sell maybe  ? ) I do see issues like fake certifications which might be avoided by requirements for serologic test ?  

That might be a problem, which I hope will be solved (best by heaving all the people in the world  who wants to  get a vaccine will be able get it) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...