Concerns about cruising at all until COVID19 vaccine exists

[monkeydawn]

Two hospitals in NY tested all pregnant women that came in for delivery. They found roughly 15% were positive (bear in mid false negatives have been shown to be as high as 30% depending on the test and facility, possibly bringing the "real" total to as high as 40.5%). Of those that tested positive 88% were asymptomatic. You could pretty easily make the argument that most pregnant women were likely more cautious than the general public once it became widely known COVID was an issue, I'd expect many were extra cautious before then.

These numbers are staggering and worrisome to me.

https://www.cnn.com/asia/live-news/...l-04-15-20/h_68df05d2db97640d0a6a5180526b2d5b

 

[xuxa777]

Two hospitals in NY tested all pregnant women that came in for delivery. They found roughly 15% were positive (bear in mid false negatives have been shown to be as high as 30% depending on the test and facility, possibly bringing the "real" total to as high as 40.5%). Of those that tested positive 88% were asymptomatic. You could pretty easily make the argument that most pregnant women were likely more cautious than the general public once it became widely known COVID was an issue, I'd expect many were extra cautious before then.

These numbers are staggering and worrisome to me.

https://www.cnn.com/asia/live-news/...l-04-15-20/h_68df05d2db97640d0a6a5180526b2d5b

Don’t be worried, one thing pregnant women while careful are also exposed to medical offices much more than normal, also the vast majority were asymptomatic, close to 90% of the 15% in even that small of a sample size.

 

[choirfarm]

Don’t be worried, one thing pregnant women while careful are also exposed to medical offices much more than normal, also the vast majority were asymptomatic, close to 90% of the 15% in even that small of a sample size.

But the asymptomatic is what is so scary and the reason this is spreading so much.I would like to know, and I'm sure scientists are studying why some have nothing, some are on vents and all in between.

 

[igrsod]

I don't think I will cruise again after this whole situation. If it's not this virus... it will be a new virus. Being stuck on a floating petri dish and not able to dock or disembark for weeks, stuck in a small room is not worth it. I think it will be a long time before most people travel at all. Health insurance and border closures will inhibit this.

 

[monkeydawn]

Don’t be worried, one thing pregnant women while careful are also exposed to medical offices much more than normal, also the vast majority were asymptomatic, close to 90% of the 15% in even that small of a sample size.

That's precisely the part that is so worrisome. That around 40% of the population may be infected and the majority wont be showing symptoms but will still be infectious is why this virus is so insidious.

 

[xuxa777]

True but when only a very very small percentage get just minor symptoms. Only 4 out 215 got a fever or another symptom And were not admitted to hospital for covid.

There are things to worry abut but this study is not one

 

[ScooterScott44]

True but when only a very very small percentage get just minor symptoms. Only 4 out 215 got a fever or another symptom And were not admitted to hospital for covid.

There are things to worry abut but this study is not one

It seems that not worrying about asymptomatic carriers is the exact reason many of those that are susceptible to the disease are at risk and the hospitals are taxed by large influx of patients.

If you don’t like that info, what about this Sentence from a study in the NEJM this week. Iceland has been very aggressive in testing and one group tested and reported on about 10,000 people. With over 2000 positives in the study they then broke down things into a number of details.

“Notably, 43% of the participants who tested positive reported having no symptoms, although symptoms almost certainly developed later in some of them.”

Asymptomatic carriers are exactly the thing to worry about. They bring the disease into public places, airports and airlines, nursing homes and onto cruise ships. All which have varying levels of at risk people and potential for greater transmission.

Sure, I agree with you that I personally don’t feel worried for my safety but I am concerned for others like my parents, my aunt and my spouse who are all much more likely to have problems should they contract the disease.

 

[mousefan73]

Two hospitals in NY tested all pregnant women that came in for delivery. They found roughly 15% were positive (bear in mid false negatives have been shown to be as high as 30% depending on the test and facility, possibly bringing the "real" total to as high as 40.5%). Of those that tested positive 88% were asymptomatic. You could pretty easily make the argument that most pregnant women were likely more cautious than the general public once it became widely known COVID was an issue, I'd expect many were extra cautious before then.

These numbers are staggering and worrisome to me.

https://www.cnn.com/asia/live-news/...l-04-15-20/h_68df05d2db97640d0a6a5180526b2d5b

Actually this makes me feel less worried, in fact for me a positive sign.. A positive sign that the denominator is much higher which drives down the percentage of deaths and serious ill within a populations. It also means IF the herd theory is true, we are heading on the direction of the spreading to slow down.

We can only hope that 40% of the population is or was infected.. then this thing ends sooner than later.

 

[KashasMom]

I don't think I will cruise again after this whole situation. If it's not this virus... it will be a new virus. Being stuck on a floating petri dish and not able to dock or disembark for weeks, stuck in a small room is not worth it. I think it will be a long time before most people travel at all. Health insurance and border closures will inhibit this.

I'm actually kind of leaning that way myself. Maybe very small ships - like less than 50,100 people. This lock-down (day 33 for us) is taking its toll. I can't imagine being stuck on a ship full of thousands of people - sick people! The flip side is my aunt who can't wait to be back on a cruise ship. I'm sure the cruise lines will get a bailout and be back to "full" as soon as people can cruise.

 

[FireflyTrance]

For me, I just can't risk the possibility of being quarantined in a small room with my husband and two kids for weeks on a cruise ship. I get claustrophobia and my kids are both very high energy so it's basically a nightmare scenario for me. I am not going to cruise knowing that it's a possibility, even a small one. It's been hard enough being quarantined in my house with two high energy kids. But at least here we have a backyard and can go on walks outside.

 

[over50visits]

If DCL allows people to board in the short term (next year or so) who have not received a vaccine for whatever reason, fine. But I will not subject my family to the risk because some people make the choice to endanger themselves and others. We won't cruise until we believe DCL has taken affirmative steps to ensure our safety, including refusing passage to those who will not have themselves vaccinated.

 

[mevelandry]

I wonder if all this will have any effect on the anti-vaxxer movement? I wonder if people will start to feel vulnerable enough again to rethink their 'no vaccine for my kid' stance.

I wouldn't count on that.

 

[monkeydawn]

True but when only a very very small percentage get just minor symptoms. Only 4 out 215 got a fever or another symptom And were not admitted to hospital for covid.

There are things to worry abut but this study is not one

Except we still dont know if there are longs term implications in even asymptomatic people. Some early, small studies have shown that there may be issues even in "healthy" asymptomatic people. We are too deep into triage mode to be doing things like testing larger portions of the population to see just how pervasive the virus is let alone doing things like CTing know asymptomatic positives. I'm thinking longer range issues are very possible if this has spread that far in the general population already. There could be "reactivation"/ catching the virus again but now with lung tissue scarring. Dealing with a bad flu season 10 years down the line but maybe 30% of the population has lung scarring. These are the types of things that concern me when we talk about how "good" it is if COVID is widespread.

Granted I know we can all stay in hiding until we have a proven vaccine with higher success rates, so I know we have to all reemerge at some point. I guess I am just frustrated we arent in a stronger position and cant be further into research mode to answer some of these questions. Ive been following this much closer than many for about an additional two months so you can imagine that it feels like Ive been following this for about 17 years.

 

[DahliaRW]

Except we still dont know if there are longs term implications in even asymptomatic people. Some early, small studies have shown that there may be issues even in "healthy" asymptomatic people. We are too deep into triage mode to be doing things like testing larger portions of the population to see just how pervasive the virus is let alone doing things like CTing know asymptomatic positives. I'm thinking longer range issues are very possible if this has spread that far in the general population already. There could be "reactivation"/ catching the virus again but now with lung tissue scarring. Dealing with a bad flu season 10 years down the line but maybe 30% of the population has lung scarring. These are the types of things that concern me when we talk about how "good" it is if COVID is widespread.

Granted I know we can all stay in hiding until we have a proven vaccine with higher success rates, so I know we have to all reemerge at some point. I guess I am just frustrated we arent in a stronger position and cant be further into research mode to answer some of these questions. Ive been following this much closer than many for about an additional two months so you can imagine that it feels like Ive been following this for about 17 years.

They have been able to determine that the lung damage can be reversed with time (as in lung capacity increases with exercise in those who had damage from the virus). We don't know now if other potential damage is reversible. We also don't know if the damage they are seeing in hospitalized patients is from covid-19 or from the treatments they are trying (many of the drugs being studied have known heart and liver side effects). As far as testing and antibodies, knowing that amount of "herd immunity" we have going on is essential to preventing re-emergence. If over half the population has potential immunity, then we can be a bit less cautious with reopening things. If testing for antibodies shows that long-lasting antibodies are not obtained through infection with the virus, then a vaccine will be nearly impossible to be effective enough to help as well and the focus needs to be more on effective treatments. There are a lot of factors.

 

[FigmentSpark]

They have been able to determine that the lung damage can be reversed with time (as in lung capacity increases with exercise in those who had damage from the virus). We don't know now if other potential damage is reversible. We also don't know if the damage they are seeing in hospitalized patients is from covid-19 or from the treatments they are trying (many of the drugs being studied have known heart and liver side effects). As far as testing and antibodies, knowing that amount of "herd immunity" we have going on is essential to preventing re-emergence. If over half the population has potential immunity, then we can be a bit less cautious with reopening things. If testing for antibodies shows that long-lasting antibodies are not obtained through infection with the virus, then a vaccine will be nearly impossible to be effective enough to help as well and the focus needs to be more on effective treatments. There are a lot of factors.

It could be an annual vaccine, like the flu shot. If they can come up with something that would last a year.

 

[gotomu212]

What if we find out 50% of the population has been infected already?

That would be fantastic, unfortunately everywhere they are testing, including a few random sampling experiments, they are finding positives are much much lower. To get that many people infected we would have been seeing the hospital spikes much earlier (even with a majority of a symptomatic people). We would have noticed nursing homes that suddenly had 10% of their population passing and for people who end up in ICUs this thing progresses in shocking stages so people would have been noticing that and raising it so much earlier.

I just wish that we were using this months long lockdown to get testing in place for when we open up so we can increase testing and contract tracing and avoid prolonged times of going in and out of lockdown.

 

[Karin1984]

Actually this makes me feel less worried, in fact for me a positive sign.. A positive sign that the denominator is much higher which drives down the percentage of deaths and serious ill within a populations. It also means IF the herd theory is true, we are heading on the direction of the spreading to slow down.

We can only hope that 40% of the population is or was infected.. then this thing ends sooner than later.

I would be surprised you are already there. Today in the Netherlands there was an update of the result on research our bloodbank is doing.
3% of their donors has had the virus and build up the antibodies. If this is representative for our entire population that means that 0.5 million people have build up antibodies. This doesn't mean they are immune, but they have build up some sort of protection against the virus.
For herd immunity my country need 60% = 10 million people.

I personally presume it will be a little bit higher on the entire population. Maybe 4 or even 5%. As people who donate blood probably have a higher interest in science etc. and therefore probably more careful with all the regulations we have in place. Therefore less likely to have the virus.

In my country, there are 28.153 people tested who tested positive for the virus, 3.134 people have died. Of course not everyone gets tested.
According to our CDC we are getting some space to breathe, but it's not the time to go back to any kind of normal. That should happen when our IC's are back at their 'normal' level. Currently almost 1.200 people with the virus are in the IC, normal is when we are at 600.

Below you see an overview per age group, the amount of people that have (or had) the virus / the total group and the percentage.

 

[Mainsail Minnie]

As people who donate blood probably have a higher interest in science etc. and therefore probably more careful with all the regulations we have in place. Therefore less likely to have the virus.

Many of the people who donate blood are doing it for the money, because they are flat broke. An interest in science has nothing to do with it.

 

[Karin1984]

Many of the people who donate blood are doing it for the money, because they are flat broke. An interest in science has nothing to do with it.

Not in my country. All you get is Orange juice and a cookie and the feeling you are contributing to something worthwhile

 

[Geomom]

Many of the people who donate blood are doing it for the money, because they are flat broke. An interest in science has nothing to do with it.

In the US, you don't get money for blood donations, but you can be paid for plasma donations--a quick search online says $20-$50 per plasma donation (it's based on the amount you can donate.)