Is it possible to travel responsibly (during a pandemic)?
- Thread starter uncfnp
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
WeRtheOcean
Contributor
- Messages
- 392
- Reaction score
- 218
- # of dives
- None - Not Certified
WeRtheOcean
Contributor
- Messages
- 392
- Reaction score
- 218
- # of dives
- None - Not Certified
Definitely. I remember at Immigration in the Dominican Republic, someone ahead of me in line said "no" to purchasing the $10 tourist card, turned toward the counter to enter the country, and was surprised to see that the tourist card was a required document. What did they think it was? And why would you fly all the way there without finding that out?
Because the past year's worth of data shows that COVID outcomes do not correlate with the measures countries took, no doubt.
Definitely. I can assure you, a finger prick would be a major deterrent to many people who present no good reason to be deterred.
And the world didn't shut down for SARS, either.
If SARS was as contagious as this one, 8096 confirmed cases with 774 fatalities ie 10%
You won't be saying thing like this!
Rose Robinson
Contributor
Definitely. I remember at Immigration in the Dominican Republic, someone ahead of me in line said "no" to purchasing the $10 tourist card, turned toward the counter to enter the country, and was surprised to see that the tourist card was a required document. What did they think it was? And why would you fly all the way there without finding that out?
Because the past year's worth of data shows that COVID outcomes do not correlate with the measures countries took, no doubt.
Definitely. I can assure you, a finger prick would be a major deterrent to many people who present no good reason to be deterred.
And the world didn't shut down for SARS, either.
Ocean,
Not necessarily.
Especially with the most recent variants.
Being in a State, Provincial, Regional total lockdown, and asking whether or not it is safe to leave the State/Province/Region/Country to dive, or to participate in any close, unprotected personal contact is the problem, having nothing to do with government protocols.
Some Provinces in Canada have just enacted enhanced authority to law enforcement, in an effort to get people to stay put during lockdown. If you're stopped, driving, walking anywhere, with the exception of purposes like pharmacy, groceries, the fine is $700.
Ontario, for instance, is currently reporting 5000 new cases every day, with projected daily totals by the end of May to be 15,000. Ontario is currently locked down tighter than a drum, until at least May 20/22, and it's only April 17th. all borders between Ontario and Quebec and Manitoba have been closed.
I'm on the west coast, and things are slightly better, but not much. I haven't dove since February 2019, whether I ever dive again, remains to be seen, certainly nothing I'm going to worry about. I have 40+ people depending on me for their livelihood, right now and for the foreseeable future, keeping everyone safe, and gainfully employed is my only objective.
You can't ask if it's safe to travel to Florida, to partake in, of all things, a close contact ''live-a-board'' vacation.
Asking that question, has absolutely nothing to do with ''governments'' attempting to keep us all alive until this pandemic has passed.
Right now, the only thing you can do, is to get vaccinated, and strictly follow all the established protocols, as opposed to worrying about which protocol you can break and get away with.
Rose
Has the situation(infection) improved significantly since the thread started on 25th Jan 2021?
This is SB so I limited the travelling to diving destination from my position ONLY. As I am from HK, there is no such thing as domestic travelling and china has nothing to do with us.
Countries that offer scuba diving in Asia: Burma, Cambodia, East Timor, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Maldives, Malaysia, Palau, PNG, Philippines, Republic of China(Taiwan), Thailand and Vietnam. Have I missed any?
Only Maldives is FREELY accepted tourist now. While Palau and Thailand have slightly less restricted entry condition but the rest is more or less off-limited.
Thailand has seen a surge of infection over last few days and scuba diving is being prohibited until 01st May(at least).
Improvement? Yes but is it worth the risk is entirely up to you.
Scuba diving is just a recreational sport for me.
This is SB so I limited the travelling to diving destination from my position ONLY. As I am from HK, there is no such thing as domestic travelling and china has nothing to do with us.
Countries that offer scuba diving in Asia: Burma, Cambodia, East Timor, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Maldives, Malaysia, Palau, PNG, Philippines, Republic of China(Taiwan), Thailand and Vietnam. Have I missed any?
Only Maldives is FREELY accepted tourist now. While Palau and Thailand have slightly less restricted entry condition but the rest is more or less off-limited.
Thailand has seen a surge of infection over last few days and scuba diving is being prohibited until 01st May(at least).
Improvement? Yes but is it worth the risk is entirely up to you.
Scuba diving is just a recreational sport for me.
ThatDogDontHunt
Oscar Meyer Weiner
Not really locked down at all? IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT!
Clarification:
Ontario will not let others IN. Doug Ford says it is okay for any Ontario resident to drive to Manitoba or Quebec. Doug Ford does not want non residents to drive in. Residents can freely pass both ways. WTF?
Ontario is fully open for Ontarian's to do WTF they want. Wonder why Ontario is in so much troubles?
WeRtheOcean
Contributor
- Messages
- 392
- Reaction score
- 218
- # of dives
- None - Not Certified
Because the past year's worth of data shows that covid outcomes do not correlate with the measures countries took, no doubt.
What is your source for this statement?
drrich2
Contributor
Lately in the New York Times 'The Morning' section, I've been intrigued to see David Leonhardt (a man whose leftish leanings (my impression) run contrary to my conservative perspective, but I respect his intelligent, thoughtful analysis and journalism) putting out some criticism of the CDC's overly cautious recommendations that aren't keeping up with the science. I hope this link takes you to today's publication. Some quotes:
"For months, research about Covid-19 has pointed to two encouraging patterns. First, the underlying virus that causes Covid rarely spreads outdoors. Second — and even more important — fully vaccinated people are at virtually no risk of serious disease and only a minuscule risk of spreading the virus to others.
But the C.D.C., which has long been a cautious agency, has been unwilling to highlight these facts. It has instead focused on tiny risks — risks that are smaller than those from, say, taking a car trip."
"Yesterday, the agency effectively acknowledged it had fallen behind the scientific evidence: Even though that evidence has not changed in months, the C.D.C. overhauled its guidelines. It said fully vaccinated people could stop wearing masks in most settings, including crowded indoor gatherings."
"The C.D.C. has not fully shed its caution. It has not withdrawn its exaggeration of outdoor risks for the unvaccinated. And yesterday’s guidance continues to direct vaccinated people to wear masks and remain physically distant in some circumstances."
Their article, A Misleading C.D.C. Number, is particularly troubling.
My point is two-fold:
1.) For awhile, it's seemed like people who didn't hew to the CDC line were reckless and selfish rather than 'following the science' for the common good of humanity (and that's accurate about some people, but not all).
2.) The times, they are a 'change'in.
In a prior column, Leonhardt has mentioned that research showed conservatives tend to underestimate the risks of the pandemic, and liberals tend to over-estimate it.
One thing continues to be heavily endorsed...get vaccinated in you can. Whatever your politics.
"For months, research about Covid-19 has pointed to two encouraging patterns. First, the underlying virus that causes Covid rarely spreads outdoors. Second — and even more important — fully vaccinated people are at virtually no risk of serious disease and only a minuscule risk of spreading the virus to others.
But the C.D.C., which has long been a cautious agency, has been unwilling to highlight these facts. It has instead focused on tiny risks — risks that are smaller than those from, say, taking a car trip."
"Yesterday, the agency effectively acknowledged it had fallen behind the scientific evidence: Even though that evidence has not changed in months, the C.D.C. overhauled its guidelines. It said fully vaccinated people could stop wearing masks in most settings, including crowded indoor gatherings."
"The C.D.C. has not fully shed its caution. It has not withdrawn its exaggeration of outdoor risks for the unvaccinated. And yesterday’s guidance continues to direct vaccinated people to wear masks and remain physically distant in some circumstances."
Their article, A Misleading C.D.C. Number, is particularly troubling.
My point is two-fold:
1.) For awhile, it's seemed like people who didn't hew to the CDC line were reckless and selfish rather than 'following the science' for the common good of humanity (and that's accurate about some people, but not all).
2.) The times, they are a 'change'in.
In a prior column, Leonhardt has mentioned that research showed conservatives tend to underestimate the risks of the pandemic, and liberals tend to over-estimate it.
One thing continues to be heavily endorsed...get vaccinated in you can. Whatever your politics.
Similar threads
- Question
