Is Coronavirus keeping you from booking liveaboard/overseas trips this year?

[nippurmagnum]

Overreacting how? Some people said it's no worse than the flu...

CDC US flu death estimate for Oct 2019 - Apr 2020 (6 months), 24,000 - 62,000

Covid-19 confirmed deaths from late Jan 2020 - Apr 2020 (3 months), 79,000

I would say that your numbers make my point. COVID has caused and will cause more deaths than the regular flu, no doubt. But not by an order of magnitude. The flu varies in severity by a factor of three, but we don't close down the U.S. economy for the flu, and cause 15 percent of the population to become unemployed, and have the entire population be unable to see their doctor for any other medical condition. Florida took much less stringent measures, for much less time than California, and in Florida there have been fewer deaths from COVID than from the flu. To my mind, California overreacted. But leaving out my editorial statement, it is pretty much beyond dispute that California has taken a more stringent set of lockdown measures than most states, and that could complicate the travel plans of the poster to whom I was responding.

 

[pasley]

Cancelled my dive trip this year. My destination Cayman Brac. The Cayman Island have extended the ban on international flights through the end of August.

Another consideration is this "Flu" can and has caused damage to heart, lungs, kidneys and other organs, COVID-19 can attack all the major organs. Look at how many who have a bad case of it are spending closer to 2 months in the hospital and then leaving with an oxygen tank for 24/7 use. I saw two papers reportedly written by physicians who also SCUBA dive (not to be confused with Dive Medicine Doctors which is a specialty) in Belgium and Germany respectively who had treated SCUBA Divers stricken with COVID-19. Post release examination of the lungs were not good an at this time diving is not recommended for them. The papers expressed concern about if they would ever be able to return to diving. COVID-19 has also been reported as causing reactive airway issues and blood clots too.

Nice stuff that. So, I will keep my tired old butt home for now.

Better safe than sorry.

 

[pasley]

... The flu varies in severity by a factor of three, but we don't close down the U.S. economy for the flu, and cause 15 percent of the population to become unemployed, and have the entire population be unable to see their doctor for any other medical condition......"

We have in the past closed down this country (USA) and the rest of the world for the flu. The Spanish Pandemic of 1918 (1917-1919 but everyone says 1918) the US closed non-essential business, ordered everyone to stay home and mask to be worn when necessary travel took you outside. The Spanish flu was no joke. It was estimated to have killed 50 million world wide.

As for overreacting...This is a no win situation for any one in charge. If they shut down things quickly as the product of that is that not as many as feared die, then they over reacted. If they don't and people die, then they should have done more and done it sooner. Given all the information that was available on this brand new strain of SARS virus with no immunity, no cure, no vaccine and being highly contagious, IMHO it was appropriate to react as they did. But that is just me. This is no over by a long shot. I will not be at all surprised if we don't see another round of stay at home orders. The Gov of CA just last week extended the existing stay at home orders "indefinitely". The years 2020 and 2021 will very likely be challenging for one and all. But we will get through it.

 

[Jcp2]

It’s hard to compare COVID-19 deaths now to flu deaths last year precisely because most countries had a social reaction, which certainly did have an effect of decreasing deaths from COVID-19 as well as other transmissible diseases, including flu. The proper question to ask is what would have been the number of deaths for COVID-19 in the absence of social reaction (look at Brazil), or the number of deaths from flu in the presence of social reaction (TBD next year). This also doesn’t take into account morbidity from COVID-19, which is fairly significant compared to the flu as we know it today. The real difficulty is that public health measures taken (or not taken) for this particular contagion shows significant measurable results on a social scale 4-6 weeks later, because of the longer incubation period, higher transmission rate, and longer infectivity window, as compared to most other easily transmissible diseases, such as flu, measles, Ebola, smallpox, etc.

 

[nippurmagnum]

It’s hard to compare COVID-19 deaths now to flu deaths last year precisely because most countries had a social reaction, which certainly did have an effect of decreasing deaths from COVID-19 as well as other transmissible diseases, including flu. The proper question to ask is what would have been the number of deaths for COVID-19 in the absence of social reaction (look at Brazil), or the number of deaths from flu in the presence of social reaction (TBD next year). This also doesn’t take into account morbidity from COVID-19, which is fairly significant compared to the flu as we know it today. The real difficulty is that public health measures taken (or not taken) for this particular contagion shows significant measurable results on a social scale 4-6 weeks later, because of the longer incubation period, higher transmission rate, and longer infectivity window, as compared to most other easily transmissible diseases, such as flu, measles, Ebola, smallpox, etc.

I think the proper question is, how many people will die over the course of the pandemic with a lockdown, versus with no lockdown? There is no cure and no vaccine, so it all comes down to figuring out whether lives will be saved by slowing down the epidemic -- and making it last longer -- through a lockdown so as to make sure that hospitals don't get overwhelmed. The case of Brazil looks bad right now, because there is not much in the way of a lockdown, and cases are rapidly spiking. That means Brazil will get a much more intense -- but shorter -- infection curve. Would a lockdown affect total mortality over the life of the pandemic in Brazil? And at what human/economic collateral cost?

My two cents is that California overreacted massively, because its hospitals are nowhere close to operating at full capacity treating COVID cases. What California is doing is not so much flattening the curve, as shifting it to the right. If and when California reopens, cases and mortality from COVID will increase -- unless the state wants to remain closed for 18-24 months until there is widespread vaccination, which would make COVID the least of its problems.

In any event, I think we can all agree that California has taken much longer and more stringent measures than other states, and in terms of gauging the impact on dive trips (which was the question I posed in my original post), California's actions are potentially going to have a big impact, and could affect particularly trips to Guadalupe/Socorro that use San Diego as a gateway.

Personally, I'm planning to go diving in Florida in two weeks. Dive boats in Jupiter are operating, the beaches just reopened, hotels are open, car rental is easily available. Haven't decided yet whether I'll drive down or fly. Southwest has very inexpensive direct flights from where I live, and I am reasonably sure that these will be the most sterile planes I'll ever fly.

 

[Jcp2]

All of the measures of "flattening the curve" are shifting things to the right. Shifting the total infection curve down and to the right in the absence of a vaccine won't change the number of total infected. I totally agree with that statement. The area under the curves with and without action have the same number of people in it. It buys time for possibilities of new treatments, new procedures, new business policies, new medications, which in turn can possibly reduce the severity of the infections, the number of deaths from infection, and the consequences of surviving an infection. Again, it's very encouraging that cases have come down, but that was a delayed action from what we did a month ago. It's going to take another month to see what "opening up" will do. The important thing is that the degree of overall economic recovery will be determined by the overall degree of public confidence in resuming social activity. It doesn't matter if 20% of people are willing to go about regular business, because most regular businesses cannot operate on 20% of regular business activity. Personally, I'm anticipating the opening of the Florida Keys, and if I were independently wealthy without a family, I'd be one of the first to go there June 1st. However, family and job responsibilities come first, and I cannot afford going somewhere "for fun", catching even a small fever totally unrelated to COVID-19 (as I would like to think), and then quarantine for 14 days in my basement away from work.

 

[divinh]

Will we know the effect of Florida opening in a month?

Coronavirus Florida: State scientist said she refused to manipulate COVID-19 data and was fired

 

[nippurmagnum]

All of the measures of "flattening the curve" are shifting things to the right. Shifting the total infection curve down and to the right in the absence of a vaccine won't change the number of total infected. I totally agree with that statement. The area under the curves with and without action have the same number of people in it. It buys time for possibilities of new treatments, new procedures, new business policies, new medications, which in turn can possibly reduce the severity of the infections, the number of deaths from infection, and the consequences of surviving an infection. Again, it's very encouraging that cases have come down, but that was a delayed action from what we did a month ago. It's going to take another month to see what "opening up" will do. The important thing is that the degree of overall economic recovery will be determined by the overall degree of public confidence in resuming social activity. It doesn't matter if 20% of people are willing to go about regular business, because most regular businesses cannot operate on 20% of regular business activity. Personally, I'm anticipating the opening of the Florida Keys, and if I were independently wealthy without a family, I'd be one of the first to go there June 1st. However, family and job responsibilities come first, and I cannot afford going somewhere "for fun", catching even a small fever totally unrelated to COVID-19 (as I would like to think), and then quarantine for 14 days in my basement away from work.

All good points. I think states that are requiring businesses to reopen at limited capacity are sending the wrong signal, because very few businesses will operate at anywhere near full capacity, given that a lot of people are terrified to leave their homes. If anything, people should be encouraged to go out and spend money (as the director of the IMF recently urged).

As for family and job responsibilities, I am forced to telework anyway, so when I return from my dive trip, I'll be effectively quarantined whether I have the virus or not (if I haven't already had it -- I had a dry cough for a couple of weeks in early March, and never got tested). And I'd like to think that I'm helping the Florida dive/hotel/restaurant sectors by going down and spending freely. I plan to tip like crazy.

 

[Hoag]

 

[divinh]

If anything, people should be encouraged to go out and spend money (as the director of the IMF recently urged).

IMF is the International Monetary Fund, interested in economics, not health. Different priorities.

For those still intent on traveling...

Where Can You Travel? What’s Open? What’s Closed? Here’s the Current Status for All 50 States

At least you can make an informed decision and know whether there are travel restrictions.