Liveaboard Covid quarantine- Debate

[dianna912]

Assuming that they are not in a locality that requires it, should liveaboards require guests who test positive to quarantine?

We just got back from a highly infectious liveaboard that DID have this requirement. With at least 70% of the guests infected, welp, it's safe to say it didn't work.

My thought process is this: unless you require an extremely harsh, any symptoms=quarantine type of policy, which is untenable on a dive boat. (Congestion/ear issues/fatigue/achiness are all symptoms of a long dive day) you will never stop it before it has already spread. I understand that boats want to protect their crew, but quarantining guests is just a feel-good measure to allow everyone to carry on as usual, except of the souls locked in a tiny room. This is what happened on our boat. No changes to anything were made until we started dropping like flies. The first couple that had it just got stuck in their room, while the crew did not mask around the other guests, everyone still ate in the same closed galley (except the quarantined couple) and it was all for absolutely nothing.

When we boarded the Juliet last March and they said: if one of us has it, all of us will, I thought they were being irresponsible. Now, I'm thinking they are correct.

My opinion: either take the "let er rip" strategy of the Juliet or have a policy that completely changes protocols, for everyone, the moment someone tests positive. No congregating in closed spaces, masks on all staff and guests when not eating, etc, etc.

 

[scrane]

I think if you board a cruise ship or liveaboard in today's world you implicitly accept the risk of becoming infected with Covid.

 

[drrich2]

Thus, we need a negotiated middleground, with some compromises.

Yes. The problem is, so many people think they are the reasonable centrists and their position is the reasonable middle ground!

To me, requiring everyone be vaccinated but no required testing makes sense, but many would disagree. And if people can't or won't agree on that, how will they agree on the solution to this:

Assuming that they are not in a locality that requires it, should liveaboards require guests who test positive to quarantine?

Liveaboards tend to have limited space. If someone is not in his stateroom, where is he that isn't a potential biohazard to other people?

Some liveaboards have an upper sundeck with loungers and maybe a hot tub. Perhaps that could be the 'quarantine deck' where COVID-19 positive people outside their staterooms could go (of course, they'll be using dive deck bathrooms - perhaps restricted to using one).

---

Another question that underlies reactions to this issue is this...putting aside the issue of your social responsibility to not infringe the health of others with undue risk...how threatened do you personally feel by COVID-19? If you found out you'd be exposed to a COVID-19+ person and might be getting symptomatic, how threatened would you feel?

 

[Darnold9999]

… also my calculus is significantly different depending on the LOB. I am heading off to a LOB in a couple of months that is going to take me more than 48 hours to get to (with layovers), that I had scheduled more than two years ago, that is almost as remote as you can get. Compare that to a Caribbean LOB and I might be more accepting of a belief system that is at odds with accepted norms. After all I have to accept those who believe, all evidence to the contrary, that a Big Mac is a healthy meal choice. On the former trip I would prefer both to stay home. Fortunately you can’t get into the country without being vaccinated so one small worry off the table.

 

[waterone]

It was pointed out that the concern is the potential inconvenience to all onboard of having to return to port to unload a sick guest.

There is always a concern if covid gets on board, its a risk that accepted if out set out on such a trip. As I said previously, I do my best to not think of the future in "if" as it's a waste of time and usually involves stressful what if's...

I do believe I have seen liveaboards in remote areas far from recompression chambers pushing Nitrox and conservative dive practices.

Almost every liveaboard I have been interested in, it is always a selectable upcharge. While I guess some might, they probably also serve alcohol and have a hot tub.

Not sure this is a good analogy.

It isnt It was originally a tongue in cheek comment that got turned into one...

If my personal health depends in part on YOUR personal health, then I DO care about whether you are infected or not.

If you are vaccinated, then it shouldn't matter if someone else is or not. If you are so concerned, then you should not go out of the house and most definitely should not go on a liveaboard.

While it is indeed likely that you can and will still get covid, you have chosen a vaccination in hopes to mitigate your own personal health risks. Look at the last scubaboard trip, they still had quite a few covid cases, I don't think anyone got severely sick.

Also, if MY dive trip is cut short because YOU refuse to get vaccinated and get really ill, then I DO care about your personal health, and whether you did what you could to keep from getting sick.

My trip could be cut short for many ifs. In the end for my travels, I do what I can to mitigate what I believe to be my own risks for such a trip. If you have done the same, then statistically you should be ok!

 

[ThatDogDontHunt]

I think if you board a cruise ship or liveaboard in today's world you implicitly accept the risk of becoming infected with Covid.

Any more risky than other daily life?

Some personal experiences:
- LOB trip where everyone was vaccinated AND provided a negative test in order to fly. The only covid concession on board was conversion of the buffet lunch to sit down seating.
- River cruise where all passengers were vaccinated, temperature test upon boarding, all crew wore masks, passengers had to wear masks for any buffet meal
- upcoming cruise where all passengers must be vaccinated, negative test required to board, daily temperature checks and the crew all wear masks.

I am more worried about spending time in a local restaurant or grocery store....

 

[Darnold9999]

I think if you board a cruise ship or liveaboard in today's world you implicitly accept the risk of becoming infected with Covid.

Getting infected with Covid isn’t really the issue. As the last two US presidents have demonstrated getting covid without a vaccine can be life threatening requiring a hospital visit, while getting it while vaccinated is most often a relatively mild cold. If you’re unvaccinated and you get it and it is life threatening your preventable illness is impacting my life. I would be just as pissed if you were “that guy” who pushed deco limits and needed a chamber ride.

All this has moved away from the original question - quarantine. It has been good however to push me to think through what I plan to do. Which is get my fourth booster a couple of weeks before I leave and hope it is the latest Omicron specific one. I still have to think through what I will do re testing. Likely I will take a supply of rapid tests. What I will do if I test positive on the trip is a question that I have not resolved. My last bout with covid was extremely mild so much so that my partner did not get it. Do I report it, not report it and self isolate or???

 

[BRT]

Yes, there is a spectrum between dying and inconvenience. Where on that specturm would you (for example) place a liveaboard trip being terminated due to someone (who is unvaccinated) else's severe infection? Most liveaboards already require some sort of medical statement in order to board, perhaps even a doctor's signature. Is requiring vaccination any different?

By the way, red lights and stop signs were simply an example of the absolute-freedom folks tolerating some infringement of their freedom, which is what we are talking about. Where is the acceptable middle ground between absolute freedom and no freedom?

In this case it is probably for the live aboard operator to define. If they think they can get more customers with a vaccinated only policy, OK. If they think they can get more customers without that policy, great. Vaccinated only has not worked well as vaccinated people continue to get covid and die.

 

[tursiops]

Vaccinated only has not worked well as vaccinated people continue to get covid and die.

The risk of death is greatly lowered if you are vaccinated. Unvaccinated people are MUCH more likely to die. even from the "benign" variants. This is not a simple "it works or it doesn't" situation, no matter how much the antivaxxers would like to make that argument.

 

[Lorenzoid]

Almost every liveaboard I have been interested in, it is always a selectable upcharge. While I guess some might, they probably also serve alcohol and have a hot tub.

Right, I have never seen a dive op or liveaboard that "required" Nitrox, but I could swear I recall seeing it being highly recommended because the liveaboard was going to be far from any recompression chamber. But more than just highly recommending Nitrox, they may impose longer surface intervals and keep the group shallow at the end of the dive for a sort of extended safety stop. The bottom line is I think there are some liveaboards that try to provide an array of safety buffers against a customer getting DCS, which could potentially interrupt the trip for everyone. Similarly, I can see a liveaboard providing an array of safety buffers against diseases breaking out on board.

 

[BRT]

The risk of death is greatly lowered if you are vaccinated. Unvaccinated people are MUCH more likely to die. even from the "benign" variants. This is not a simple "it works or it doesn't" situation, no matter how much the antivaxxers would like to make that argument.

I agree, but my death may or may not affect your trip. And my being vaccinated doesn't make it a sure thing that my illness will not affect your trip. And my using nitrox and thereby not diving to NDL's does not mean I won't interrupt your trip for a ride to the chamber.