[Exports_project_office] One more thought I wanted to convey at the end of today's PO call

[Ken Buesseler]

Hi again-

I was able to get informal feedback from the WHOI Covid committee who 
have been in charge of employees and WHOI UNOLS ships, wrt COVID 
planning and travel permissions.

They are OK with daily outdoor isolated activity.  So those from WHOI 
among this group in UK would be able to join the rest if that is the 
decision.  However, I don't think this works in Spain, as the country is 
restricting anyone from leaving quarantine until they have a negative 
result on a test on day 7.  So maybe our group in Vigo can go out after 
one week for exercise- tbd.

In addition, I brought up the issue about the optics of foreigners 
bringing in COVID if you go out for outdoor activity before testing 
negative, and then tested positive (my email earlier).  That was 
considered more of a personal decision.  You do need to be sure that you 
as seafarers in UK are allowed outdoors before testing on day 5 in the 
first place.

And finally to this topic, opposite to what we've discussed, WHOI has 
phase I and II for outdoor activity, making the restrictions looser in 
the first week (OK to be outside) and more restrictive the second week 
(stay inside- this is for crew joining a ship).

Secondly, *the WHOI policy on positive test results, but no symptoms, is 
you are NOT allowed to sail, unless you remain w/o symptoms for the 
quarantine period* (normally 14 days).  So if you tested positive on day 
5 and remained asymptomatic for qtine and tested negative at end, you 
could sail.  Anyone testing positive on day 12 would not have enough 
time, and NOT be allowed to sail, even if they tested negative say 
during MOB. *Second tests are not enough.* The evidence they are seeking 
after a positive PCR result, is a period of 14 days w/o symptoms to 
confirm.

So I think Heidi is right, we need a clear plan on what to do with 
positive results, but I don't think they are that likely now that I read 
this good link to an MIT medical article on false positives, 
https://medical.mit.edu/covid-19-updates/2020/11/pcr-test-result

a key line being/*"*//*we have done *//*more than 156,000 tests 
<http://covidapps.mit.edu/dashboard>*//*on asymptomatic individuals 
through COVID Pass and have had fewer than 90 positives,” */

Still some discussion needed.  I'm up for another PO call or? as we all 
need to be on board with these plans (which will always remain "plans of 
the moment").

Later, Ken


On 2021/04/08 2:03 PM, Ken Buesseler wrote:
>
> Here was my last thought after today's discussion about when to open 
> up the solo exercise option.
>
> Let's say we start outdoor exercise on day 2 and everyone tests 
> negative on first PCR test, day 5.  Great.
>
> Let's say we start day 2, and 1 or more test positive on first PCR 
> test, after day 5.  Not Great.  We immediately will need to be 
> thinking about retesting, replacements, extending Q-tines, etc.  Also, 
> the news will get out (on WhatsAPP, calls to family) and the story 
> will be - /*"US scientists arrived in UK are testing positive for 
> COVID."*/ and furthermore, /*this group has been walking around the 
> streets of our fair city..... */I think the optics and PR would not be 
> good, and why risk it.  If after day 5 PCR test, we only allow those 
> who test negative out (hopefully 100% of us), that story doesn't 
> happen.  A similar positive test result on day 12 will be interpreted 
> as the US scientists picked up COVID in Southampton.... also not good, 
> but a different story.
>
> Does this resonate with anyone but me?  I walk every day.  I'm worried 
> about the social consequences of (false?) positives and how to deal 
> with them, and we are opening up a new planed activity not specified 
> when we all signed up for this Qtine and got Institutional travel 
> approvals.  I'm also trying to confirm verbally/informally that the 
> WHOI folks will even be allowed outside their rooms at all- it was not 
> part of the approved travel plan with individual isolation at the 
> hotel, but I think it would be allowed.
>
> FYI, I am VERY willing to go with the flow and PO vote, but I'm trying 
> to think through the worst case scenarios, and this is a slightly 
> different reasoning than I've heard so far.
>
> So glad we are able to have this open discussion-  Ken
>
> -- 
> Ken Buesseler
> Senior Scientist, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
> http://cafethorium.whoi.edu      @Cafe_Thorium
> Director, Center for Marine and Environmental Radioactivity
> http://www.whoi.edu/CMER         @whoi_cmer
> 508-289-2309

-- 
Ken Buesseler
Senior Scientist, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
http://cafethorium.whoi.edu     @Cafe_Thorium
Director, Center for Marine and Environmental Radioactivity
http://www.whoi.edu/CMER        @whoi_cmer
508-289-2309

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://espo.nasa.gov/pipermail/exports_project_office/attachments/20210408/e3e728a6/attachment.html>