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

Thu Apr 8 18:41:34 PDT 2021

Hi team,

that article does not address the fact that people that have covid within
the last 90 days can still come out positive, although they are not
considered infected. Bc CDC recognizes that fact and recommends that no PCR
testing should be done during that period as there is a chance that person
will come out positive... That is considered by CDC as a false positive,
and such positive tests are automatically discarded as false positives by
all health agencies around US.(but to my knowledge NHS doesn't have a
procedure to address that)
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/duration-isolation.html

Person can have viral parts in their respiratory system up to three months
after the recovery, and be disease free. That same person can be tested
multiple times negative, also be vaccinated on top of that, and still have
that "false" positive.

To my knowledge UNOLS have had a recent  cruise that had a false positive?
As I recall, Heidi in her email she stated that on two of her recent
cruises, she had a false positive.

I am not going to let anyone who is sick aboard the vessel. I will not make
a decision by myself. What I am suggesting is repeated testing, probably
double swab (procedure that NOAA is doing) and consultation with doctor.

Thank you

Ivona

On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 4:41 PM Ivona Cetinic <icetinic at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Ken,
>
> Thank you for the update.
>
> Just a fast response as I am about to taake my poor child out a bit.
>
> I will work on the writing the policy for false positives. Other is
> defined in the exports plan. It is the same as unols policy, that is the
> same as whoi policy.
>
> Ivona
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2021, 4:31 PM Ken Buesseler via Exports_project_office <
> exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
>> 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 Institutionhttp://cafethorium.whoi.edu     @Cafe_Thorium
>> Director, Center for Marine and Environmental Radioactivityhttp://www.whoi.edu/CMER        @whoi_cmer
>> 508-289-2309
>>
>> --
>> Ken Buesseler
>> Senior Scientist, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institutionhttp://cafethorium.whoi.edu     @Cafe_Thorium
>> Director, Center for Marine and Environmental Radioactivityhttp://www.whoi.edu/CMER        @whoi_cmer
>> 508-289-2309
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Exports_project_office mailing list
>> Exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov
>> https://espo.nasa.gov/lists/listinfo/exports_project_office
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://espo.nasa.gov/pipermail/exports_project_office/attachments/20210408/e19bb88a/attachment.html>