CDC 100 Day No Sail Order

[ObstructedView2]

The cruise industry pushing back against the CDC’s order

 

Located @: https://cruiseradio.net/cruise-industry-concerned-about-new-cdc-order/

 

 

 

 

 

✌️

[bluesea321]

30 minutes ago, ObstructedView2 said:

The cruise industry pushing back against the CDC’s order

Located @: https://cruiseradio.net/cruise-industry-concerned-about-new-cdc-order/

 

Here is the official CLIA's response to the CDC order.  They better get with it since they have 7 days to come up with a plan.

https://cruising.org/news-and-research/press-room/2020/april/clia-statement-regarding-no-sail-order

[TooManyWakeUpsTilWeSail]

1 hour ago, ObstructedView2 said:

The cruise industry pushing back against the CDC’s order

 

Located @: https://cruiseradio.net/cruise-industry-concerned-about-new-cdc-order/

 

 

 

1 hour ago, ObstructedView2 said:

 

Key words from each response:

CCL “recommendations”

RCCL “order”

 

Hmmmmmm

[EscapeFromConnecticut]

The lobbying group continues treating this as just an azipod breakdown or one-off mid-ocean fire.

 

In truth, this was systematic corporate malfeasance during a global crisis.

Governments, emergency services, port authorities and the Coast Guard stepped in again and again to clean up the mess ... do not expect them to settle for the usual public relations nonsense from the industry now.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/cruise-ships-kept-sailing-as-coronavirus-spread-travelers-and-health-experts-question-why/2020/03/20/5b640f14-67e2-11ea-b5f1-a5a804158597_story.html

[DallasGuy75219]

4 hours ago, bluesea321 said:

 

Here is the official CLIA's response to the CDC order.  They better get with it since they have 7 days to come up with a plan.

https://cruising.org/news-and-research/press-room/2020/april/clia-statement-regarding-no-sail-order

"While it’s easy to focus on cruising because of its high profile, the fact is cruising is neither the source or cause of the virus or its spread."

 

Not the cause of its spread? Only if you ignore the multiple onboard outbreaks, including those currently developing among staff and crew still on the ships while they're not sailing with passengers.

 

Not sure what planet CLIA has been living on.

[beerman2]

24 minutes ago, DallasGuy75219 said:

"While it’s easy to focus on cruising because of its high profile, the fact is cruising is neither the source or cause of the virus or its spread."

 

Not the cause of its spread? Only if you ignore the multiple onboard outbreaks, including those currently developing among staff and crew still on the ships while they're not sailing with passengers.

 

Not sure what planet CLIA has been living on.

Just defending it's members like most unions do.

Even with the facts facing them square in the face, it's important for them to spin it in the cruise lines favor.

 

I'm betting the CDC wins out over CLIA. Play with 🔥 you get burnt.

[jimbo5544]

6 hours ago, beerman2 said:

Just defending it's members like most unions do.

Even with the facts facing them square in the face, it's important for them to spin it in the cruise lines favor.

 

I'm betting the CDC wins out over CLIA. Play with 🔥 you get burnt.

Agree that line is lip service

[Jasalth]

6 hours ago, DallasGuy75219 said:

"While it’s easy to focus on cruising because of its high profile, the fact is cruising is neither the source or cause of the virus or its spread."

 

Not the cause of its spread? Only if you ignore the multiple onboard outbreaks, including those currently developing among staff and crew still on the ships while they're not sailing with passengers.

 

Not sure what planet CLIA has been living on.

The one where... cruises are not the largest and biggest source of the spread maybe? Remember cruise lines all chose to suspend sailings, if I had a reason to I could still fly into Europe tomorrow.... 

 

So.. it's the cruise lines fault. Defiantly dose not have anything to do with the the 100's of flight staff (not counting airport staff!) who have actually tested positive. This doesn't count non-symptomatic carriers who are still ON these flights that while flying not full, are not always flying empty. There are still over 100 flights departing and arriving at my local airport a day at this time. Actually I went and looked up statistics they post, which is total number of passengers per month. My local airport, had MORE passengers go through it in January and February of 2020 (March is not posted yet) than in 2019! 

 

Travel is the cause of the spread of this virus. Not cruise lines, not airlines, not buses, not subways, not trains. I feel it IS unfair to focus on one group out of ALL of the ways of travel. I could actually hop on a train, and take a 100+ hr trip to Seattle tomorrow if I felt like it, while stopping in large cities all along the way. 

 

Basically what you are saying is because people are on a cruise for a longer period of time and they have stricter reporting laws for medical issues on board, passengers can show symptoms on board. That does NOT make it any more the cause of the spread than someone having gotten on a plane in NYC, stopped at Chicago, spend 3-5 hours in the airport, and then got on a plane to LA. That 1 person on a plane now has infected people in 3+ locations by themselves. Not to mention how many people are not going to the same place they are in the end? 

 

IMO if cruises can't resume, there is no way that airlines should be flying either! 

 

 

[jimbo5544]

56 minutes ago, Jasalth said:

The one where... cruises are not the largest and biggest source of the spread maybe? Remember cruise lines all chose to suspend sailings, if I had a reason to I could still fly into Europe tomorrow.... 

 

So.. it's the cruise lines fault. Defiantly dose not have anything to do with the the 100's of flight staff (not counting airport staff!) who have actually tested positive. This doesn't count non-symptomatic carriers who are still ON these flights that while flying not full, are not always flying empty. There are still over 100 flights departing and arriving at my local airport a day at this time. Actually I went and looked up statistics they post, which is total number of passengers per month. My local airport, had MORE passengers go through it in January and February of 2020 (March is not posted yet) than in 2019! 

 

Travel is the cause of the spread of this virus. Not cruise lines, not airlines, not buses, not subways, not trains. I feel it IS unfair to focus on one group out of ALL of the ways of travel. I could actually hop on a train, and take a 100+ hr trip to Seattle tomorrow if I felt like it, while stopping in large cities all along the way. 

 

Basically what you are saying is because people are on a cruise for a longer period of time and they have stricter reporting laws for medical issues on board, passengers can show symptoms on board. That does NOT make it any more the cause of the spread than someone having gotten on a plane in NYC, stopped at Chicago, spend 3-5 hours in the airport, and then got on a plane to LA. That 1 person on a plane now has infected people in 3+ locations by themselves. Not to mention how many people are not going to the same place they are in the end? 

 

IMO if cruises can't resume, there is no way that airlines should be flying either! 

 

 

Don't let the naysayers get you down.  During times of duress, bottom feeders come out looking to lure in unhappy clients with promises of delusion and grandeur when in reality they are trying to line their pockets with ill gained shekels on other peoples woes.  Its easy to throw rocks when things are not golden.   

Edited April 11, 2020 by jimbo5544

[beerman2]

54 minutes ago, Jasalth said:

The one where... cruises are not the largest and biggest source of the spread maybe? Remember cruise lines all chose to suspend sailings, if I had a reason to I could still fly into Europe tomorrow.... 

 

So.. it's the cruise lines fault. Defiantly dose not have anything to do with the the 100's of flight staff (not counting airport staff!) who have actually tested positive. This doesn't count non-symptomatic carriers who are still ON these flights that while flying not full, are not always flying empty. There are still over 100 flights departing and arriving at my local airport a day at this time. Actually I went and looked up statistics they post, which is total number of passengers per month. My local airport, had MORE passengers go through it in January and February of 2020 (March is not posted yet) than in 2019! 

 

Travel is the cause of the spread of this virus. Not cruise lines, not airlines, not buses, not subways, not trains. I feel it IS unfair to focus on one group out of ALL of the ways of travel. I could actually hop on a train, and take a 100+ hr trip to Seattle tomorrow if I felt like it, while stopping in large cities all along the way. 

 

Basically what you are saying is because people are on a cruise for a longer period of time and they have stricter reporting laws for medical issues on board, passengers can show symptoms on board. That does NOT make it any more the cause of the spread than someone having gotten on a plane in NYC, stopped at Chicago, spend 3-5 hours in the airport, and then got on a plane to LA. That 1 person on a plane now has infected people in 3+ locations by themselves. Not to mention how many people are not going to the same place they are in the end? 

 

IMO if cruises can't resume, there is no way that airlines should be flying either! 

 

 

Kinda irrelevant about the Jan/Feb numbers being up. This was Before  the virus turned into a pandemic. 

 

Let's see the March numbers . That will be a more accurate indication.

 

March/April numbers will be ridiculously low.

[jimbo5544]

9 minutes ago, beerman2 said:

Kinda irrelevant about the Jan/Feb numbers being up. This was Before  the virus turned into a pandemic. 

 

Let's see the March numbers . That will be a more accurate indication.

 

March/April numbers will be ridiculously low.

If you mean flights and the number of people flying, my guess is down significantly.  Saw where Delta will bot be filling middle seats (probably was not going to be an issue anyway).  That said, the quoted poster is probably right in terms of number of cases (but we would never know).  

[rvsullivan]

jimbo, I sometimes don't agree with your posts, but in this case I think you're spot on! Either shut down all transportation or none! To focus on cruising is foolish and shortsighted!

[Jobeth66]

I dont think they are going to try and sail until, the submit a mitigation plan that addresses the concerns.  If the CDC lifts the stay on day 10 or 100, then they (and they is meaning any cruise line) can cruise.

The requirements for mitigation are in the order. And they are very stringent. Must have robust testing for all passengers and crew, with weekly reporting to the CDC. Must have hospital-level facilities with trained medical staff *on the ship* including PPE and ventilators. Must have commercial contracts in place for evacuation of patients (no reliance on the USCG) along with contracts in place with shore side hospitals who agree in advance to take any infected patients from the ship. In addition, the must have contracts in place with chartering companies to get evacuated but non-infected passengers home (cannot rely in commercial airlines).

This all appears to be at the cruise lines' expense.

I can't imagine any hospitals agreeing to take an unknown number of patients with unknown prognosis before a ship even leaves port.

And the logistics of trying to test everyone are beyond us at this point.

[mrgame101]

53 minutes ago, rvsullivan said:

jimbo, I sometimes don't agree with your posts, but in this case I think you're spot on! Either shut down all transportation or none! To focus on cruising is foolish and shortsighted!

Agreed! We been saying this for weeks. This industry is being attacked! When airlines were still flying, theme parks still open etc. 

They do not have to report to the CDC

[TNcruising02]

I think the original source was international travel.  Since the virus originated overseas (from the US), obviously someone who travelled internationally brought it over.  When I got off of my cruise in March, I was more nervous about traveling through the Orlando airport than I was the entire time on my cruise.  However, my cruise left out of the US.  Cruises that left out of other countries ran a higher risk because of the international travelers at that time.

Now the threat is all travel.  I can't imagine getting on a plane right now.

[Purvis1231]

I have been pessimistic about cruising resuming since so dozens of people died on the ships-especially Princess that may not sail for awhile-if ever. It is highly likely if the cruise lines do not bring in some revenue they will have to declare Chapter 11.  This will delay sailing for a longer period but will free Carnival from some lawsuits and from having to pay crewmembers that have been sent home. 

[firefly333]

9 hours ago, DallasGuy75219 said:

"While it’s easy to focus on cruising because of its high profile, the fact is cruising is neither the source or cause of the virus or its spread."

 

Not the cause of its spread? Only if you ignore the multiple onboard outbreaks, including those currently developing among staff and crew still on the ships while they're not sailing with passengers.

 

Not sure what planet CLIA has been living on.

All the early cases in dallas flew in on airplanes. First case a business guy brought it home from silicone valley.

 

Unless they shut down planes, or mass transit I dont see cruise ships as the only culprit. I agree cruises are singled out, sorry. Cant just place blame on one if they all spread it.

 

True carnival corp made some really bad decisions to hurt the industry. Hurt ncl and rcl and their other lines like carnival. 

[jimbo5544]

1 hour ago, Jobeth66 said:

The requirements for mitigation are in the order. And they are very stringent. Must have robust testing for all passengers and crew, with weekly reporting to the CDC. Must have hospital-level facilities with trained medical staff *on the ship* including PPE and ventilators. Must have commercial contracts in place for evacuation of patients (no reliance on the USCG) along with contracts in place with shore side hospitals who agree in advance to take any infected patients from the ship. In addition, the must have contracts in place with chartering companies to get evacuated but non-infected passengers home (cannot rely in commercial airlines).

This all appears to be at the cruise lines' expense.

I can't imagine any hospitals agreeing to take an unknown number of patients with unknown prognosis before a ship even leaves port.

And the logistics of trying to test everyone are beyond us at this point.

We will see, was there any argument on the plan?  If both sides agree, it is a moot point, besides your subjective view. 😎

[beerman2]

22 minutes ago, firefly333 said:

All the early cases in dallas flew in on airplanes. First case a business guy brought it home from silicone valley.

 

Unless they shut down planes, or mass transit I dont see cruise ships as the only culprit. I agree cruises are singled out, sorry. Cant just place blame on one if they all spread it.

 

True carnival corp made some really bad decisions to hurt the industry. Hurt ncl and rcl and their other lines like carnival. 

Don't think anyone is trying to exonerate the airlines or any other mass transit. The problem is most domestic flights are what 2 1/2 to 3 hours and those pax are gone which makes a little more difficult to track.

 

Pax on a 24/7 cruise makes it much easier to spread.

 

Hell I have a flight scheduled for late June that I really don't want to go on, however if the National Dance Competition our 2 granddaughters are in isn't cancelled I will take that chance with every precaution humanly possible.

 

Even though  the airlines have supposedly stepped up their procedures we will wipe down everything associated with our seats. And as much as I despise wearing face masks it is a necessity.

[firefly333]

5 minutes ago, beerman2 said:

Don't think anyone is trying to exonerate the airlines or any other mass transit. The problem is most domestic flights are what 2 1/2 to 3 hours and those pax are gone which makes a little more difficult to track.

 

Pax on a 24/7 cruise makes it much easier to spread.

 

Hell I have a flight scheduled for late June that I really don't want to go on, however if the National Dance Competition our 2 granddaughters are in isn't cancelled I will take that chance with every precaution humanly possible.

 

Even though  the airlines have supposedly stepped up their procedures we will wipe down everything associated with our seats. And as much as I despise wearing face masks it is a necessity.

Anyone taking a flight in june cant say people shouldnt cruise. Let them take the risk.

 

Maybe june too early, as you say its spread on a cruise and more obvious. Not that its spread more. People can see its spread and not get home to their bed. 

 

I'll be practicing those deep breathing exercises I've seen and not sleep on my back if I get it, but I'm not staying home forever and living in fear. I have 4 booked cruises.

[PhillyFan33579]

3 hours ago, Jasalth said:

The one where... cruises are not the largest and biggest source of the spread maybe? Remember cruise lines all chose to suspend sailings, if I had a reason to I could still fly into Europe tomorrow.... 

 

So.. it's the cruise lines fault. Defiantly dose not have anything to do with the the 100's of flight staff (not counting airport staff!) who have actually tested positive. This doesn't count non-symptomatic carriers who are still ON these flights that while flying not full, are not always flying empty. There are still over 100 flights departing and arriving at my local airport a day at this time. Actually I went and looked up statistics they post, which is total number of passengers per month. My local airport, had MORE passengers go through it in January and February of 2020 (March is not posted yet) than in 2019! 

 

Travel is the cause of the spread of this virus. Not cruise lines, not airlines, not buses, not subways, not trains. I feel it IS unfair to focus on one group out of ALL of the ways of travel. I could actually hop on a train, and take a 100+ hr trip to Seattle tomorrow if I felt like it, while stopping in large cities all along the way. 

 

Basically what you are saying is because people are on a cruise for a longer period of time and they have stricter reporting laws for medical issues on board, passengers can show symptoms on board. That does NOT make it any more the cause of the spread than someone having gotten on a plane in NYC, stopped at Chicago, spend 3-5 hours in the airport, and then got on a plane to LA. That 1 person on a plane now has infected people in 3+ locations by themselves. Not to mention how many people are not going to the same place they are in the end? 

 

IMO if cruises can't resume, there is no way that airlines should be flying either! 

 

 

Personally I wouldn’t fly on an airplane or cruise on a ship right now. However, the reason the cruise industry is being singled out in my opinion is because there have been several ships that have had COVID-19 breakouts to include multiple deaths. On the other hand I have not heard of one person dying from this virus while physically on an airplane, train, bus, subway, etc.  I think it is safe to say the chances of this virus spreading are significantly higher when people spend days to weeks together on a cruise ship, as opposed to spending minutes to hours together on other means of transportation. 

[beerman2]

2 minutes ago, firefly333 said:

Anyone taking a flight in june cant say people shouldnt cruise. Let them take the risk.

 

Maybe june too early, as you say its spread on a cruise and more obvious. Not that its spread more. People can see its spread and not get home to their bed. 

 

I'll be practicing those deep breathing exercises I've seen and not sleep on my back if I get it, but I'm not staying home forever and living in fear. I have 4 booked cruises.

Your first paragraph isn't anywhere close to my comments, I NEVER said people shouldn't cruise and that is exactly what you insinuated.

 

 

[firefly333]

11 minutes ago, beerman2 said:

Your first paragraph isn't anywhere close to my comments, I NEVER said people shouldn't cruise and that is exactly what you insinuated.

 

 

A lot say that. Sorry I shouldnt have quoted you with my gripe against flying being treated differently.

[TNcruising02]

I would feel much more comfortable on a ship where I could walk away from someone coughing than being stuck in an airplane seat with nowhere else to go.

[eileen2664]

4 minutes ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

I think it is safe to say the chances of this virus spreading are significantly higher when people spend days to weeks together on a cruise ship, as opposed to spending minutes to hours together on other means of transportation. 

 

I'm not sure I agree (keep in mind I'm a layman, I have no background in medicine/epidemiology so I'm probably underthinking this).  Take patient X, he goes on a cruise unknowingly sick.  Throughout the course of 7 days he crosses paths with many people, no doubt, but the number of people he comes in contact with is limited to however many are on the ship....let's say 4,000 plus a few in ports.  But they also see many of these people many times over....from all reports (I've not yet cruised....someday, maybe, if we're ever allowed to leave our houses) room stewards, bar staff, and dining room servers all recognize cruisers.  These people could be key in saying "Mr. Smith, you seem to be coughing a lot more today than yesterday, why don't you visit the clinic just in case".

 

Patient Y, also unknowingly sick, decides to take a week long land trip.  He flies from LA to Orlando/Disney World with a 3 hour layover in Chicago.  Between his flights, buses, multiple theme parks, hotels, restaurants, etc I'd venture to say he has crossed paths with FAR more than 4-5,000 people.  Also keep in mind that all those various places have a variety of cleaning standards (while cruises have 1 level of standards, which in theory should be quite high).  Also, most of the people patient Y comes in contact with are for short visits, they wouldn't necessarily notice if he was coughing a lot or looked ill and if they did notice would they/could they do anything?

 

Now the difference is that when patient Y gets sicker the hospital is accessible whereas patient X is stuck in the middle of the ocean.  That is the part that should be the focus IMO.  How to effectively quarantine these people and, if necessary, get them off the ship to get the care they need.