Social Distancing during Embarkation

[KnowTheScore]

1 minute ago, navybankerteacher said:

This approach taken to its absurd (but “logical”) limit would mean abandoning flu vaccines because they are sometimes only 50% effective

 

They've been shown to be much less effective than that. 

[navybankerteacher]

15 minutes ago, sverigecruiser said:

 

They can let people choose among the available times when they book so someone booking early can have a better chance to choose the time they want. I'm not interested in booking a cruise and later be assigned a late check-in time so if the times shall be enforced I must be able to choose when I book. 

 

If social distancing is needed during the check-in it's a problem if the earlier cruise is delayed and everybody with assigned times between 10 am and noon are waiting outside the terminal.

You “...must be able to choose...” ?  Why are you more special than everyone else who might want the same boarding time?   I can understand wanting to be able to choose - but do you think cruise lines would want to accept that headache without any compensation?

[mnocket]

1 hour ago, ldubs said:

OK, sorry to be the wet blanket.   If social distancing is still a need during a cruise, then staying separated during embarkation is the least of your worries.   I know there are all kinds of posts about how to achieve a "socially distanced" cruise ship, but in reality I wonder really how practical that will be.  

 

Is there room under that blanket for me?

 

I couldn't agree more.  People worrying about social distancing during embarkation are missing the obvious - social distancing while on board the ship will often be impossible.  Do you think MDR seating will be spaced 6 ft apart, with only family members sharing a table? Do you think sun loungers will be spaced 6  ft apart?  Do you think bar seating will be 6 ft apart with no  one standing in-between? Do think you can maintain social distancing on the elevators?  How many seats are within 6 ft of you when sitting in the showroom?  Do you think those seats will be empty?  I could go on and on.  The point is......  if social distancing is still required, you don't want to be on a cruise ship - and embarkation is just one of many problems.

[KnowTheScore]

1 minute ago, mnocket said:

 

Is there room under that blanket for me?

 

I couldn't agree more.  People worrying about social distancing during embarkation are missing the obvious - social distancing while on board the ship will often be impossible.  Do you think MDR seating will be spaced 6 ft apart, with only family members sharing a table? Do you think sun loungers will be spaced 6  ft apart?  Do you think bar seating will be 6 ft apart with no  one standing in-between? Do think you can maintain social distancing on the elevators?  How many seats are within 6 ft of you when sitting in the showroom?  Do you think those seats will be empty?  I could go on and on.  The point is......  if social distancing is still required, you don't want to be on a cruise ship - and embarkation is just one of many problems.

 

+1

 

Ergo the social distancing "rule" is destined to be overturned completely by government at some point in the future.  They will simply say it is no longer needed and make some fancy excuses.   It will happen.

[navybankerteacher]

11 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

They've been shown to be much less effective than that. 

So what?  If a vaccine only saves 10,000 or 20,000 lives a year should it be ignored?

 

 

[sverigecruiser]

2 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

You “...must be able to choose...” ?  Why are you more special than everyone else who might want the same boarding time?   I can understand wanting to be able to choose - but do you think cruise lines would want to accept that headache without any compensation?

 

When I say that I "must be able to choose" I don't mean that any laws required that, I just mean that if I can't choose I will not book because I don't want a late check-in time. If I should be the first to book it's only fair that I can choose the time I want. If I'm the last to book it's fair that I have to take the time that is left.

 

I'm not more special than anyone else but if I'm the first to book I can choose which cabin I want. Why is it wrong to think that I also shall be able to pick my check-in time? 

 

If a cruiseline think that's too much trouble it's their choice, I don't need to cruise even if I want to.  

 

The possibility to choose check-in time can also be included in the fare when booking a suite and that should be okay for me.

[navybankerteacher]

4 minutes ago, sverigecruiser said:

 

When I say that I "must be able to choose" I don't mean that any laws required that, I just mean that if I can't choose I will not book because I don't want a late check-in time. If I should be the first to book it's only fair that I can choose the time I want. If I'm the last to book it's fair that I have to take the time that is left.

 

I'm not more special than anyone else but if I'm the first to book I can choose which cabin I want. Why is it wrong to think that I also shall be able to pick my check-in time? 

 

If a cruiseline think that's too much trouble it's their choice, I don't need to cruise even if I want to.  

 

The possibility to choose check-in time can also be included in the fare when booking a suite and that should be okay for me.

Which is what I proposed when I first discussed this.  Choice of accommodations only comes with willingness to pay - so should choice of time.

[navybankerteacher]

11 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

+1

 

Ergo the social distancing "rule" is destined to be overturned completely by government at some point in the future.  They will simply say it is no longer needed and make some fancy excuses.   It will happen.

Of course it will be dropped at some time - when there is no need for it.  Right now there IS a need for it - which has been cited by virtually all informed sources, and which appears to have been validated by the fact that contagion has dropped in areas where it was (and still is) in effect - while contagion is still on the upswing, or at least holding steady, in areas where it was/is  not widely applied.

[KnowTheScore]

16 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

So what?  If a vaccine only saves 10,000 or 20,000 lives a year should it be ignored?

 

 

It very much depends on many other factors, not least the number of people that will be harmed

 

This isn't the place for that discussion

[KnowTheScore]

15 minutes ago, sverigecruiser said:

I'm not more special than anyone else but if I'm the first to book I can choose which cabin I want. Why is it wrong to think that I also shall be able to pick my check-in time? 

 

It's wrong because it totally ignores the practical logistics involved in people travelling to ports.   In fact those that live local to Southampton ought to be given the latest embarkation times as it's easy for them to hop aboard.  Those travelling from Scotland have very long journeys.   They need to be able to board as soon as their coaches or cars arrive.  Embarkation times should always have been assigned by people's home locations but sadly never have.   I have cruised 30-40 times and have always ignored my allotted embarkation time and simply arrived early and gotten on-board.   This situation is unlikely to change. 

[navybankerteacher]

4 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

It very much depends on many other factors, not least the number of people that will be harmed

 

This isn't the place for that discussion

Then why did you introduce" that discussion"?  

[KnowTheScore]

Because there was a suggestion that those people not having flu vaccines were posing a risk to others

[navybankerteacher]

40 minutes ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

It's wrong because it totally ignores the practical logistics involved in people travelling to ports.   In fact those that live local to Southampton ought to be given the latest embarkation times as it's easy for them to hop aboard.  Those travelling from Scotland have very long journeys.   They need to be able to board as soon as their coaches or cars arrive.  Embarkation times should always have been assigned by people's home locations but sadly never have.   I have cruised 30-40 times and have always ignored my allotted embarkation time and simply arrived early and gotten on-board.   This situation is unlikely to change. 

This approach ignores the fact that some people whose home locations are thousands of miles away might be spending the night in Southampton.

 

One of the reasons boarding is chaotic is the fact that so many people do just as you do: ignore their allotted embarkation time.   Perhaps if the line were to charge people for picking their time, that revenue could more than cover their extra costs related to enforcing such times.  The last half hour or so could be left for people who opted not to pay or who missed their earlier assigned time.

[clo]

On 5/30/2020 at 8:47 AM, iancal said:

-have one or more underlying health issues

 

I'm 73. Don't all of us at this age have some kind of "underlying health issues"?

[cruisemom42]

19 minutes ago, clo said:

I'm 73. Don't all of us at this age have some kind of "underlying health issues"?

 

Not all. There are a lucky few. Neither of my parents had any underlying health issues at 73. No co-morbidities, not overweight, neither were on any prescription drugs. In fact, in the case of my mother, she was never in the hospital from the time I was born until she broke her hip, some 50 years later.

 

I hope I inherited their genes with no mutations!

 

[clo]

1 minute ago, cruisemom42 said:

I hope I inherited their genes with no mutations!

 

Whereas my parents died three months apart at ages 60 and 61 so I feel like I'm doing great!

[jocap]

2 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

This approach ignores the fact that some people whose home locations are thousands of miles away might be spending the night in Southampton.

 

One of the reasons boarding is chaotic is the fact that so many people do just as you do: ignore their allotted embarkation time.   Perhaps if the line were to charge people for picking their time, that revenue could more than cover their extra costs related to enforcing such times.  The last half hour or so could be left for people who opted not to pay or who missed their earlier assigned time.

The 2 cruise lines we've been with who gave an allotted time, RCI and P&O, go by decks, so RCI's Independence deck 8 was 12.15pm for us, and P&O's Ventura deck 14 was 3.30pm. People arriving at the wrong time on our last cruises from Southampton were given a coloured card, and had to wait until the queue for the correct time had ended. 

[DaveSJ711]

4 hours ago, KnowTheScore said:

 

The 2m social distance measure is utterly facile and meaningless.   Always has been.  It's a public pacifier.  The germs from coughs and sneezes travel 8m and further and this has been known from the outset.  In addition the germs remain floating in the air for up to 3 hours so keeping 2m from anyone is utterly futile because you're in an environment where you can't avoid the germs.

 

I can guarantee that the 2m social distance nonsense will be eradicated in the near future.  It simply has to be.   Will be interesting to see how the government spins that U-Turn when it happens.

.

 

"Facile"?  "Meaningless"?  "Nonsense"?  Not according to this peer-reviewed medical journal.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31183-1/fulltext

 

 

[2wheelin]

58 minutes ago, clo said:

I'm 73. Don't all of us at this age have some kind of "underlying health issues"?

No. Lots of us don’t

[ontheweb]

4 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

Just because a workable precaution is not 100% effective, it does not make sense to abandon it.  This approach taken to its absurd (but “logical”) limit would mean abandoning flu vaccines because they are sometimes only 50% effective - or even measles vaccine because the fact that there is not 100% compliance means that measles has not been eradicated.

I thought cases of measles were pretty much eradicated until the anti-vaccine folks started to have their children not take the vaccine.

[navybankerteacher]

20 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

I thought cases of measles were pretty much eradicated until the anti-vaccine folks started to have their children not take the vaccine.

Yes — the Luddite anti-vaxxers will keep measles with us indefinitely - and we can probably see a polio case crop here and there.  The level of blather about how low the effective rate of flu shots has successfully increased flu cases - and deaths.  Even if the effective rate is as low as 50%  if a million people get the shot - that will be 500,000 fewer active infections capable of spreading to others - who in turn will pass it on.

 

The only thing more contagious than viruses is intrenched human ignorance.

[lenquixote66]

1 hour ago, clo said:

I'm 73. Don't all of us at this age have some kind of "underlying health issues"?

I was 100% healthy till age 60 and very healthy till age 67 and zero percent healthy since then.

[lenquixote66]

42 minutes ago, DaveSJ711 said:

 

"Facile"?  "Meaningless"?  "Nonsense"?  Not according to this peer-reviewed medical journal.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31183-1/fulltext

 

 

You might be right.It does not seem to affect the people protesting and looting all over the world.

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, DaveSJ711 said:

 

"Facile"?  "Meaningless"?  "Nonsense"?  Not according to this peer-reviewed medical journal.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31183-1/fulltext

 

 

You are talking to a Luddite - who may or may not be able to read, but has demonstrated nothing but contempt for people who study, and understand, problems such as those we are facing.

 

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, navybankerteacher said:

Yes — the Luddite anti-vaxxers will keep measles with us indefinitely - and we can probably see a polio case crop here and there.  The level of blather about how low the effective rate of flu shots has successfully increased flu cases - and deaths.  Even if the effective rate is as low as 50%  if a million people get the shot - that will be 500,000 fewer active infections capable of spreading to others - who in turn will pass it on.

 

The only thing more contagious than viruses is intrenched human ignorance.

Amen to everything you wrote.

 

There is a very young school age child who is our son's Godson in everything but official name. He should be protected from measles by herd immunity since he should not get the shot due to a compromised immunity system. He ended up getting the shot since because of those anti-vaxxers who did not get the shot, his parents were afraid his potential harm would be less from the shot than from possible exposure to measles.

Edited June 2, 2020 by ontheweb
wrote his parents instead of they