New CDC Order

[BigAl94]

13 minutes ago, Miaminice said:

 

🙄 Please don´t put words into my mouth!

I didn´t say TUI Cruises was the cruise line which already did the cruise to Norway.

I mentioned Norway as an example for the cruises which already took place in Europe and I mentioned TUI as an example for the reduced capacity. Don´t mix up information and tell me I did 😄

 

But FYI: Since Friday or so, TUI cruises also offer a 7 night cruise to Norway starting 08/07.

 

 

If any cruise line starts up there will be massively reduced capacity. Many cruises are still being offered for sale that will not happen. 

[yorky]

I’ve always been a firm believer that we would see cruising resume at some level this year, I’ve not seen anything to change my mind.

[Blackduck59]

I think some cruises will sail in some markets somewhere in the world in 2020 and the CDC will have nothing to say in the matter. It's a big planet and although the US market is huge it's not the only market and Americans aren't the only keen cruisers. In any case I believe that it will be some time before borders will be open to American tourists. That means cruise lines have to find protocols that are acceptable to other markets and get their ships operational wherever they can.

[Miaminice]

4 hours ago, BigAl94 said:

If any cruise line starts up there will be massively reduced capacity. Many cruises are still being offered for sale that will not happen. 

I wasn’t talking about the “usual“ cruises still online for sale.

The ones I mentioned, like the one week Norway cruise of TUI Cruises, are the startup cruises under Covid regulations. And yes, as also mentioned, they are only selling balcony staterooms and suites up to 60% capacity. Plus, they are limited to certain nationalities - despite the fact that otherwise travel within the EU is possible.
 

Edited July 19, 2020 by Miaminice

[Happy Cruiser 6143]

14 hours ago, hcat said:

She also mentioned that Celebrity has hired an image  or branding consultant rec by Kelly Hoppen,  all across the pond. Maybe some of their ships will taken on more of an international flavor as they seek out Gen X cruisers. ?????

 

OMG!  They are still doing business with that woman?

[hcat]

14 minutes ago, Happy Cruiser 6143 said:

 

OMG!  They are still doing business with that woman?

She only said it was her rec for the branding co from what I recall of the interview, but Hoppen nearly ruined EDGE!

[alibaba1]

CDC Extends 'No Sail Order' by Two More Months

 

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention has issued an extension of its No Sail Order that was due to expire July 24, extending it until September 30, 2020, for all cruises out of U.S. ports of call.

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/5467/?et_cid=3345900&et_rid=16914174&et_referrer=Popup_Main

[BigAl94]

Bahamas closed to Americans. https://amp.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/article244340147.html?__twitter_impression=true

[BigAl94]

16 hours ago, Miaminice said:

I wasn’t talking about the “usual“ cruises still online for sale.

The ones I mentioned, like the one week Norway cruise of TUI Cruises, are the startup cruises under Covid regulations. And yes, as also mentioned, they are only selling balcony staterooms and suites up to 60% capacity. Plus, they are limited to certain nationalities - despite the fact that otherwise travel within the EU is possible.
 

Presume you refer to these types of cruises? https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/this-ship-planning-a-cruise-to-nowhere.805485

[Miaminice]

18 minutes ago, BigAl94 said:

Presume you refer to these types of cruises? https://timesofmalta.com/articles/view/this-ship-planning-a-cruise-to-nowhere.805485

 

Not actually... When talking about TUI cruises I was referring to these cruises sailing from and to Germany much earlier - starting 7/24
https://www.tuicruises.com/blauereisen
 

But the one from Malta is the same concept.

 

Edited July 20, 2020 by Miaminice

[TeeRick]

19 hours ago, Blackduck59 said:

I think some cruises will sail in some markets somewhere in the world in 2020 and the CDC will have nothing to say in the matter. It's a big planet and although the US market is huge it's not the only market and Americans aren't the only keen cruisers. In any case I believe that it will be some time before borders will be open to American tourists. That means cruise lines have to find protocols that are acceptable to other markets and get their ships operational wherever they can.

Blackduck I would love to see this even if I sit on the sidelines as an American.  Cruising anywhere in the world will be good for the industry.  And lessons will be learned once cruising starts again.  I will be jealous but at the same time excited!

[hvbaskey]

2 hours ago, TeeRick said:

Blackduck I would love to see this even if I sit on the sidelines as an American.  Cruising anywhere in the world will be good for the industry.  And lessons will be learned once cruising starts again.  I will be jealous but at the same time excited!

 

Exactly my my thoughts / feelings.   I was viewing videos/photos of the Seabourn Cruise in Norway - thinking how amazing it was that a cruise was underway.   I was so excited to see this happen, even though cruising is out for us until at least 2021.  

 

PS  ... As a Canadian,  I cannot cruise yet (our government has a standing advisory against cruising and even IF we were allowed to board (per cruise line / nationality allowances) - our insurance wouldn’t cover us and any repatriation efforts could be charged to us).  

[phoenix_dream]

1 hour ago, dporter said:

@DaveSJ711

I believe you maybe read more into my statement as I did not indicate whether the virus mattered or did not matter to me.

 

I could add another statement that more people die worldwide from heart disease every year, but we don't see our government removing food choices from store shelves.

 

My opinion is that people should have freedom of choice.

*If you choose to eat high fat foods you are taking the risk that you may get heart disease.

*If you choose to be in any environment with lots of people you are taking the risk that you may catch a virus (flu, common cold, RSV, SARS, norovirus, measles, chicken pox, etc.).  Covid-19 is a disease caused by one of many SARS viruses that exist in the world. 

Heart disease is not catching, Covid-19 clearly is.  There is no reasonable comparison. 

 

Freedom of choice to be in an environment where you could catch the virus?  I guess that depends on many things.  Primary is the fact that this virus is extremely contagious, and very dangerous in particular to those in vulnerable categories.  To even put it in the same sentence as the common cold or norovirus is ludicrous to say the least.  If you use that freedom of choice and catch the virus how many people do you infect before you even know you have it?  If you need to be hospitalized, how many health care workers are you putting at risk?  And if enough of you use that freedom of choice, how many ICU beds are used up that are needed by people who are sick through no fault of their own, or due to old age?  Freedom of choice is an outstanding concept, one which many have fought and died for.  But it is rightly limited when it adversely impacts others around you, in this case in ways that could be deadly.

[grandgeezer]

1 hour ago, dporter said:

@DaveSJ711

I believe you maybe read more into my statement as I did not indicate whether the virus mattered or did not matter to me.

 

I could add another statement that more people die worldwide from heart disease every year, but we don't see our government removing food choices from store shelves.

 

My opinion is that people should have freedom of choice.

*If you choose to eat high fat foods you are taking the risk that you may get heart disease.

*If you choose to be in any environment with lots of people you are taking the risk that you may catch a virus (flu, common cold, RSV, SARS, norovirus, measles, chicken pox, etc.).  Covid-19 is a disease caused by one of many SARS viruses that exist in the world. 

 

Sounds like the prevalent attitude, me over we.

If that was true, be my guest and cruise your head off. The problem is you could be a carrier and inflict many innocent people who could inflict many others. That's why  we are where we are.

[Fouremco]

29 minutes ago, phoenix_dream said:

Freedom of choice is an outstanding concept, one which many have fought and died for.  But it is rightly limited when it adversely impacts others around you, in this case in ways that could be deadly.

There was a column that I read recently whose author insisted that he should have the freedom of choice to drive his car with his eyes closed. There were undoubtedly people who missed the satirical nature of the column and supported his right to drive in this manner.  

Edited July 20, 2020 by Fouremco

[hvbaskey]

43 minutes ago, hvbaskey said:

 

Exactly my my thoughts / feelings.   I was viewing videos/photos of the Seabourn Cruise in Norway - thinking how amazing it was that a cruise was underway.   I was so excited to see this happen, even though cruising is out for us until at least 2021.  

 

PS  ... As a Canadian,  I cannot cruise yet (our government has a standing advisory against cruising and even IF we were allowed to board (per cruise line / nationality allowances) - our insurance wouldn’t cover us and any repatriation efforts could be charged to us).  

 

Correction - Typo ...  “Seadream” (vs. Sebourn) - apologies!

[Globehoppers]

On 7/19/2020 at 9:28 AM, TeeRick said:

But Mr. Spock said "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".

...or the one!

[phoenix_dream]

14 hours ago, dporter said:

I think there will be a dramatic shift in how this pandemic is handled after the US elections in November 2020.

 

I hope we all get to sail again soon without a bunch of restrictions, but only time will tell.

 

While the numbers are scary to hear, the worldwide numbers of people who have or have had COVID-19 still amount to less than 1% of the worldwide population.  

Who knows what the pandemic will look like in November, and even if there is a change in presidents, that won't happen until January.  By then we may have a vaccine (if we're lucky!), or we may not.

 

And besides the fact that 1% still equals 80 million people, the amount of people who have actually had the virus is likely many times more than that (no one knows for sure).  I think we can use the 1% only as a small reassurance to those struggling with worrying about catching this that the odds are in their favor, so far (although that varies a lot by which country, or in some cases in the US, which state they are in).  But when you are betting against a killer, I prefer higher odds than that

[C-Dragons]

56 minutes ago, phoenix_dream said:

If you use that freedom of choice and catch the virus how many people do you infect before you even know you have it?  If you need to be hospitalized, how many health care workers are you putting at risk?  And if enough of you use that freedom of choice, how many ICU beds are used up that are needed by people who are sick through no fault of their own, or due to old age?  Freedom of choice is an outstanding concept, one which many have fought and died for.  But it is rightly limited when it adversely impacts others around you, in this case in ways that could be deadly.

There are those who insist on their freedom of choice NOT to wear masks, even though doing so would protect other “innocent people” as well as themselves. Most of the unfortunate circumstances caused by the virus have been due to “freedom of choice” and unfortunately I have yet to see that concept being limited in our country in a way that would make a significant difference. But I keep hoping.

[Fouremco]

3 minutes ago, C-Dragons said:

There are those who insist on their freedom of choice NOT to wear masks, even though doing so would protect other “innocent people” as well as themselves. Most of the unfortunate circumstances caused by the virus have been due to “freedom of choice” and unfortunately I have yet to see that concept being limited in our country in a way that would make a significant difference. But I keep hoping.

It was very disappointing to see the number of anti-mask protests in cities across Canada this past weekend. The majority of the protestors seemed to be there to support their "freedom of choice", but many of those interviewed made claims varying from masks do absolutely nothing to help prevent the transmission of the virus to claims that it was "scientifically proven" that masks put you in greater danger of catching the virus. 🤷🏼‍♂️

 

[bEwAbG]

These types have always existed.  They just have a platform to broadcast their stupidity more readily.  Mask usage even in the holdout states continues to rise.  It's unfortunate that the first wave will last twice as long as was necessary in the U.S., but hopefully we'll be where most of the rest of the world is in another month or so.

[jotjot]

Well, does the mask work or not? One thing for sure no handshaking does. I am sure we all agree on that, right.

[phoenix_dream]

46 minutes ago, C-Dragons said:

There are those who insist on their freedom of choice NOT to wear masks, even though doing so would protect other “innocent people” as well as themselves. Most of the unfortunate circumstances caused by the virus have been due to “freedom of choice” and unfortunately I have yet to see that concept being limited in our country in a way that would make a significant difference. But I keep hoping.

It is so infuriating and disgusting.  Freedom of choice ENDS when your choices are harming others.  That's why we have laws against violent acts.  Why don't these people get that?!!  

[BigAl94]

24 minutes ago, bEwAbG said:

These types have always existed.  They just have a platform to broadcast their stupidity more readily.  Mask usage even in the holdout states continues to rise.  It's unfortunate that the first wave will last twice as long as was necessary in the U.S., but hopefully we'll be where most of the rest of the world is in another month or so.

It will be more than a months but expect the second wave to be horrendous

[tert333]

33 minutes ago, Fouremco said:

It was very disappointing to see the number of anti-mask protests in cities across Canada this past weekend. The majority of the protestors seemed to be there to support their "freedom of choice", but many of those interviewed made claims varying from masks do absolutely nothing to help prevent the transmission of the virus to claims that it was "scientifically proven" that masks put you in greater danger of catching the virus. 🤷🏼‍♂️

 

While I agree with you, people have the right to voice their beliefs.  However, once a law is passed to mandate it, they can continue to protest(as long as they are wearing a mask..).   Remember when all of the smokers were complaining their rights were being impinged upon, when the rules were changing around smoking in public places.   They did not care about any other rights but their own, even though they were impacting the health of others.   This is the same argument. 

 

People will always find an "expert" who will argue the other side of a position.   I would prefer to believe in the experts my government supports, especially as they have no vested reason to be biased in any way.   Why would the government want us to wear a mask, if it was not to protect us.   Not a big believer in the conspiracy theories....