CDC Order

[stevenr597]

2 minutes ago, voljeep said:

I guess MSC didn't get the memo ... 🍻

 

stay safe 😷

stay hydrated

To the best of my knowledge MSC is currently not having any liners leaving from a U.S. Port.  

[SargassoPirate]

3 hours ago, Steelers36 said:

Ok, but then you cannot be assured that everyone in those foreign ports the ship calls on has also been vaccinated.  Are you planning to stay on board?

 I don't see that as an issue if everyone on the ship, crew and passengers, have been vaccinated.  What is your view?

[voljeep]

12 minutes ago, voljeep said:

cruise industry

 

1 minute ago, SargassoPirate said:

 ( deleted )

 

9 minutes ago, stevenr597 said:

To the best of my knowledge MSC is currently not having any liners leaving from a U.S. Port.  

well, i do realize that South Florida is the cruise capital of the world . but i was giving the rest of the world at least partial credit for being in the 'cruise industry' 🤑

 

stay safe 😷

[score34]

1 hour ago, stevenr597 said:

I cannot see the cruise industry permitting people to travel on one of their ships until we have an safe and effective Coronavirus Vaccine.  I do feel that it will be mandatory, until we have found that the virus is no longer a threat, which will be well into next year.  Although one can argue that other members may be effective, the threat of a law suit would be too great for a cruise line to risk.  In addition, signing a waiver against filing a suit would not be feasible. 

You are right, “safe and effective” ! But “safe and effective” will take years to determine that! That will bankrupt the cruise and travel industry . And besides a normal healthy person who just needs to vaccine to travel for leisure reasons will be the very very last ones to get the vaccine. How could you decide to make the Covid vaccine mandatory but not the Flu Vaccine??? The law suit will come from them making it mandatory to take Covid vaccine. It will be not be proven “safe and effective” for years. 

Edited October 3, 2020 by score34

[nocl]

2 hours ago, voljeep said:

I guess MSC didn't get the memo ... 🍻

 

stay safe 😷

stay hydrated

When MSC started back up the new infection rate in Italy was less than 400 per day around 6.7 per million.  With that number of odds of an infected passenger trying to board would be .1 per 1000 passengers.  So the odds of the ship remaining free, especially with the testing program which would reduce the odds even more .  That would mean that a 2000 passenger ship would only face an infection on board about once every 7-10 cruises assuming that testing would catch at least 50% of the active infections.

 

Lets watch an see if they remain as lucky now with their infection rate growing to around 2000 per day 33 per million which would mean that there risk is now 1 person per every 1-2 cruises.

 

In the case of the US we are running 42,000 infections per day, or about  123.5 per million.  That means the odds of someone with active infection  would be about 2.5 per thousand  or in the case of a 2000 passenger ship expect 5 active infections per 1-2 cruises.  That means with the current testing accuracy even with PCR expect 1-2 to actually get through testing with a false negative depending upon the timing of their infection. Or about 1 every other cruise.

Edited October 3, 2020 by nocl

[memoak]

52 minutes ago, score34 said:

You are right, “safe and effective” ! But “safe and effective” will take years to determine that! That will bankrupt the cruise and travel industry . And besides a normal healthy person who just needs to vaccine to travel for leisure reasons will be the very very last ones to get the vaccine. How could you decide to make the Covid vaccine mandatory but not the Flu Vaccine??? The law suit will come from them making it mandatory to take Covid vaccine. It will be not be proven “safe and effective” for years. 

There would not be any lawsuits that would get very far. When I fly into the Amazon region of Brazil I could not even get on a plane without showing proof of several vaccines 

[Steelers36]

13 minutes ago, nocl said:

When MSC started back up the new infection rate in Italy was less than 400 per day around 6.7 per million.  With that number of odds of an infected passenger trying to board would be .1 per 1000 passengers.  So the odds of the ship remaining free, especially with the testing program which would reduce the odds even more .  That would mean that a 2000 passenger ship would only face an infection on board about once every 7-10 cruises assuming that testing would catch at least 50% of the active infections.

 

Lets watch an see if they remain as lucky now with their infection rate growing to around 2000 per day 33 per million which would mean that there risk is now 1 person per every 1-2 cruises.

 

In the case of the US we are running 42,000 infections per day, or about  123.5 per million.  That means the odds of someone with active infection  would be about 2.5 per thousand  or in the case of a 2000 passenger ship expect 5 active infections per 1-2 cruises.  That means with the current testing accuracy even with PCR expect 1-2 to actually get through testing with a false negative depending upon the timing of their infection. Or about 1 every other cruise.

#1 - are the only people cruising on MSC from Italy?

#2 - Detection of infections is going to directly vary and correlate with the amount of testing as well.

#3 - Although you may have some valid analysis, I don't think the numbers can necessarily project into the situation as there are even more variables involved.

 

BTAIM, someone coming down with COVID-19 every 1-2 cruises is not a calamity IMO.

 

[Steelers36]

2 hours ago, SargassoPirate said:

 I don't see that as an issue if everyone on the ship, crew and passengers, have been vaccinated.  What is your view?

 

You had originally posted this:  "I think the only way I would get on a ship in the foreseeable future is if all crew and all passengers were required to show proof of vaccination for Covid-19.  Why allow walking Covid-19 incubators to board and possibly ruin a cruise for everyone?  I don't want to get stuck on a ship or in a foreign port because of an outbreak on ship.".

 

I posted my remark in the reply above because you were going to feel comfortable if all around you were similarly vaccinated and that would be impossible to guarantee for civilians in ports of call (i.e. off the ship). 

 

My view is that whoever is vaccinated, the efficacy level may only be in the 50% range.  Maybe 75%.  Who knows?  Not until final trials are over and there is full reporting and a candidate is selected.  Something is better than nothing perhaps, but I would not expect to be on a ship, nor in any large group and expect to be free from COVID-19 just because all of them are vaccinated. 

 

Does this worry me?  No, not at all.  But that is me because I never seem to get ill from anything.  Never taken a flu vaccine (which is also a respiratory illness and which vaccines are never anywhere near 90% or 100% effective) and never had the flu and I am mid-60's.

 

It is socially accepted in North America (at least USA and Canada) to get a flu vaccine shot in the fall season - especially for seniors.  It is also accepted that we don't fret and worry in general over that potential and do anything much other than cover coughs and sneezes and practice normal hygiene.  Same for Noro on ships (hygiene protocols).  I do realize that COVID-19 has proven to be more contagious than seasonal flu, but its harm level also seems to be decreasing as time goes by. 

 

Whatever the new protocols are for cruising, everyone will have to take their own decisions on the risk in forming a decision to travel or not.  I certainly do not expect a Nirvana of a protected environment on a cruise ship, nor anywhere else.  I will be comfortable with reasonable protocols and will stay home if we are too restricted in movements and wait until otherwise.  I do very much hope the main cruise lines can survive and come back new, and I would like to support that, but I am not prepared to spend an entire cruise cooped up on board, afraid of every person I meet in the hallway or stairwell.

 

[nocl]

1 hour ago, Steelers36 said:

#1 - are the only people cruising on MSC from Italy?

#2 - Detection of infections is going to directly vary and correlate with the amount of testing as well.

#3 - Although you may have some valid analysis, I don't think the numbers can necessarily project into the situation as there are even more variables involved.

 

BTAIM, someone coming down with COVID-19 every 1-2 cruises is not a calamity IMO.

 

Yes MSC when they started was restricted to Italian passengers, not sure about today but have not heard that those restrictions have been loosened

2. Italy was heavily hit at the start and has a very intensive test and contract tracing program.  In the US around 50% of those contacted for contact tracing will not give out their contact so contact tracing is very limited.

3. There are certainly more variables, because one cannot project where in the US all of the passengers are coming from, but the infection rate in the source population is certainly a major criteria that impacts the effectiveness of other measures.

 

The analysis is not someone coming down with COVID, it is the odds of someone with active COVID making it onto the ship at the start of the cruise.  Once on board depending upon their viral load, length of cruise, where they spend time, how many people they interact with, how strictly they follow the rules, the number of new infections could be anywhere from zero to a few hundred.  If the cruise is short, 3-5 days it is unlikely that the cases will be identified on board of the ship.  5 to 10 day cruise then you might see the new cases. 

 

The issue is also how often is crew tested.  A likely scenario is that with short cruises.  Any infected passengers will get off, but any infected crew with incubate in and it will be found (as in the case of the Hurtigruten ship) a couple of cruise later.

 

The key point is that will be very difficult to keep COVID off of the cruise ships with US passengers at the current infection rate.  Then you have all of the other possibilities kick in including what happens if a case is identified on board.

Edited October 3, 2020 by nocl

[nocl]

7 hours ago, Steelers36 said:

#1 - are the only people cruising on MSC from Italy?

#2 - Detection of infections is going to directly vary and correlate with the amount of testing as well.

#3 - Although you may have some valid analysis, I don't think the numbers can necessarily project into the situation as there are even more variables involved.

 

BTAIM, someone coming down with COVID-19 every 1-2 cruises is not a calamity IMO.

 

While they are still only leaving from Italian ports (and as a result all passengers must be able to travel to Italy), it does appear that they are allowing passengers from other EU countries.

Here is an article about 13 French passengers denied boarding because 1 test positive on both Antigen test and PCT test.

 

 

https://www.trvltrend.com/cruise/denied-boarding-to-msc-grandiosa/

[HappyInVan]

19 hours ago, stevenr597 said:

The White House has used the PCR test which tests for the genetic material of the Coronavirus which is highly accurate, and in fact, may generate some False Positive.  

 

As I recall, Trump's navy valet was infected in May...

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/valet-to-president-trump-navy-member-tests-positive-for-covid-19-2020-5

 

Here's the interesting part...

 

“CNN reported that Trump was "upset" when he learned of the valet testing positive, and that both he and Pence are tested WEEKLY with Abbott rapid result test devices.”

 

So, who's the West Wing superspreader?

 

In May, they were using Abbott's rapid test machine for WH visitors, staffers and residents.

 

“Abbott's rapid tests can produce false negatives under certain conditions, the company says”

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/abbott-laboratories-coronavirus-rapid-test/index.html

 

So, how do you explain the outbreak in the West Wing. Not all the infected were at the Supreme Court announcement on Saturday?

[stevenr597]

19 hours ago, SargassoPirate said:

 I don't see that as an issue if everyone on the ship, crew and passengers, have been vaccinated.  What is your view?

I believe that initially the cruise industry will only permit individual to tour using cruise tours endorsed by the line.  In addition, they may certainly restrict leaving the ship in areas with a high index of Coronavirus.  

[stevenr597]

35 minutes ago, HappyInVan said:

 

As I recall, Trump's navy valet was infected in May...

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/valet-to-president-trump-navy-member-tests-positive-for-covid-19-2020-5

 

Here's the interesting part...

 

“CNN reported that Trump was "upset" when he learned of the valet testing positive, and that both he and Pence are tested WEEKLY with Abbott rapid result test devices.”

 

So, who's the West Wing superspreader?

 

In May, they were using Abbott's rapid test machine for WH visitors, staffers and residents.

 

“Abbott's rapid tests can produce false negatives under certain conditions, the company says”

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/abbott-laboratories-coronavirus-rapid-test/index.html

 

So, how do you explain the outbreak in the West Wing. Not all the infected were at the Supreme Court announcement on Saturday?

The important thing is that no test is completely accurate.  The PCR has given false positives and even false negatives and the Rapid Tests are only about 80% effective, having a greater index of false negatives.

However, the highly respected medical journal, the New England Journal of Medicine has also said that many people view the wearing of a face mask as almost a “talisman”, that “....if you wear a face mask you are protected.”  Even physicians, and other health care personal,  who have worn gowns, N 95 masks and goggles have contracted COVID-19.  While face masks are certainly helpful, they are certainly not absolute. 

The White House had required all guests to have a temperature test, history and testing.  They thought that this would be sufficient.  It hasn’t been.  They are looking into it.

I do feel that the cruise lines will require individuals to be vaccinated, in fact, I would be surprised if they don’t also require a Flu Vaccine, and have rapid testing before they are permitted to board. 

[Potstech]

48 minutes ago, HappyInVan said:

 

As I recall, Trump's navy valet was infected in May...

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/valet-to-president-trump-navy-member-tests-positive-for-covid-19-2020-5

 

Here's the interesting part...

 

“CNN reported that Trump was "upset" when he learned of the valet testing positive, and that both he and Pence are tested WEEKLY with Abbott rapid result test devices.”

 

So, who's the West Wing superspreader?

 

In May, they were using Abbott's rapid test machine for WH visitors, staffers and residents.

 

“Abbott's rapid tests can produce false negatives under certain conditions, the company says”

 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/abbott-laboratories-coronavirus-rapid-test/index.html

 

So, how do you explain the outbreak in the West Wing. Not all the infected were at the Supreme Court announcement on Saturday?

How do you explain the wife of the Canadian Prime Minister testing  positive for the virus and very little said by all?

[Abercrombie2019]

2 hours ago, Potstech said:

How do you explain the wife of the Canadian Prime Minister testing  positive for the virus and very little said by all?

Not sure what that has to do with anything, but she got it on a trip to London UK, at the beginning of March.  When she returned to Canada she went into quarantine and our Prime Minister self isolated even though he was negative.  He continued to run the country from isolation until it was clear he was not infected.  
The incident received coverage for a while, but mostly because she was in contact with much more famous people in London.

[BirdTravels]

On 10/3/2020 at 7:55 AM, SargassoPirate said:

 I don't see that as an issue if everyone on the ship, crew and passengers, have been vaccinated.  What is your view?

So an “effective” vaccine only has to have positive results in 50% of the people taking it. I think that fact escapes people. That is true of all vaccines and not a COVID loophole. So, there would be people walking around thinking that the were invincible, acting foolishly, and could carry the virus onboard. And infect others that had “unsuccessful” vaccinations. 

 

That is the issue. 

Edited October 5, 2020 by BirdTravels

[Steelers36]

10 hours ago, Abercrombie2019 said:

Not sure what that has to do with anything, but she got it on a trip to London UK, at the beginning of March.  When she returned to Canada she went into quarantine and our Prime Minister self isolated even though he was negative.  He continued to run the country from isolation until it was clear he was not infected.  
The incident received coverage for a while, but mostly because she was in contact with much more famous people in London.

And for considerable time longer.

[mcrcruiser]

Take it to the bank .This virus is serious . Thus ,all decision makers should take health pf the pax & crew as their number one priority before returning  to ships at sea ,imo

[caribill]

15 hours ago, stevenr597 said:

However, the highly respected medical journal, the New England Journal of Medicine has also said that many people view the wearing of a face mask as almost a “talisman”, that “....if you wear a face mask you are protected.” 

 

The wearing of face masks is not intended to protect the wearer. It is intended to keep people who have the virus, but do not know it, from spreading the virus to other people.

 

If you choose not to wear a mask, you are not saying you do not need protection. You are saying you do not care about other people.

 

Of course what they wear in a hospital are masks designed to protect the wearer, but these not not the type masks that the general population is using.

[Lucky TGO]

Hi to all my Cruise Critic friends,

This is just me. I don’t care Who says it safe to cruise and who says it’s not safe. I will decide for myself. 
At this time I don’t think it’s safe. I’m not even looking at all the cruise promotions. 
Tony

[stevenr597]

9 hours ago, caribill said:

 

The wearing of face masks is not intended to protect the wearer. It is intended to keep people who have the virus, but do not know it, from spreading the virus to other people.

 

If you choose not to wear a mask, you are not saying you do not need protection. You are saying you do not care about other people.

 

Of course what they wear in a hospital are masks designed to protect the wearer, but these not not the type masks that the general population is using.

Excellent comments.  Unless one wears goggles and an approved N95 Respiratory/Mask, one can still contract the Coronavirus.  The purpose of a face mask is to protect an individual contracting Coronavirus from the mask wearer, not the other way around. 

[RocketMan275]

2 hours ago, stevenr597 said:

Excellent comments.  Unless one wears goggles and an approved N95 Respiratory/Mask, one can still contract the Coronavirus.  The purpose of a face mask is to protect an individual contracting Coronavirus from the mask wearer, not the other way around. 

If my mask protects you from me, why won't your mask protect you from me?

[RocketMan275]

How many believe we should be wearing masks, socially distancing, etc., until 3rd, maybe 4th quarter 2021 like Fauci says we should?

[Abercrombie2019]

6 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

If my mask protects you from me, why won't your mask protect you from me?

If an infected person wears a mask it can slow down the virus that they are exhaling.  Their breath will not travel as far from their mouth, or as fast.  So it is less likely to reach another person.

 

If an infected person does not wear a mask, the virus that they are exhaling may hit the face of people that are close to them.  If those people are wearing a cloth mask, they can still breath the virus in. The virus will be able to travel between the fibers of a cloth mask.  (The virus cannot travel through a N95 mask, which is why doctors use them).

 

If an infected person and a non-infected person are both wearing masks, it is much less likely that the virus will spread between them.  Since most people don't know if they are infected (because they may be asymptomatic) it is important for everyone to wear a mask when they are in public.

[Candocruises]

4 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

How many believe we should be wearing masks, socially distancing, etc., until 3rd, maybe 4th quarter 2021 like Fauci says we should?

No way!!  The pandemic is OVER!  We now have a "casedemic."  The number of cases, which is greatly exaggerated, is making the death rate, which is also exaggerated, plummet.  I am sure this argument has been made many times here but here are some stories you will not hear because they don't exist:  "Military ravaged by Coronavirus."  As of last week there were, hold your breath, 8 deaths of active duty and reservists.  Most deaths are from the 1.4 million reservists, with only a few among the 1.1 million active duty members.  "Coronavirus ravages Sub-Saharan Africa."  In countries that are extremely poor, have rancid living conditions and populations living in areas where malaria is the biggest threat the virus is not taking lives much less having the number of cases reported in more developed countries.  Wonder what is used by this population to prevent or control the spread of malaria?  Finally, if you are still reading and my post has not been censored, what ever happened to the wealth of knowledge scientists obtained from the controlled environment they had back in March when the Princess ships with Covid were quarantined for weeks?  When and where did they apply this knowledge?  Cruising and airline travel may never return unless the people grow a backbone and stand up and say "enough is enough!"