Carnival CEO Says No Vaccination Requirement

[SumoCitrus]

4 minutes ago, Tampa Girl said:

 

Where are you finding that Americans have a "right to travel" - other than within the U.S.?  

 

Exactly where do you find your "right to travel" - other than within the U.S.  Our "right" to travel internationally is a "permission" granted by the foreign country.  And if a foreign country does not want you in the country unless vaccinated, it has the absolute right to forbid you entering the country.  Like too many of my fellow Americans, personal "rights" are grossly exaggerated.

 

I guess I find it a little odd that you believe there isn't (or shouldn't be) a right to travel. Pure dystopian.

 

Regarding the entrance requirements for foreign countries, couldn't the non-vax passengers just enjoy shipboard activities on those days? Again, assuming a given port has a vaccine requirement.

Edited April 21, 2021 by SumoCitrus

[SumoCitrus]

5 minutes ago, Pizzasteve said:

The fact that you call it injection with chemicals speaks volumes about your desire to spin doctor your fear of science or political views.

 

Actually, this speaks more about you. This isn't a fear of science or a political issue. If you are of the opinion that the vaccine does not contain a chemical, I think you have some reading to do. All vaccines do - whether a preservative or active ingredient. I think being skeptical about a vaccine that isn't even approved by the FDA is warranted.

[Tampa Girl]

Just now, SumoCitrus said:

 

I guess I find it a little odd that you believe there isn't (or shouldn't be a right to travel). Pure dystopian.

 

Regarding the entrance requirements for foreign countries, couldn't the non-vax passengers just enjoy shipboard activities on those days? Again, assuming a given port has a vaccine requirement.

  No, HAL will not allow you to board the ship if you have not had the Yellow Fever vaccine, for instanced.

 

But where did you get the info that we have an absolute right to travel to other countries without their implied or explicitly required permission?  The key word is "permission".  That does not equate to a "right."

 

[Pizzasteve]

2 minutes ago, SumoCitrus said:

 

I guess I find it a little odd that you believe there isn't (or shouldn't be) a right to travel. Pure dystopian.

 

Regarding the entrance requirements for foreign countries, couldn't the non-vax passengers just enjoy shipboard activities on those days? Again, assuming a given port has a vaccine 

"Pure dystopian" to clearly communicate the facts of life?  Please.  Our rights during travel are subject to limits by so many rules and laws that your post is hilarious.  So you can do whatever you want on a ship, not have a passport, run around naked, grab women as you please, be obviously ill in public spaces, commit crimes, throw food?  Come on.  Ships set the rules and we must obey or off ship you go.  The lines will define their terms and they will include vaccines or not at their management discretion.  No 'rights' are involved, other than those that international authorities/treaties and rules US ports impose.  Come on with the rhetoric.

[Pizzasteve]

17 minutes ago, SumoCitrus said:

 

Actually, this speaks more about you. This isn't a fear of science or a political issue. If you are of the opinion that the vaccine does not contain a chemical, I think you have some reading to do. All vaccines do - whether a preservative or active ingredient. I think being skeptical about a vaccine that isn't even approved by the FDA is warranted.

It is a very poor argument to try to create a false straw man.  I criticized the words you used as an attempt at exaggeration. We have a standard vaccine, but it contains 100% known ingredients.  Yes they include chemicals, but all ones tested for use in humans in millions of cases.  Please.

 

 I presented a series of arguments, none of which you responded to.  You chose to assert that I dont understand that vacccines include chemicals.  Cant you see how silly that is as a way to support your position?

 

By the way, the FDA has approved the vaccine for emergency use. One reason it was approved is that the science behind the vaccines is well understood and decades old, having been used for similar vaccines for decades.  It was tested in large scale clinical trials and has now safely protected millions with very very low side effects.

 

My father is a pharmacist and I grew up reading drug labels as his technician when younger, and the low number of side effects of this vaccine vs typical approved drugs is really a miracle.  It is a super clean drug. If we injected 200 million people globally with a placebo we would have some side effect appear, including deaths to investigate.

Edited April 21, 2021 by Pizzasteve

[harkinmr]

5 minutes ago, SumoCitrus said:

 

I guess I find it a little odd that you believe there isn't (or shouldn't be) a right to travel. Pure dystopian.

 

Regarding the entrance requirements for foreign countries, couldn't the non-vax passengers just enjoy shipboard activities on those days? Again, assuming a given port has a vaccine requirement.

No.  If a country deems a vaccination necessary for entry, then the restriction will be that only ships carrying fully vaccinated passenger and crew will be allowed to dock or drop anchor and disembark passengers.

 

Your "dystopian" comment stumps me.  Are you saying that any person should be able to freely cross any other country's border without permission or restriction?  That may be the case in certain areas of the world on a limited basis, but it is not the case for entry of foreigners into the US.

 

https://www.cbp.gov/travel/international-visitors/know-before-you-visit

[SumoCitrus]

 

16 minutes ago, Pizzasteve said:

having been used for similar vaccines for decades

 

Are you under the impression there was a mRNA vaccine used in humans prior to the Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccines?

 

I seem to have hit a nerve because your responses are increasingly vitriolic and personal. That's really a shame. You have options if you are still very afraid of COVID and I encourage you to do what is best for you.

[cruisemom42]

Also, as a practical matter, I feel that any "vaccine hesitancy" isn't necessarily manifest UNTIL you get through vaccinating all of those who want the vaccine. With this vaccine, in particular, I don't think there is a large population on the fence. (Especially with so few "enticements" on the table as far as some are concerned...)  You either really want the vaccine now, and thus you're going to book the first available appointment, or you really don't want it now, in which case you do nothing.

 

When this is the situation, it is hard to tell when you are going to reach the saturation point in the market, but it's likely that when that happens, the demand will dry up VERY fast. Almost like a faucet being turned off.

 

[SumoCitrus]

18 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

Are you saying that any person should be able to freely cross any other country's border without permission or restriction?

 

 

Not necessarily. But to sail the open seas, yes. It's dystopian to minimize freedoms that are, or have historically been rights - things we have fought for or constantly strived to improve, expand, or enhance. I find the response of "you didn't get the shot? stay in your hole! no government gave you the right to travel!" to be doomer-ish and bleak.

 

By the way, I am not vaccinated and have been traveling extensively. It has been inconvenient in some situations with the restrictions, but not impossible. With the cases falling and vaccinated numbers going up, I think countries are going to have a harder time justifying restrictions because what exactly are they trying to prevent?

 

I go back to my original question that no one seems to want to answer/engage: If the vaccine is so effective and so right for you, why are you afraid of others who don't have it? You're vaccinated. You should be all set, right?

[jeynon]

1 hour ago, harkinmr said:

The answer is very simple.  Because the cruise lines are trying to reduce the risk of an outbreak onboard, as well as the severity of that outbreak and the consequences of such (i.e., full ship quarantine and/or halting the cruise with a return to the port of origin).  A 100% vaccinated cruise ship allows them to address those issues in a much easier and less risky fashion.  Certainly easier and less risky than an unvaccinated crew and passenger cohort.

 

As to your point on health questionnaires being deemed "satisfactory", passengers have been notoriously dishonest when completing those questionnaires and have brought infectious diseases like the flu onboard and sickened passengers.  Cruise lines may want to try to get away with just the questionnaire, but they know that it generally is not trustworthy.

 

Vaccines are not "experimental gene therapy".  Please don't spread misinformation.

Fully vaccinated crew and passenger list will only be a false sense of health security. Already it is acknowledged that mRNA vaccines most likely will not prevent transmission of variants. https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/variants-may-be-responsible-for-coronavirus-cases-that-evade-vaccines-cdc-finds/ar-BB1fTPKW?li=BBnbfcL

 

In response to your "gene therapy statement, Copied from Moderna website: 

What is mRNA?

Messenger RNA, or mRNA, plays a fundamental role in human biology, transferring the instructions stored in DNA to make the proteins required in every living cell. mRNA provides instructions to cells to make protein. Moderna’s approach is to use mRNA medicines to instruct a patient’s own cells to produce proteins that could prevent, treat, or cure disease. We are also working to advance the development mRNA therapeutics that restore the activity of missing enzymes responsible for various rare diseases, such as methylmalonic acidemia (MMA) and propionic acidemia (PA).  Perhaps "gene therapy" semantically is incorrect, however by Moderna's own admission the messenger RNA over rides the bodies natural DNA instructions. By any stretch of the terminology, it cannot be called a true vaccine.

[POA1]

18 minutes ago, Pizzasteve said:

By the way, the FDA has approved the vaccine for emergency use. One reason it was approved is that the science behind the vaccines is well understood and decades old, having been used for similar vaccines for decades. 

The Janssen vaccine (J&J) used traditional vaccine technology. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are mRNA. Those do not have "decades" of experience behind them.

 

You can prove me wrong by naming any 20+ year old messenger RNA vaccine in use. Partial credit for any approved mRNA vaccine that's been in use for the better part of a decade.

 

I have nothing against vaccines. I get the flu vaccine every year. I also have nothing against new technology. The "well-understood" thing is a canard though.

[kazu]

11 minutes ago, SumoCitrus said:

I go back to my original question that no one seems to want to answer/engage: If the vaccine is so effective and so right for you, why are you afraid of others who don't have it?

 

Speaking for myself - if there are too many people that are not vaccinated and they all get infected, I don’t want to end up on a cruise to nowhere, refused entries in port  or quarantined in my cabin because of the outbreak.

 

I don’t see the vaccine as minimizing freedoms.  If countries you are visiting require it, you have no choice IF you want to cruise.  It’s no different than other vaccines that are required for entry into some countries - like Yellow Fever IMO.

[POA1]

15 minutes ago, SumoCitrus said:

Are you under the impression there was a mRNA vaccine used in humans prior to the Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccines?

 

I'm going to get my own bonus points, but the answer is yes for "used in tests." Zika, Ebola and rabies vaccines were tested but not approved. (There may be some emergency approval for the Ebola vaccine in some country, but I can't find any info.)

[Laminator]

11 minutes ago, SumoCitrus said:

 

 

Not necessarily. But to sail the open seas, yes. It's dystopian to minimize freedoms that are, or have historically been rights - things we have fought for or constantly strived to improve, expand, or enhance. I find the response of "you didn't get the shot? stay in your hole! no government gave you the right to travel!" to be doomer-ish and bleak.

 

By the way, I am not vaccinated and have been traveling extensively. It has been inconvenient in some situations with the restrictions, but not impossible. With the cases falling and vaccinated numbers going up, I think countries are going to have a harder time justifying restrictions because what exactly are they trying to prevent?

 

I go back to my original question that no one seems to want to answer/engage: If the vaccine is so effective and so right for you, why are you afraid of others who don't have it? You're vaccinated. You should be all set, right?

I am not afraid at all of others that don't have the vaccine. My only concern is getting stuck on a ship for an extra week or two because of an outbreak. Now if the cruise lines announce that all vaccinated pax will be able to disembark after receiving a PCR test I will not have any concerns. Let those who are unvaccinated stay on for whatever quarantine period is deemed necessary at the time. 

[harkinmr]

20 minutes ago, SumoCitrus said:

 

 

Not necessarily. But to sail the open seas, yes. It's dystopian to minimize freedoms that are, or have historically been rights - things we have fought for or constantly strived to improve, expand, or enhance. I find the response of "you didn't get the shot? stay in your hole! no government gave you the right to travel!" to be doomer-ish and bleak.

 

By the way, I am not vaccinated and have been traveling extensively. It has been inconvenient in some situations with the restrictions, but not impossible. With the cases falling and vaccinated numbers going up, I think countries are going to have a harder time justifying restrictions because what exactly are they trying to prevent?

 

I go back to my original question that no one seems to want to answer/engage: If the vaccine is so effective and so right for you, why are you afraid of others who don't have it? You're vaccinated. You should be all set, right?

What you say at the very beginning of your post is very much an American ideal.  It is part of our cultural experience as Americans and we believe very firmly in our constitutionally protected freedoms.  But even our constitutional rights can and have been limited historically.  No person has absolute freedom to do anything they want.  No US governmental authority has mandated the vaccine to travel.  You can travel freely within the US, as well as internationally, subject to international restrictions applied by other countries based on vaccinated status.  We do not carry all of our constitutional protections on an airplane or a cruise ship as we travel. 

 

I don't think anyone has ever indicated they are "afraid' of others that are not vaccinated.  As cruisers we are, however, afraid that our cruise might be negatively impacted by a COVID outbreak on board.  And that is a legitimate concern.  That is why most people advocate for a fully vaccinated cruise ship.

 

As I am not sailing until 2022, I will say that my primary fear concerning those choosing not to be vaccinated is that we may not achieve herd immunity as a country as soon as we would like, or that the growth and introduction of variants and continuing infections will result in more sickness and death.  That to me would be a bigger tragedy than what we have already experienced.  Obviously everyone is free to choose for themselves, but I am a proponent of the theory that we all have an obligation to protect not only ourselves, but others as well.

Edited April 21, 2021 by harkinmr

[harkinmr]

18 minutes ago, jeynon said:

Fully vaccinated crew and passenger list will only be a false sense of health security. Already it is acknowledged that mRNA vaccines most likely will not prevent transmission of variants. https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/variants-may-be-responsible-for-coronavirus-cases-that-evade-vaccines-cdc-finds/ar-BB1fTPKW?li=BBnbfcL

 

In response to your "gene therapy statement, Copied from Moderna website: 

What is mRNA?

Messenger RNA, or mRNA, plays a fundamental role in human biology, transferring the instructions stored in DNA to make the proteins required in every living cell. mRNA provides instructions to cells to make protein. Moderna’s approach is to use mRNA medicines to instruct a patient’s own cells to produce proteins that could prevent, treat, or cure disease. We are also working to advance the development mRNA therapeutics that restore the activity of missing enzymes responsible for various rare diseases, such as methylmalonic acidemia (MMA) and propionic acidemia (PA).  Perhaps "gene therapy" semantically is incorrect, however by Moderna's own admission the messenger RNA over rides the bodies natural DNA instructions. By any stretch of the terminology, it cannot be called a true vaccine.

mRNA vaccines are NOT gene therapy in any way shape or form and are TRUE vaccines.  You need to educate yourself before promoting disinformation.  Disinformation is hazardous to everyone's health.

On mRNA vaccines:

 

"They work in a different way from previous generations of vaccines. Instead of introducing the body to an inactivated or weakened version of a virus or a piece of it, they temporarily turn the body’s cells into tiny vaccine-making factories. They do this using synthesized versions of something called messenger RNA, a molecule that normally carries genetic coding from a cell’s DNA to its protein-making machinery. In this case, the mRNA instructs the body to make the spike protein that Sars-CoV-2 uses to enter cells. This, in turn, stimulates the body to make long-lasting antibodies to the virus. Messenger RNA vaccines are quicker to develop than traditional ones because their production doesn’t require growing viruses or viral proteins inside live cells."

 

"Critics have taken to labeling mRNA vaccines a form of gene therapy, insinuating that the shots might somehow alter your DNA: They don’t. While the messenger RNA they employ is a type of genetic material, the vaccines differ from what is typically thought of as gene therapy in that they do not change the DNA inside cells. “They do not affect or interact with our DNA in any way,” the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention explains. In fact, mRNA molecules in the vaccines, which are short-lived, don’t enter the nucleus of cells, where DNA is stored, the CDC notes."

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-22/are-mrna-covid-vaccines-risky-what-the-experts-say-quicktake

 

[Daniel A]

1 hour ago, SumoCitrus said:

I guess I find it a little odd that you believe there isn't (or shouldn't be) a right to travel. Pure dystopian.

 

 I looks like @Tampa Girl isn't the only one who thinks that.  According to the United States Department of State:  

"Denial of a U.S. Passport Application

There are a number of reasons why the U.S. Department of State can deny your U.S. Passport application or renewal, including:

 

Owing child support

 

Receiving an IRS taxpayer notice in the mail about having a large overdue unpaid tax debt

 

Having a previous passport revoked

 

Being involved in a custody dispute if you are a minor

 

Being subject to foreign extradition requests. This involves U.S. authorities handing over a person accused or convicted of a crime to the foreign state or country where the crime was committed.

 

Receiving certain court orders and declarations

 

Defaulting on an assistance loan from the Department of State. You must repay this loan first, or arrange to do so"

 

U.S. Passport Fees, Facilities or Problems | USAGov

 

 

[SumoCitrus]

44 minutes ago, kazu said:

It’s no different than other vaccines that are required for entry into some countries - like Yellow Fever IMO.

 

FWIW, I never received a yellow fever vaccine and I have traveled internationally and been on several HAL cruises. I've also never been to a place that requires a flu vaccine.

[SumoCitrus]

45 minutes ago, POA1 said:

I'm going to get my own bonus points, but the answer is yes for "used in tests." Zika, Ebola and rabies vaccines were tested but not approved. (There may be some emergency approval for the Ebola vaccine in some country, but I can't find any info.)

 

I couldn't find anything that said those were human trials. I just assumed it was animal testing.

[SumoCitrus]

43 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

Obviously everyone is free to choose for themselves, but I am a proponent of the theory that we all have an obligation to protect not only ourselves, but others as well.

 

I'm sorry but the "protect others" (or alternatively, "protect grandma") is a red herring. Always has been. It's a ploy to guilt people into compliance. It is terribly flawed:

 

• Where do you draw the line? What else should I do to "protect others" ? Not drive? Give up my guns? Not speak?
• Again (and again and again) going back to vaccine effectiveness. If the vaccines are so safe and effective, and you have the doses, why must I do anything at all to protect you? Your vaccine will protect you. The protect others bit, during this post-vaccine time, is a tacit admission that people doubt the vaccine's safety and/or effectiveness.

[Florida_gal_50]

6 minutes ago, SumoCitrus said:

 

FWIW, I never received a yellow fever vaccine and I have traveled internationally and been on several HAL cruises. I've also never been to a place that requires a flu vaccine.

I was on a cruise to South America that required a yellow fever shot so it does happen.  I'm curious how you see Covid ending without a vaccine?  I've encountered people that think it's Bill Gates is trying to kill people with the vaccine, people thinking they will have a chip implanted in them to people that think they will get mad cow disease.  The first thing that comes to mind isn't wow these people are very intelligent.  I'm so thrilled when I hear of anyone getting the covid vaccine and I am one of those people.  I had zero hesitation.  I have no desire to sail on a ship where everyone is not vaccinated. 

[Florida_gal_50]

6 minutes ago, SumoCitrus said:

 

I'm sorry but the "protect others" (or alternatively, "protect grandma") is a red herring. Always has been. It's a ploy to guilt people into compliance. It is terribly flawed:

 

• Where do you draw the line? What else should I do to "protect others" ? Not drive? Give up my guns? Not speak?
• Again (and again and again) going back to vaccine effectiveness. If the vaccines are so safe and effective, and you have the doses, why must I do anything at all to protect you? Your vaccine will protect you. The protect others bit, during this post-vaccine time, is a tacit admission that people doubt the vaccine's safety and/or effectiveness.

No, it's about people that don't have the vaccine that could disrupt the cruise for everyone.  Surely you've seen that mentioned in this thread more than once.

[SumoCitrus]

1 minute ago, Florida_gal_50 said:

I was on a cruise to South America that required a yellow fever shot so it does happen.  I'm curious how you see Covid ending without a vaccine?  I've encountered people that think it's Bill Gates is trying to kill people with the vaccine, people thinking they will have a chip implanted in them to people that think they will get mad cow disease.  The first thing that comes to mind isn't wow these people are very intelligent.  I'm so thrilled when I hear of anyone getting the covid vaccine and I am one of those people.  I had zero hesitation.  I have no desire to sail on a ship where everyone is not vaccinated. 

 

There are definitely some destinations where countries require vaccines for entry. I just don't go to those places. My point was that I have been able to cruise freely for years without providing medical data to the cruise line or having an injection.

 

How will it end? Well, the Spanish Flu ended without a vaccine. How did that happen? Probably a combination of deaths, acquired immunity, mitigation, and virus mutation. That is the likely outcome here. The virus burns itself out. Is there something that makes you think COVID will last forever?

[albingirl]

1 hour ago, SumoCitrus said:

 

 

Not necessarily. But to sail the open seas, yes. It's dystopian to minimize freedoms that are, or have historically been rights - things we have fought for or constantly strived to improve, expand, or enhance. I find the response of "you didn't get the shot? stay in your hole! no government gave you the right to travel!" to be doomer-ish and bleak.

 

By the way, I am not vaccinated and have been traveling extensively. It has been inconvenient in some situations with the restrictions, but not impossible. With the cases falling and vaccinated numbers going up, I think countries are going to have a harder time justifying restrictions because what exactly are they trying to prevent?

 

I go back to my original question that no one seems to want to answer/engage: If the vaccine is so effective and so right for you, why are you afraid of others who don't have it? You're vaccinated. You should be all set, right?

This argument seems to be never ending at this point, but as far as being all set?  Not at all if you choose to be on a ship without being vaccinated, since that is your right, but endangering the right of others to visit the ports they wish to visit.  Not to mention the downer of being on a sick ship. Most ports will never allow entry and you know that.

[Mosaic]

This thread needs shut down and some of the regular posters here should realize this is a forum about cruising.