Who in their right mind would want to cruise under these conditions??????

[JamieLogical]

4 minutes ago, At Sea At Peace said:

 

Agreed and nice summary.  Very rare these days here and also welcomed.

 

I've still not found clear reasoning by the CDC for the 98% 95% vaccinated crew and passengers respectively.

 

Based on the NYT article today, with the potential the outdoor transmission might have been overstated by 10 to 100 times, the CDC motive for the 98% 95% rule might just be that they really can't give a scientific reply to NCL and Del Rio as to why they can't sail now with 100% vaccinated crew and passengers.

 

As each day passes, as the vaccination rates climb, and now as we see the ebb and plateau, there is a wary large segment of the population choosing not to get the vaccines.  If there are no rewards, i.e., a return towards less tyrannical edicts on individuals and activities, combined with a growing list of intentional misinformation and guidance by the CDC, then those holding out on the vaccine will become more ensconced in their decision.

 

The thing that I find frustrating, and I assume Del Rio does as well, is that the CDC made some concession towards vaccinated sailings by lifting the requirement for test sailings, but stopped short of coming out with separate guidance for vaccinated revenue sailings. I think, when that info about test sailings not being required if 98% of crew and 95% of pax vaccinated, the logical assumption was that the CDC was making a meaningful distinction between vaccinated and unvaccinated sailings. But then when the full guidance came out, no such distinction was made.

 

It's like the acknowledged that fully vaccinated sailing was safe (thus no need for test cruises), but then gave no option for reduced mitigation on the actual sailings.

[Sinbadssailors]

1 hour ago, At Sea At Peace said:

 

 

 

If there are no rewards, i.e., a return towards less tyrannical edicts on individuals and activities, combined with a growing list of intentional misinformation and guidance by the CDC, then those holding out on the vaccine will become more ensconced in their decision.

 

I flew to Mexico in September, pre vaccines, pre vaccination. No test in either direction.

 

(And lived to tell the tale)

 

Now I'm vaccinated, as are many who want to be in the US, but I now need a test to return to my country.  So I'd have to find somewhere to do that, on vacation, likely with some expense attached.

 

So what have I gained by being vaccinated, or from half my country being vaccinated? 

I'm apparently more dangerous now than I was in September- certainly less trusted by the CDC.  

 

 

"All air passengers coming to the United States, including U.S. citizens and fully vaccinated people, are required to have a negative COVID-19 test result no more than 3 days before travel or documentation of recovery  from COVID-19 in the past 3 months  before they board a flight to the United States. "

 

 

 

 

[winterbliss]

5 hours ago, JamieLogical said:

 

How is it not "taking a stand" for something to get the vaccine to return to normal life? I believe that in order to return to normal life people SHOULD get vaccinated. A return to normal life without being vaccinated, putting yourself and those around you at risk, is folly. That's the stand I am making!

I see your point. But I think you believe in your choice though...that you're doing the right thing for yourself and society. Of course, that makes sense to me.

I feel what you don't understand about some like myself, is that we are just as concerned about others as you. The fact is, many health professionals that have been censored and silenced, are very concerned about the side effects and long term impact on our collective health.

Retired RN that I am, I know a thing or two about death and dying, and I in no way disregard or minimize illness of any kind but I learned a long, long time ago to never place blind trust in anyone or anything. That's particularly important when it comes to doctors and health authorities.

[DCGuy64]

4 minutes ago, Sinbadssailors said:

 

I flew to Mexico in September, pre vaccines, pre vaccination. No test in either direction.

 

(And lived to tell the tale)

 

Now I'm vaccinated, as are many who want to be in the US, but I now need a test to return to my country.  So I'd have to find somewhere to do that, on vacation, likely with some expense attached.

 

So what have I gained by being vaccinated, or from half my country being vaccinated? 

I'm apparently more dangerous now than I was in September- certainly less trusted by the CDC.  

 

 

"All air passengers coming to the United States, including U.S. citizens and fully vaccinated people, are required to have a negative COVID-19 test result no more than 3 days before travel or documentation of recovery  from COVID-19 in the past 3 months  before they board a flight to the United States. "

 

 

 

 

Well, at there's this:

https://www.afar.com/magazine/cdc-approves-at-home-covid-tests-for-international-travel

 

PS My wife and I spent a week at an all-inclusive in Mexico last September and were fine. No vaccinations, no quarantines, no nothing.

Edited May 11, 2021 by DCGuy64

[Sinbadssailors]

16 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

Well, at there's this:

https://www.afar.com/magazine/cdc-approves-at-home-covid-tests-for-international-travel

 

PS My wife and I spent a week at an all-inclusive in Mexico last September and were fine. No vaccinations, no quarantines, no nothing.

Interesting- thank you

[kirtihk]

1 hour ago, JamieLogical said:

 

The thing that I find frustrating, and I assume Del Rio does as well, is that the CDC made some concession towards vaccinated sailings by lifting the requirement for test sailings, but stopped short of coming out with separate guidance for vaccinated revenue sailings. I think, when that info about test sailings not being required if 98% of crew and 95% of pax vaccinated, the logical assumption was that the CDC was making a meaningful distinction between vaccinated and unvaccinated sailings. But then when the full guidance came out, no such distinction was made.

 

It's like the acknowledged that fully vaccinated sailing was safe (thus no need for test cruises), but then gave no option for reduced mitigation on the actual sailings.

Hi, neighbor,

 

That's due to the fact they don't want us to sail (similar to how I previously wrote in Hawaii example - please come to visit us, but you must quarantine at your own expense for 14 days. Who on average comes for vacation to Hawaii for 3 weeks or longer?  Basically, Hawaii didn't want us to come, did they?).

 

PS I start to regret I fall for the trap of accepting the shot (I only did it, because at that time I truly believed that I will be off of restrictions).  Is it possible to remove it from my body (rhetorical question, of course)?

Edited May 11, 2021 by kirtihk

[Tippyton]

The rules are beyond ridiculous at this point.  Reminds me of that comedy TV show "Whose Pandemic Is It Anyway?  Where the rules are made up and facts don't matter!"

[kristi195]

8 hours ago, winterbliss said:

I didn't read the article, however, I think at this point, if you choose to take this injection because you believe it is effective and not concerned about side effects, your choice. If you choose to take it JUST so you can vacation..or so that you can get back to a more normal life... I believe that shows an unwillingness to make a stand for something.....if you are forced to by employers to take something that has not gone through the usual process to determine efficacy and safety, so that you can work, and side effects are ultimately determined to be of great significance to your health, I hope that class actions reign on any and all said companies.

 

Having said all that, leave pregnant women and children alone, which of course, we know that isn't the case either.

Who needs to make a stand for anything? My husband and I felt relieved to have gotten the vaccines. And the EU is making plans to open up for vaccinated Americans! Yay. So if that's what is required to travel, we would get it. We need passports too and in 2022 an ETIAS. So we would get that too. No difference. 

[steveknj]

6 minutes ago, Tippyton said:

The rules are beyond ridiculous at this point.  Reminds me of that comedy TV show "Whose Pandemic Is It Anyway?  Where the rules are made up and facts don't matter!"

More accurately is, the rules change as we know more.  The problem is, we are still learning.  That's what happens with science.

 

I do think some of the CDC rules are overly restrictive, but I do think they are trying to be overly cautious.  Personally, as of today, with less than half the people in most states (and especially in the cruise centers of places like Florida and Texas), I'm not touching any cruise where the crew and passengers aren't vaccinated.

 

I read a story about the polio vaccine the other day.  The same fears that people have now about that vaccine are what people have now (though I think these days, most of the fears that people have are either politically motivated or driven by folks who want to be anti-"whatever party is in power".  I'm not sure that was the case in the 1950s.

 

There's a risk with everything.   Should you not have that heart transplant because there's a risk you might not wake up from the surgery?   You play the odds and hope for the best.  The odds are with the vaccine right now.

[harkinmr]

4 hours ago, JamieLogical said:

 

If you want to avoid most of these restrictions, your best bet is to sail on one of NCL's cruises out of Jamaica or the DR. NCL has already announced that you won't be restricted to ship-only excursions. Frank Del Rio has made it clear that he thinks the strict CDC mandates about masking are absurd for fully vaccinated cruises, so I don't expect a very strict mask mandate on board. You don't have to worry about quarantining, because the likelihood of an outbreak on a ship with fully vaccinated passengers and crew is next to zero.

I'm not sure you can make that assumption.  FDR has said that his SailSafe protocols will apply to vaccinated sailings and those protocols include masks.  I think everyone should expect that masks are going to be a part of ship board life for both vaccinated and unvaccinated sailings out of the US, or anywhere else in the world for that matter, at least for the short term.  

 

"Despite the vaccination requirement, guests will still need to wear face coverings while onboard the ship. Guests will need to don a mask at all times while indoors, except while in their own stateroom and while eating and drinking in restaurants, bars, and lounges. Guests will also need to wear a mask outdoors when physical distancing is not possible." 

[kirtihk]

17 minutes ago, kristi195 said:

Who needs to make a stand for anything? My husband and I felt relieved to have gotten the vaccines. And the EU is making plans to open up for vaccinated Americans! Yay. So if that's what is required to travel, we would get it. We need passports too and in 2022 an ETIAS. So we would get that too. No difference. 

On top of all of this we are wasting our time on rebooking spending hour and hours, days and days to research in order to locate (as we always do) a cruise we want (cruise line type (luxury vs not), ship, itinerary, time of the year, cabin type, price, incentives, air, hotels, and alike).  So far, we had to it 14 times!!!

Edited May 11, 2021 by kirtihk

[HBCcruiser]

1 minute ago, kirtihk said:

On top of all of this we are wasting our time on rebooking spending hour and hours, days and days to research in order to locate (as we always do) a cruise we want (cruise line type (luxury vs not), ship, itinerary, time of the year, cabin type, price, incentives, and alike).  So far, we had to it 14 times!!!

 

This is exactly why we booked the more "sure" thing - sailing outside of the US. 

[At Sea At Peace]

5 minutes ago, steveknj said:

More accurately is, the rules change as we know more.  The problem is, we are still learning.  That's what happens with science.

 

I do think some of the CDC rules are overly restrictive, but I do think they are trying to be overly cautious.  Personally, as of today, with less than half the people in most states (and especially in the cruise centers of places like Florida and Texas), I'm not touching any cruise where the crew and passengers aren't vaccinated.

 

I read a story about the polio vaccine the other day.  The same fears that people have now about that vaccine are what people have now (though I think these days, most of the fears that people have are either politically motivated or driven by folks who want to be anti-"whatever party is in power".  I'm not sure that was the case in the 1950s.

 

There's a risk with everything.   Should you not have that heart transplant because there's a risk you might not wake up from the surgery?   You play the odds and hope for the best.  The odds are with the vaccine right now.

 

To be fair to a number of individuals (parents, prospective parents, etc.) comparison to the Polio vaccine actually makes their point of concern.

 

Look at the development time for each (as well as other diseases).

 

[RocketMan275]

On 5/9/2021 at 12:30 PM, coffeebean said:

What do you do when you wish to enter an establishment that has a sign on the door "MASKS REQUIRED"?

I ignore the sign.  In this area, almost every store has such a sign but no one is enforcing mask wearing.  Every day, more and more are ignoring these signs.

 

[BirdTravels]

1 hour ago, kirtihk said:

(similar to how I previously wrote in Hawaii example - please come to visit us, but you must quarantine at your own expense for 14 days. Who on average comes for vacation to Hawaii for 3 weeks or longer?  Basically, Hawaii didn't want us to come, did they?).

That restriction in Hawaii lasted a few months. As an identical requirement existed in New York (but a lot harder to enforce). Hawaii has not required a quarantine since October. 

[JamieLogical]

44 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

I'm not sure you can make that assumption.  FDR has said that his SailSafe protocols will apply to vaccinated sailings and those protocols include masks.  I think everyone should expect that masks are going to be a part of ship board life for both vaccinated and unvaccinated sailings out of the US, or anywhere else in the world for that matter, at least for the short term.  

 

"Despite the vaccination requirement, guests will still need to wear face coverings while onboard the ship. Guests will need to don a mask at all times while indoors, except while in their own stateroom and while eating and drinking in restaurants, bars, and lounges. Guests will also need to wear a mask outdoors when physical distancing is not possible." 

 

I don't consider that "very strict". Certainly not compared to the CDC guidelines released last week. Also, I imagine there will be more flexibility in enforcement by staff on board than if they were worried about the ship being blacklisted by the CDC.

[ace2542]

6 hours ago, kirtihk said:

Today is the national "Children Hunting Day

Is District 12 getting vaccinated first.

[harkinmr]

3 minutes ago, JamieLogical said:

 

I don't consider that "very strict". Certainly not compared to the CDC guidelines released last week. Also, I imagine there will be more flexibility in enforcement by staff on board than if they were worried about the ship being blacklisted by the CDC.

Flexibility in enforcement is a slippery slope and puts an unfair burden on ship staff.  And no one should count on flexibility out of the gate.  If the cruises are out of the US, there will no flexibility as the ship's ability to disembark back in the US will depend upon compliance.  And, again, it's really unfair to staff to even attempt to challenge the rules.

[JamieLogical]

5 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

Flexibility in enforcement is a slippery slope and puts an unfair burden on ship staff.  And no one should count on flexibility out of the gate.  If the cruises are out of the US, there will no flexibility as the ship's ability to disembark back in the US will depend upon compliance.  And, again, it's really unfair to staff to even attempt to challenge the rules.

 

Right. That is my point exactly. Which is why I was talking about sailings NOT out of the US that aren't under the purview of the CDC.

 

For mask mandates on ships sailing out of the US, the burden of enforcement will fall to the staff, which could be very daunting when the consequence of non-compliance could be having the ship shut down by the CDC. Hopefully for the NCL sailings out of the Jamaica and the DR, that burden won't be so onerous for the staff.

Edited May 11, 2021 by JamieLogical

[harkinmr]

8 minutes ago, JamieLogical said:

 

Right. That is my point exactly. Which is why I was talking about sailings NOT out of the US that aren't under the purview of the CDC.

 

For mask mandates on ships sailing out of the US, the burden of enforcement will fall to the staff, which could be very daunting when the consequence of non-compliance could be having the ship shut down by the CDC. Hopefully for the NCL sailings out of the Jamaica and the DR, that burden won't be so onerous for the staff.

I guess that depends on cruisers' cooperation then...

[kirtihk]

29 minutes ago, BirdTravels said:

That restriction in Hawaii lasted a few months. As an identical requirement existed in New York (but a lot harder to enforce). Hawaii has not required a quarantine since October. 

I was just used it as an example.

[hamrag]

2 hours ago, kirtihk said:

..I start to regret I fall for the trap of accepting the shot...

Is it possible to remove it from my body (rhetorical question, of course)?

 

Have you tried disinfectant?

[ace2542]

1 hour ago, JamieLogical said:

 

Right. That is my point exactly. Which is why I was talking about sailings NOT out of the US that aren't under the purview of the CDC.

 

For mask mandates on ships sailing out of the US, the burden of enforcement will fall to the staff, which could be very daunting when the consequence of non-compliance could be having the ship shut down by the CDC. Hopefully for the NCL sailings out of the Jamaica and the DR, that burden won't be so onerous for the staff.

NCL should just implement mask wearing for the health of staff and passengers onboard forever and if you don't want to cruise that is fine but that is our policy end of discussion. And put the line in the sand so to speak. And then staff are only enforcing company policy.

Edited May 11, 2021 by ace2542

[ace2542]

1 hour ago, harkinmr said:

If the cruises are out of the US, there will no flexibility as the ship's ability to disembark back in the US will depend upon compliance

And how will they monitor that. Install cameras all over the ship and turn ships into a cross between Person of Interest and the movie Silver? Or have undercover cruisers like undercover boss?

Edited May 11, 2021 by ace2542

[HMR74]

31 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

NCL should just implement mask wearing for the health of staff and passengers onboard forever and if you don't want to cruise that is fine but that is our policy end of discussion. And put the line in the sand so to speak. And then staff are only enforcing company policy.

 

The main problem with requiring mask wearing, or not, is  the cruise lines will likely lose half their customers. They cannot fix that so they have to find a way for people to feel and be safe without masks. Sailing at 50% capacity is not a long term option as they lose money on each sailing then.

and since average occupancy is between 105 and 110% due to 3 and 4 in a cabin, the 50% of normal capacity means 45% of realistic old occupancy.

 

Big business issue for the cruise lines.