No vaccine mixing allowed in US… I hope this changes very very quickly 😱

[rodndonna]

12 minutes ago, NAGooner said:

For those of you in Ontario, have you read your Ministry of Health issued COVID-19 vacination receipt (don't know about other Provinces or Territories)?

 

Mine reads -

• Agent - COVID -19 mRNA
• Product name - Pfizer Biontech COVID-19 Vaccine mRNA
• Further down - You have received two valid doses (after my first dose the receipt read - you have received one valid dose)

Does your second dose receipt read any differently? Ddoes it mention the first dose you had or just as I described above?

 

If as described above, will this vacination receipt satisfy the US authorities to let you enter their country and the cruise line authorities to board their ship?  Or are we going to require an international vaccine passport?

 

If I am out to lunch on this feel free just to ignore me!!!

 

NAGooner

 

Yes - you are correct that in Ontario, your receipt for the second dose does not specify what your first dose was.

 

If in the event the requirement that the doses have to match stays as is, I guess they could insist on seeing both receipts.

 

[Barwick Cruiser]

19 minutes ago, NAGooner said:

For those of you in Ontario, have you read your Ministry of Health issued COVID-19 vacination receipt (don't know about other Provinces or Territories)?

 

Mine reads -

• Agent - COVID -19 mRNA
• Product name - Pfizer Biontech COVID-19 Vaccine mRNA
• Further down - You have received two valid doses (after my first dose the receipt read - you have received one valid dose)

Does your second dose receipt read any differently? Ddoes it mention the first dose you had or just as I described above?

 

If as described above, will this vacination receipt satisfy the US authorities to let you enter their country and the cruise line authorities to board their ship?  Or are we going to require an international vaccine passport?

 

If I am out to lunch on this feel free just to ignore me!!!

 

NAGooner

Also in Ontario, have the same receipt but mine reads Moderna as that was my second dose (first was Pfizer) but only shows the date of that second dose so even tho it says I’ve received two doses I’m wondering if cruise lines will want to see dates of each jab or will be satisfied with the receipt as above. 

[rodndonna]

1 minute ago, Barwick Cruiser said:

Also in Ontario, have the same receipt but mine reads Moderna as that was my second dose (first was Pfizer) but only shows the date of that second dose so even tho it says I’ve received two doses I’m wondering if cruise lines will want to see dates of each jab or will be satisfied with the receipt as above. 

 

Not sure about your receipts, but ours are pretty cheesy and could easily be altered. I have not yet logged into the health ministry of Ontario site to see what information is contained, but I expect it has all the details and is amore legitimate proof of vaccination than our flimsy printout receipts.

 

 

[scottbee]

1 hour ago, rodndonna said:

 

Yes - you are correct that in Ontario, your receipt for the second dose does not specify what your first dose was.

 

If in the event the requirement that the doses have to match stays as is, I guess they could insist on seeing both receipts.

 

 

Mine says

COVISHIELD (the product name of AstraZeneca's vaccine) for my 1st

AstraZeneca (the company name) for the 2nd.

 

I have a bad feeling that some bureaucrat somewhere isn't going to grasp that they're the same thing.

 

 

[pixiedust777]

6 hours ago, Ken the cruiser said:

If I may ask, has anyone from Canada, the UK or any other applicable country who is scheduled to sail from Ft Lauderdale on or before Aug 7th been notified via email or phone call by Celebrity yet about this new "mixed vaccine" restriction? We just got our "Important Updates to Testing and Health Screening Requiements" email this morning regarding our Aug 7th Edge cruise and nowhere did it mention this new restriction.

 

Just curious if any applicable Canadian or UK passengers have received something different yet that referenced the new restriction? Afterall, not everyone follows CC as passionately as some of us do and this would really be bad if they learned of this new restriction when they tried to check-in at the terminal. 😎

 

Vaccination Policy

 

Following CDC guidelines we will sail with all crew vaccinated and at least 95% of guests will be fully vaccinated.

 

All guests 16 years and older must be fully vaccinated with all COVID-19 vaccine doses administered at least 14 days prior to sailing. As of August 1, 2021, all guests age 12 and older must be fully vaccinated.

 

Acceptable proof of vaccination must be in the form of the original vaccination record document issued by the country’s health authority or healthcare provider that administered the vaccination. All unvaccinated children will require a complimentary Covid-19 test at the terminal. Registration is required prior to arrival at terminal. A link will be provided via email to the unvaccinated guest.

 

Guests that do not meet the testing and health screening policy requirements will be denied boarding.

We sail on the 7th.

I have heard nothing from Celebrity regarding the new vaccine policy nor have I received an email such as the one you got.

I would imagine there will be some sort of phone call this week to verify whether we are fully vaccinated according to the new terms.

 

 

[MR_T]

I tweeted Royal and they responded that the mixed vaccine policy is now under review and we just have to wait and see what they decide 🤷🏼‍♂️🙄

[pixiedust777]

2 hours ago, rodndonna said:

 

Not sure about your receipts, but ours are pretty cheesy and could easily be altered. I have not yet logged into the health ministry of Ontario site to see what information is contained, but I expect it has all the details and is amore legitimate proof of vaccination than our flimsy printout receipts.

 

 

When you log into the Ontario ministry of health site you can print out dose  one and dose two. They print out on 8x11 paper and it has a water mark that goes through the paper making it look more official.

I Know that Carnival says you must have proof of both doses stating the type of vaccine and the date it was given. So you would need both print outs to show as being fully vaccinated.

[ipeeinthepool]

23 minutes ago, pixiedust777 said:

When you log into the Ontario ministry of health site you can print out dose  one and dose two. They print out on 8x11 paper and it has a water mark that goes through the paper making it look more official.

I Know that Carnival says you must have proof of both doses stating the type of vaccine and the date it was given. So you would need both print outs to show as being fully vaccinated.

 

Carnival may have the correct approach on this issue.

[TeeRick]

4 hours ago, nocl said:

So you are saying that WHO or FDA should modify their standards and make an exception for the combinations because it would be politically expedient or because recreational tourism is more important than maintaining high review standards?

 

CDC uses FDA and WHO exactly because of those standard.  The onus is on Health Canada to provide the medical/scientific data to justify their choice, not expect the other agencies to lower their standards.  While the choice was made to save lives, it was still made with limited data and they did not do anything to start the process to get them on the list.  Because to them it was not important the decision had been made so why collect the data to really study that decision.

 

The EU (EMEA) does not even accept WHO, thus the lack of complete acceptance across the EU countries when it comes to the AZ vaccine manufactured in Australia and in India.  Again they did not submit the data for those plants to the EU because they were not planning to ship product there.  As a result you now have issues with some countries accepting that vaccine and others not.  Should the EU change their standards or should the plants do what is normal and submit their quality data (which they should have for a filing) and get certified.

 

Saving lives might be worthwhile to deviate from standards, recreational travel not so much.

 

We already have issues with lack of trust in the approving agencies do we really want to give people a real case.

nocl have you read my previous several posts?  I have said nothing about standards or lowering of regulatory standards.  I have simply said that all parties involved must meet together and identify a path forward pretty quickly.    Honestly this cannot be addressed adequately here under the new rules of Cruise Critic.  You are misinterpreting my response.  And this type of back and forth leads to the red banner unfortunately.   Nothing more from me here.  

[Ken the cruiser]

53 minutes ago, pixiedust777 said:

We sail on the 7th.

I have heard nothing from Celebrity regarding the new vaccine policy nor have I received an email such as the one you got.

I would imagine there will be some sort of phone call this week to verify whether we are fully vaccinated according to the new terms.

FWIW we contacted our Celebrity PVP a few weeks ago rather than waiting for the phone call to have him update our vaccination status. As the clock is ticking, you might want to contact your TA/PVP to update your account as well, if you haven't already since you're flying from Canada and there will probably be a few more hoops to jump through than us who are just driving to the port from Alabama. It's just a suggestion. 😎

[nocl]

1 hour ago, TeeRick said:

nocl have you read my previous several posts?  I have said nothing about standards or lowering of regulatory standards.  I have simply said that all parties involved must meet together and identify a path forward pretty quickly.    Honestly this cannot be addressed adequately here under the new rules of Cruise Critic.  You are misinterpreting my response.  And this type of back and forth leads to the red banner unfortunately.   Nothing more from me here.  

I have read your posts including

 

"I have been saying and continue to say that this can be resolved by high level conversations between Health Canada (since they approved mixed doses) and the other parties - WHO, FDA/CDC - to approve some type of way forward pretty quickly.  A way that will not be new clinical studies.  Too slow. "

 

Based upon 1. Requiring the clinicals is too slow and 2. resolved by high level conversations.  Would certainly seem to imply working around the existing set of standards if clinicals are in fact required.

 

After all the current standards require a certain level of data, Not something that can just be negotiated around, unless the potential exists for a study of existing medical records with an agreed upon analysis plan.  An action which would also take months.  Unlikely to be a quick fix without either getting WHO to authorize it bypassing their current standards.  Or CDC to change their standards of using WHO and FDA as the references.

 

Thus the question.  

[tert333]

3 hours ago, scottbee said:

 

Mine says

COVISHIELD (the product name of AstraZeneca's vaccine) for my 1st

AstraZeneca (the company name) for the 2nd.

 

I have a bad feeling that some bureaucrat somewhere isn't going to grasp that they're the same thing.

 

 

Covishield is the version of Astrazeneca manufactured by the Serim Institute in India.  It is approved by the WHO.  You should be fine.

[nocl]

9 minutes ago, tert333 said:

Covishield is the version of Astrazeneca manufactured by the Serim Institute in India.  It is approved by the WHO.  You should be fine.

In the US yes.  Some countries in the EU do not recognize it because the manufacturing plant has not been certified by the EMEA and the EU does not accept the WHO list, only those approved by EMEA, though some countries will accept WHO authorized where as if authorized by EMEA all EU countries accept it.

[nocl]

28 minutes ago, nocl said:

I have read your posts including

 

"I have been saying and continue to say that this can be resolved by high level conversations between Health Canada (since they approved mixed doses) and the other parties - WHO, FDA/CDC - to approve some type of way forward pretty quickly.  A way that will not be new clinical studies.  Too slow. "

 

Based upon 1. Requiring the clinicals is too slow and 2. resolved by high level conversations.  Would certainly seem to imply working around the existing set of standards if clinicals are in fact required.

 

After all the current standards require a certain level of data, Not something that can just be negotiated around, unless the potential exists for a study of existing medical records with an agreed upon analysis plan.  An action which would also take months.  Unlikely to be a quick fix without either getting WHO to authorize it bypassing their current standards.  Or CDC to change their standards of using WHO and FDA as the references.

 

Thus the question.  

My whole point is there may not be a quick solution.  Because a quick solution would require one or more parties to lower current standards.  Either CDC to go outside the FDA and WHO lists, or WHO to add it to the list without the full set of data.  

 

Otherwise it will take time to get the data, assemble the submission and for WHO to review it.  The AZ Pfizer could come faster depending exactly upon the status of the Pfizer trial.

 

AZ is talking about a combination trial, but that has not even started so think is terms of several months for that data

[tert333]

Just now, nocl said:

In the US yes.  Some countries in the EU do not recognize it because the manufacturing plant has not been certified by the EMEA and the EU does not accept the WHO list, only those approved by EMEA, though some countries will accept WHO authorized where as if authorized by EMEA all EU countries accept it.

Agreed.   Many are accepting it - France accepted it yesterday.   The two largest members Germany and France approved it.  Also, it is accepted in the UK.   So it is changing realtime.

 

The same is true for any other country in the world.  For awhile, before anyone goes into a country, we will all need to check the approved vaccines for a specific country if they are requiring vaccinations before you arrive.

[TeeRick]

11 hours ago, nocl said:

I have read your posts including

 

"I have been saying and continue to say that this can be resolved by high level conversations between Health Canada (since they approved mixed doses) and the other parties - WHO, FDA/CDC - to approve some type of way forward pretty quickly.  A way that will not be new clinical studies.  Too slow. "

 

Based upon 1. Requiring the clinicals is too slow and 2. resolved by high level conversations.  Would certainly seem to imply working around the existing set of standards if clinicals are in fact required.

 

After all the current standards require a certain level of data, Not something that can just be negotiated around, unless the potential exists for a study of existing medical records with an agreed upon analysis plan.  An action which would also take months.  Unlikely to be a quick fix without either getting WHO to authorize it bypassing their current standards.  Or CDC to change their standards of using WHO and FDA as the references.

 

Thus the question.  

I do think the situation might be resolved through discussions and identifying an agreed path forward. Possibly not an easy path. It is an unusual situation.  Needs a solution.   I am posting what I think (my opinion) and what I said.  You can post what you think I have implied about changed standards or whatever.  

[Ken the cruiser]

I just read this on the FB RC Blog. Maybe a glimmer of hope, but of course, only time will tell. Unfortunately, the "no mixed vaccine" clause is still in the Celebrity FAQ section.

 

Over the weekend, Royal Caribbean had joined other cruise lines in adding language to its vaccination policy saying it would not accept mixed vaccines as being fully vaccinated.

 

As of this morning, that policy has been removed from its website, and there is no mention at all of mixed vaccines.

 

The rule change was originally about not considering someone who had taken doses of different brands of Covid-19 vaccines fully vaccinated. This would mean someone who took 1 dose Pfizer + 1 dose Moderna, or 1 dose AstraZeneca + 1 dose Pfizer, etc.

[Ex-Airbalancer]

2 hours ago, Ken the cruiser said:

I just read this on the FB RC Blog. Maybe a glimmer of hope, but of course, only time will tell. Unfortunately, the "no mixed vaccine" clause is still in the Celebrity FAQ section.

 

Over the weekend, Royal Caribbean had joined other cruise lines in adding language to its vaccination policy saying it would not accept mixed vaccines as being fully vaccinated.

 

As of this morning, that policy has been removed from its website, and there is no mention at all of mixed vaccines.

 

The rule change was originally about not considering someone who had taken doses of different brands of Covid-19 vaccines fully vaccinated. This would mean someone who took 1 dose Pfizer + 1 dose Moderna, or 1 dose AstraZeneca + 1 dose Pfizer, etc.

On celebrity website it still shows they will not allow mixing of vaccines 

 

[Tomchick1970]

1 hour ago, Airbalancer said:

On celebrity website it still shows they will not allow mixing of vaccines 

 

 

Edited July 19, 2021 by Tomchick1970

[jagoffee]

On 7/18/2021 at 11:21 AM, Fouremco said:

Exactly my point, it doesn't matter what Health Canada says to the cruise lines, as the FDA and WHO approvals drive the CDC definition of fully vaccinated. 

 

Makes sense to me.  I would not think that individual companies or various country’s Health department should be determining what should be considered fully vaccinated in the US.   If the FDA and WHO say a particular manufacturer or a mix of manufacturers is approved for EUA, then it should be OK for cruises visiting the US.  If not, then it is not.  
I do not think the burden of this critical decision should be left to individual cruise lines.  

[CruisinFinsUp]

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/some-cruise-lines-not-accepting-passengers-with-mixed-covid-19-vaccinations-1.5514985

[ipeeinthepool]

2 hours ago, jagoffee said:

Makes sense to me.  I would not think that individual companies or various country’s Health department should be determining what should be considered fully vaccinated in the US.   If the FDA and WHO say a particular manufacturer or a mix of manufacturers is approved for EUA, then it should be OK for cruises visiting the US.  If not, then it is not.  
I do not think the burden of this critical decision should be left to individual cruise lines.  

 

Absolutely.  As a point of reference Canada just announced that they will open their border to US travelers for non-essential travel beginning in August.  The announcement indicated that fully vaccinated US travelers can enter Canada if they were fully vaccinated with vaccines approved by the Canadian government.  If Canada won't accept people based on US rules, why would people think that the US should consider vaccination requirements established by any other country?

[tert333]

2 hours ago, jagoffee said:

Makes sense to me.  I would not think that individual companies or various country’s Health department should be determining what should be considered fully vaccinated in the US.   If the FDA and WHO say a particular manufacturer or a mix of manufacturers is approved for EUA, then it should be OK for cruises visiting the US.  If not, then it is not.  
I do not think the burden of this critical decision should be left to individual cruise lines.  

I do not disagree with you.  However, the WHO has said that the recommended approach is to use the same vaccines for both doses, but acknowledges that situations occur where an individual may received two different vaccines.  In those cases, they do not need a third vaccine.  Below is an extract from the WHO Sage Report, dated June 15, 2021. 

 

Interchangeability with other vaccines
It is currently recommended that the same product should be used for both doses. If different COVID-19 vaccine products are inadvertently administered in the two doses, no additional doses of either vaccine are recommended at this time. Heterologous (mix-and-match) studies are ongoing with regards to the interchangeability of this vaccine with other COVID-19 vaccines. Preliminary results from a heterologous priming schedule where BNT162b2 was given as the second dose following a first dose of ChAdOx1-S [recombinant] vaccine showed a slightly increased but acceptable reactogenicity with superior or similar immunogenicity results, thus supporting the use of such a heterologous priming schedule in settings where the second dose for the ChAdOx1-S [recombinant]vaccine is not available due to vaccine supply constraints or other concerns (17, 18).

 

Under the assumption that the CDC/FDA is accepting WHO pronouncements, then they should allow the cruiseships to treat people with mixed vaccines as fully vaccinated.

[DirtyDawg]

34 minutes ago, ipeeinthepool said:

 

Absolutely.  As a point of reference Canada just announced that they will open their border to US travelers for non-essential travel beginning in August.  The announcement indicated that fully vaccinated US travelers can enter Canada if they were fully vaccinated with vaccines approved by the Canadian government.  If Canada won't accept people based on US rules, why would people think that the US should consider vaccination requirements established by any other country?

Yes, every country will base their entry requirements on their own standards based on what their health experts have determined. You know, the ones who went to medical schools other than You Tube  or Twitter University. And then, into the mix, will be added a dash of country to country quid pro quo. 😉 

[jagoffee]

1 hour ago, tert333 said:

I do not disagree with you.  However, the WHO has said that the recommended approach is to use the same vaccines for both doses, but acknowledges that situations occur where an individual may received two different vaccines.  In those cases, they do not need a third vaccine.  Below is an extract from the WHO Sage Report, dated June 15, 2021. 

 

Interchangeability with other vaccines
It is currently recommended that the same product should be used for both doses. If different COVID-19 vaccine products are inadvertently administered in the two doses, no additional doses of either vaccine are recommended at this time. Heterologous (mix-and-match) studies are ongoing with regards to the interchangeability of this vaccine with other COVID-19 vaccines. Preliminary results from a heterologous priming schedule where BNT162b2 was given as the second dose following a first dose of ChAdOx1-S [recombinant] vaccine showed a slightly increased but acceptable reactogenicity with superior or similar immunogenicity results, thus supporting the use of such a heterologous priming schedule in settings where the second dose for the ChAdOx1-S [recombinant]vaccine is not available due to vaccine supply constraints or other concerns (17, 18).

 

Under the assumption that the CDC/FDA is accepting WHO pronouncements, then they should allow the cruiseships to treat people with mixed vaccines as fully vaccinated.

It is not clear to me that the WHO is saying that those people in this category (mixed vaccines) should be considered fully vaccinated.  They are certainly saying not to get a third dose.  If they mean that they should be considered fully vaccinated, then the WHO should say so.  Then the cruise line should follow what the WHO or the FDA determine.  But in my opinion each individual cruise line should not be forced to make the determination on their own.