Don’t believe Princess website

[ontheweb]

1 hour ago, MamaFej said:

All of the passengers are good-looking and within a healthy weight range, as well. 🤔

And young, none of us senior citizens.

[cruisingguy007]

16 minutes ago, IJustWantToGo36 said:

Also you cant have it both ways.

Cruise lines are going back to FULL penalty for cancellation

Cant do that and claim endless emergencies requiring masking.

 

Agree, lifting masking was a big whoopla and the excitement reverberated across the cruise world. Many of us canceled all our previously booked sailings due to mask mandates and received refunds, others sat on the sidelines until it was lifted. When it was lifted, everyone rushed back in and booked sailings with the understanding that masks would not be required, bookings went through the roof in fact. It would be deceptive to hard-line cancellation policies once again. Their ship their rules but my money and my vote also. I'm not interested in masked cruising, even for free and would most certainly never ever pay for one. They are free to make their choices/policies but not bamboozle folks with bait and switch tactics. It's simply bad business practices and not conducive to a positive transparent relationship between the lines and customers/passengers. 

[caribill]

1 hour ago, cruisingguy007 said:

 

Agree, lifting masking was a big whoopla and the excitement reverberated across the cruise world. Many of us canceled all our previously booked sailings due to mask mandates and received refunds, others sat on the sidelines until it was lifted. When it was lifted, everyone rushed back in and booked sailings with the understanding that masks would not be required, bookings went through the roof in fact. It would be deceptive to hard-line cancellation policies once again. Their ship their rules but my money and my vote also. I'm not interested in masked cruising, even for free and would most certainly never ever pay for one. They are free to make their choices/policies but not bamboozle folks with bait and switch tactics. It's simply bad business practices and not conducive to a positive transparent relationship between the lines and customers/passengers. 

 

Fact: After lifting the mask mandate, Princess has had at least two cruises with 100+ known cases of Covid-19 among passengers.

Fact: Some passengers returning home from Princess cruises recently have posted they tested positive for Covid-19 within several days of leaving the ship.

Fact: Not known is how many symptom-less cases of Covid-19 were contracted while on a Princess ship recently.

 

Science has shown that mask wearing as appropriate in indoor areas can greatly reduce the amount of virus transmission.

 

Given the choice of cruising with a mask and much less chance of catching this pathogen, I would choose that over cruising with no mask and a higher risk of being quarantined during the cruise or returning home with Covid.

 

Note that it is not saying it is up to the individual to decide whether of not to wear a mask. Since the main benefit of mask wearing is to keep unknowingly infected people from spreading the virus, saying "I chose to take the personal risk and not wear a mask" is saying "I chose to possibly infect others with the virus."

 

Some recent Princess cruises have had the possibility of being super spreader events with cruises returning home unknowingly infected and passing the virus on to others.

 

It is good that most current cases are mild, but even a person with a mild case can spread the virus to someone who ends up with a serious case or possibly long term effects.

 

At some unknown time in the future (sooner or later), Covid will still be there but will infect very few people. That day has not arrived.

[HaveDogWillTravel]

4 hours ago, Daniel A said:

I don't think you'll find any cruise line that has ships broadcasting how many Covid positive cases are onboard.  Each ship transmits the counts on a daily basis to the CDC and even the CDC does not release those numbers to the public.  

Hi there 🙂while Saga may not have broadcast covid counts to the news, the Captain gave daily updates to the passengers. This is a partial list of the posts with counts on the thread below: #’s 537,541, 571, 600, 629 and 638 (where she explains the counts are currently infected and not close contacts nor those that have been released) 

This leg of her journey had about 700 passengers, so for a fully vaxxed sailing with lots of testing & isolating these counts are high. Everyone is masked but if you look at the pictures they are those flat surgical masks (for crew) and a mix of cloth/surgical for passengers. Nary a 95 type in sight. 
 

My Jan/Feb sailing on Ruby required 95 masks inside for all everywhere with no smoking in the casino. There was extreme high compliance and on the outer decks many chose to mask even though it wasn’t required.    It had very, very few cases break through.  
 

There has been at least 2 cases of covid on board every ship I’ve sailed starting with the inaugural one. I sailed in July, October, November, December, January and February.  

 

The Saga thread seems (seems to…….I am not saying it proves anything) to demonstrate that cloth and surgical masks may not be very effective against the new ba2 variant. I am not saying they don’t help.   It could be that even a well fitted, seal tested 95 mask isn’t either.  But since I feel the former are less effective I for one will wear the latter. 
 

 Just saying if you are going to use masks to keep yourself safe think carefully about what type and how it fits, especially now with so many unmasked the viral load in any public area will be higher. 
 

 

 

Edited April 3, 2022 by HaveDogWillTravel

[JimmyVWine]

2 hours ago, cruisingguy007 said:

 

Agree, lifting masking was a big whoopla and the excitement reverberated across the cruise world. Many of us canceled all our previously booked sailings due to mask mandates and received refunds, others sat on the sidelines until it was lifted. When it was lifted, everyone rushed back in and booked sailings with the understanding that masks would not be required, bookings went through the roof in fact. It would be deceptive to hard-line cancellation policies once again. Their ship their rules but my money and my vote also. I'm not interested in masked cruising, even for free and would most certainly never ever pay for one. They are free to make their choices/policies but not bamboozle folks with bait and switch tactics. It's simply bad business practices and not conducive to a positive transparent relationship between the lines and customers/passengers. 

While it is certainly possible for Princess to throw up its hands and act as if Covid is no longer a thing, the Board Room discussion would have to go something like this:

• All our passengers will be vaccinated. 
• Most vaccinated people who contract it have good outcomes. 
• We need full, unmasked ships to sustain our business model. 
• A full, unmasked ship of 4,000 passengers where everything returns to pre-Covid procedures will result in between 500-1,000 new infections. 
• Of those, 50 or so people will get very sick but recover, but 5 will die. 
• The press and plaintiffs’ lawyers will continue to publicize the number of infections that occur on each cruise. 
• All in favor of proceeding along these lines say “Aye!”  
 

Now I’m not saying that this isn’t a possible path for Princess to take. But I’m not betting that it will. 

[HaveDogWillTravel]

2 hours ago, cruisingguy007 said:

 

Agree, lifting masking was a big whoopla and the excitement reverberated across the cruise world. Many of us canceled all our previously booked sailings due to mask mandates and received refunds, others sat on the sidelines until it was lifted. When it was lifted, everyone rushed back in and booked sailings with the understanding that masks would not be required, bookings went through the roof in fact. I'm not interested in masked cruising, even for free and would most certainly never ever pay for one. 

I think you are spot on. The people who were sailing with the mandates  were typically those who voluntarily would mask indoors anyway so they represent a more cautious, careful approach to boarding……isolating for days before and after testing and such so that they are as sure as they can be of not incubating covid at embarkation.  The group you describe have an entirely different approach.   I think the breakouts are, in part anyway, due to those boarding whose activities just prior put them at risk of incubating covid. 

[cruisingguy007]

9 minutes ago, caribill said:

 

Fact: After lifting the mask mandate, Princess has had at least two cruises with 100+ known cases of Covid-19 among passengers.

Fact: Some passengers returning home from Princess cruises recently have posted they tested positive for Covid-19 within several days of leaving the ship.

Fact: Not known is how many symptom-less cases of Covid-19 were contracted while on a Princess ship recently.

 

Science has shown that mask wearing as appropriate in indoor areas can greatly reduce the amount of virus transmission.

 

Given the choice of cruising with a mask and much less chance of catching this pathogen, I would choose that over cruising with no mask and a higher risk of being quarantined during the cruise or returning home with Covid.

 

Note that it is not saying it is up to the individual to decide whether of not to wear a mask. Since the main benefit of mask wearing is to keep unknowingly infected people from spreading the virus, saying "I chose to take the personal risk and not wear a mask" is saying "I chose to possibly infect others with the virus."

 

Some recent Princess cruises have had the possibility of being super spreader events with cruises returning home unknowingly infected and passing the virus on to others.

 

It is good that most current cases are mild, but even a person with a mild case can spread the virus to someone who ends up with a serious case or possibly long term effects.

 

At some unknown time in the future (sooner or later), Covid will still be there but will infect very few people. That day has not arrived.

 

People have their own opinions and no one is debating that. That said, a lot of people are over it and aren't wearing masks anymore (on ships or in everyday life). Good luck sticking that genie back in the bottle. Frankly, I couldn't care less what the lines do, it's their right to implement/change them if they choose and the market will bare it, just count me out if masks are required and give me my money back and all is well. My point was that folks should have a choice and if conditions/requirements change from booking conditions, that constitutes a major change to a contract and an opt out option should be available (like it is for every other contract from credit cards, cell phones, cable etc), irrespective of side, whether those that want mask/those that don't. The lines and the market will ultimately decide, well, unless the CDC doesn't stay in their lane and implements another unfair overreach and burden by singling out only the cruise lines for extra scrutiny again.       

[cruisingguy007]

12 minutes ago, JimmyVWine said:

While it is certainly possible for Princess to throw up its hands and act as if Covid is no longer a thing, the Board Room discussion would have to go something like this:

• All our passengers will be vaccinated. 
• Most vaccinated people who contract it have good outcomes. 
• We need full, unmasked ships to sustain our business model. 
• A full, unmasked ship of 4,000 passengers where everything returns to pre-Covid procedures will result in between 500-1,000 new infections. 
• Of those, 50 or so people will get very sick but recover, but 5 will die. 
• The press and plaintiffs’ lawyers will continue to publicize the number of infections that occur on each cruise. 
• All in favor of proceeding along these lines say “Aye!”  
 

Now I’m not saying that this isn’t a possible path for Princess to take. But I’m not betting that it will. 

 

I concur with the bolded, the rest is hyperbole, fear mongering and conjecture. 

[IJustWantToGo36]

26 minutes ago, cruisingguy007 said:

 

People have their own opinions and no one is debating that. That said, a lot of people are over it and aren't wearing masks anymore (on ships or in everyday life). Good luck sticking that genie back in the bottle. Frankly, I couldn't care less what the lines do, it's their right to implement/change them if they choose and the market will bare it, just count me out if masks are required and give me my money back and all is well. My point was that folks should have a choice and if conditions/requirements change from booking conditions, that constitutes a major change to a contract and an opt out option should be available (like it is for every other contract from credit cards, cell phones, cable etc), irrespective of side, whether those that want mask/those that don't. The lines and the market will ultimately decide, well, unless the CDC doesn't stay in their lane and implements another unfair overreach and burden by singling out only the cruise lines for extra scrutiny again.       

and CDC has declared cruising SAFE!!!

[IJustWantToGo36]

Have  missed any post where people that say I DID NOT MASK ON THE SHIP got sick?

[JimmyVWine]

1 hour ago, cruisingguy007 said:

 

I concur with the bolded, the rest is hyperbole, fear mongering and conjecture. 

Then you believe that 100% of all passengers who walk off of the ships will be fine. There are no empirical statistics that support that conclusion. Your assumption is FAR more conjecture than my scenario. 

[traceytd]

On 4/2/2022 at 3:26 AM, 2 cruises a year said:

 

Actually, this post is true.  Both examples are from three Ruby Princess cruises in February and March.

Is it written in the policies regarding the back to backers being able to stay on the ship? That would mean no testing between the cruises? If so where did u read it. 
We had to disembark in February due to testing + and missed out on our last B2B.
We are going to Athens In June and I would not want to miss out on this back to back.

thanks 🙂

[Moustique]

Management was probably ok with the risk of new infections with mask being optional.  I believe that what they did not expect is how quarantine was going to be managed.  That is the problem.  I am ok with taking the risk on being infected.  I am health, a am vaccinated and boosted.  But I am not willing to take the risk of quarantine on Princess.  Not the way it is being done right now.

[IJustWantToGo36]

1 hour ago, Moustique said:

Management was probably ok with the risk of new infections with mask being optional.  I believe that what they did not expect is how quarantine was going to be managed.  

I do not understand the reason for quarantining in a separate cabin (unless no balcony)

We have to stop treating covid as a plague and treat as a flu type and then the quarantine management would not be such a disaster.

The next result of these threads is almost everyone will not report a positive top medical

[cruisingguy007]

3 hours ago, JimmyVWine said:

Then you believe that 100% of all passengers who walk off of the ships will be fine. There are no empirical statistics that support that conclusion. Your assumption is FAR more conjecture than my scenario. 

 

"100% of all passengers who walk off of the ships will be fine" is an unrealistic expectation. Are the big theme parks, airlines and other large vacation and travel venues held to the same standard? Of course not. Cruises are just like anything else, there is a small risk that people must decide to take when making the choice to cruise. Get vaccinated/boosted and wear a mask if you choose, but carry on or choose another vacation option, though virtually none are risk free covid zero activities. 

[cruiser419419]

4 hours ago, IJustWantToGo36 said:

Have  missed any post where people that say I DID NOT MASK ON THE SHIP got sick?

 

On the recent Sky Transatlantic, for the first week, almost no one wore masks. About ~8-9 days in, I'd estimate 30-40% of passengers had a runny nose and/or cough (judging from randomly assigned MDR dining companions which changed each evening)

[cruiser419419]

5 hours ago, JimmyVWine said:

A full, unmasked ship of 4,000 passengers where everything returns to pre-Covid procedures will result in between 500-1,000 new infections. 
• Of those, 50 or so people will get very sick but recover, but 5 will die. 

 

If everyone is boosted, even with 1000 new infections you wouldn't expect anyone to die. The vaccines are very good at preventing death.

This is why folks are saying we need to move on. With a fully boosted population, there is a risk, but it is very minimal.

[cruisingguy007]

12 minutes ago, cruiser419419 said:

 

On the recent Sky Transatlantic, for the first week, almost no one wore masks. About ~8-9 days in, I'd estimate 30-40% of passengers had a runny nose and/or cough (judging from randomly assigned MDR dining companions which changed each evening)

 

Longer trips equal more risk, that's obvious, especially with more port days. You can only control the controllable and mitigate as best as possible. B2B, side to side and trans-Atlantic/Pacific are inherently more risky, odds wise. Much the same as flying all over the place to various locations, visiting crowded theme parks for two weeks straight or attending any other function/event with hordes of humanity for extended times. Allergies are also in full swing, we have a lot of allergy sufferers in the family and this early spring has been hell for the lot of them. We got blossoms all over the trees this year in early February, earliest I've ever seen in recent memory.  

[Sunwanabe]

4 hours ago, Moustique said:

Management was probably ok with the risk of new infections with mask being optional.  I believe that what they did not expect is how quarantine was going to be managed.  That is the problem.  I am ok with taking the risk on being infected.  I am health, a am vaccinated and boosted.  But I am not willing to take the risk of quarantine on Princess.  Not the way it is being done right now.

Exactly. I haven't heard one comment saying that passengers were well treated and looked after. If I'm wrong, please let us know. 

[IJustWantToGo36]

2 hours ago, cruiser419419 said:

 

If everyone is boosted, even with 1000 new infections you wouldn't expect anyone to die. The vaccines are very good at preventing death.

This is why folks are saying we need to move on. With a fully boosted population, there is a risk, but it is very minimal.

who is predicting a 25% 15 day infection rate?

Right now the current predictions is that on a case (not hospital) basis, Omicron 2 will have minor US effect.

[HaveDogWillTravel]

56 minutes ago, Sunwanabe said:

Exactly. I haven't heard one comment saying that passengers were well treated and looked after. If I'm wrong, please let us know. 

Post # 94. By RCI cruiser.  

[caribill]

8 hours ago, IJustWantToGo36 said:

and CDC has declared cruising SAFE!!!

 

They said if everyone on the ship is fully vaccinated.

 

That means no exceptions for children not eligible for the vaccination, people with medical conditions that preclude the vaccination, and people with religious objections to the vaccine.

[caribill]

3 hours ago, cruiser419419 said:

 

With a fully boosted population, there is a risk, but it is very minimal.

 

And that means the general population, not just who is on a cruise.

 

We can only get the herd immunity which would mean an almost negligible number of new cases  if at least 90% of the population is fully vaccinated. Not just the USA, but worldwide.

[caribill]

8 hours ago, cruisingguy007 said:

 

 Frankly, I couldn't care less what the lines do, it's their right to implement/change them if they choose and the market will bare it, just count me out if masks are required and give me my money back and all is well. My point was that folks should have a choice and if conditions/requirements change from booking conditions, that constitutes a major change to a contract and an opt out option should be available

 

The contract agreed to says that Princess can change various requirements at their will.

 

As far as masking is concerned, there have been months where they were required, then optional, then required again.

 

Imagine the problems if:

First those who do not want masks cancel because they are required.

Second those who what the protection masks bring cancel when masks become not required.

Third those who do nor want masks required had re-booked, but now want to cancel because masks are required again.

 

If you think hold times when calling Princess are long now.......

 

That said, RCI in January did allow cancellations with full refunds after instituting a mask requirement on close-in voyages.

 

[HappyInVan]

3 hours ago, cruiser419419 said:

This is why folks are saying we need to move on. With a fully boosted population, there is a risk, but it is very minimal.

 

That's a hypothetical situation, since no country has even boosted all of their seniors.

 

 Back on topic, I sail with the expectation that a mask requirement will be imposed whenever there's an outbreak onboard. We're still in an epidemic that's harming many people. Covid19 is still active and evolving. This is reality.