Are we seeing the end of cruising?

[D C]

10 hours ago, Hlitner said:

Probably not good for any of us to put our head in the sand, no matter how much we love to cruise.  Lets be very honest.  Mass market cruise ships crowd lots of people into a fixed space.  On many ships the deck chairs are literally butted up against each other and on some lines they are separated by a few inches.  The Lido buffet areas are always crowded during meal times and there is no way to social distance in that venue.  The main theaters are often full with no social distancing possible.  Bars/lounges are often crowded with little or no social distancing possible.   We have over 1400 days on many different ships so do understand the layouts, space issues, etc.  Now compare that to other vacation options.  If I am on a land driving trip in Europe I can (to some degree) control my environment and social space in many venues.  If I go to an All Inclusive I generally spend most of my time on a large beach (social spacing not a problem) or at one of the expansive pools where its easy to social distance.  The dining venues do vary, but one can social space if it is a priority.  

 

A bigger problem then cruise ships are the airlines.   Flying Business Class does make social distancing more possible, but planes do come with their own risks for which we have no solution.

 

So what to do?  We are already talking about a late summer trip to Paris and Prague.  The flying part causes me concern although we can do the transatlantic part in Business Class where there is some spacing.  Once in Paris and Prague we would likely rent apartments which work nicely for spacing and isolation.   For many of our restaurants we can choose to eat outdoors where there is some spacing.  If we do want to dine inside we can choose better restaurants where there is a decent amount of spacing.  But unlike ships, we would have much more ability to control our environment.  

 

Where does leave cruising?  One can achieve some social distancing on the higher end luxury lines such as Seabourn where there is a lot more space per passenger.   But a ship like the Island or Caribbean Princess is always going to be crowded because they have been designed to pack-in the max folks in the least space.  Princess could decide to only allow 50% occupancy, but this would not be possible from a financial point of view.  So, no solution.

 

Hank

 

While you can control your own agenda on a trip to Europe, what are you going to be doing while there?   Let's take France for example.  Going to Normandy on a D-Day tour is probably among the safest things to do.  Drive your own car and most sites are outside, unless you visit one of the museums.  But in Paris, the Louvre, Eiffel Tower, Arc de Triomphe, Versailles, and other "tourist checklist" places are far more crowded than anywhere on a cruise ship (our one September trip saw those places far less crowded than mid-summer.  Pic on the front steps of Versailles with nobody else in the photo? No problem!).  And is there a restaurant in all of Paris that isn't crowded, even outside?  Love dining outside there, and much lower transmission potential than inside, but they sure pack the tables in.  

 

Sure, you could choose to forego those places, but you could just as well avoid similarly crowded spaces on a ship.  Ultimately, it's how you act within the confines of your particular holiday.

 

As an aside, I wonder if we'll see loosening of local rules/regulations in regards to "sidewalk dining" in the US.  Restaurants will be clamoring for increased outdoor space, and those trendy restaurants that have roll-up garage doors to open on nice days will look very appealing as well.

 

 

 

 

[Hlitner]

26 minutes ago, D C said:

 

While you can control your own agenda on a trip to Europe, what are you going to be doing while there?   Let's take France for example.  Going to Normandy on a D-Day tour is probably among the safest things to do.  Drive your own car and most sites are outside, unless you visit one of the museums.  But in Paris, the Louvre, Eiffel Tower, Arc de Triomphe, Versailles, and other "tourist checklist" places are far more crowded than anywhere on a cruise ship (our one September trip saw those places far less crowded than mid-summer.  Pic on the front steps of Versailles with nobody else in the photo? No problem!).  And is there a restaurant in all of Paris that isn't crowded, even outside?  Love dining outside there, and much lower transmission potential than inside, but they sure pack the tables in.  

 

Sure, you could choose to forego those places, but you could just as well avoid similarly crowded spaces on a ship.  Ultimately, it's how you act within the confines of your particular holiday.

 

As an aside, I wonder if we'll see loosening of local rules/regulations in regards to "sidewalk dining" in the US.  Restaurants will be clamoring for increased outdoor space, and those trendy restaurants that have roll-up garage doors to open on nice days will look very appealing as well.

 

 

 

 

You are right regarding cafes/restaurants and, just like at home, we have to apply some common sense and accept a reasonable risk (life is not without risk).  Major tourist attractions like the Eiffel Tower are of no interest as we have been to these kind of places in the past and have no desire to return.  Museums are also a risk, but Paris is not going to be overly crowded this summer and one can apply common sense and maintain some spacing in those places plus wear a mask.   The alternative is to simply keep sheltering at home, possibly for the rest of our lives as a safe/effective vaccine is a big question mark.

 

The general public has long ago learned to accept many of the risks associated with travel and living and COVID-19 is going to be just one more risk.  But whether a cruise ship is an acceptable risk is now very open to question.  DW and I have taken many personal measures (on cruises) to avoid both Noro and cabin cough.  We have been 100% successful in avoiding Noro (on far more then 100 cruises) by simply practicing reasonable measures such as lots of hand washing and not touching our faces.  Avoiding Cabin Cough has proven difficult (especially for DW) but we have had a good measure of success by simply minimizing/avoiding the use of elevators and doing our best to keep the distance from those who are constantly coughing/sneezing.  Given that COVID-19 is likely more contagious then the typical cabin cough bugs, we cannot imagine a reasonable way to minimize the risk on a crowded mass market ship.  On small luxury ships or in something like the MSC Yacht Club or NCL Haven Suites one could probably minimize risk but still have plenty of moments when they would be in a more crowded situation (such as the theater).    My point is that it is much more difficult to minimize risk on a crowded mass market vessel then on land.  But yes, there will always be some risk.   

 

Hank

[susancruzs]

Some good points mentioned here.  I've avoided buffet, elevators for years on ships, a personal thing.  I don't mind the stairs, I try to come home from a 30 day cruise weighing the same! 🙂 

 

I was guilty of a horrible cough on So. America cruise, bronchitis type thing.  By the end of the cruise, I noticed the ship had many cases of the cruise cough.  It started as a sinus infection, then usually I get bronchitis.  I did not have it when I boarded.

 

I've changed my 35 day cruise for April 2021 to a 21 day instead but I will keep an eye this Fall and Winter to see how the Med is doing.  No one knows at this point, hard to say.  Cruising will change but I don't think it will go away.  Maybe a change isn't a bad thing, the way cruising has expanded.  The number of ships in the Caribbean, size of them to me is ridiculous.  I do sail on Royal class ships, but anything bigger, no way.  I'm interested to see how this all ends up, I've thought for a long time, cruising over expanded.

[Daniel A]

11 hours ago, Hlitner said:

So what to do?  We are already talking about a late summer trip to Paris and Prague.  The flying part causes me concern although we can do the transatlantic part in Business Class where there is some spacing.  Once in Paris and Prague we would likely rent apartments which work nicely for spacing and isolation.   For many of our restaurants we can choose to eat outdoors where there is some spacing.  If we do want to dine inside we can choose better restaurants where there is a decent amount of spacing.  But unlike ships, we would have much more ability to control our environment.  

I'm certainly not advocating that anyone get on a cruise ship anytime soon.  With that said, I have concerns about any travelling due to overreactions on the part of local authorities.  For example, many US states now require that anyone entering the state (including their own residents) must quarantine for at least 14 days.  You are instructed to bring enough food and necessities for 14 days with you as you will not be permitted to do local shopping or dining.  That's just travelling within the US.  What does a driving vacation in Europe entail?  If local governments have similar regulations requiring quarantines how would one travel?  For example how many jurisdictions would one travel through driving from Paris to Prague?  Can you imagine if each jurisdiction required a quarantine upon entry?  I don't know what the answers are or will be but these are concerns that make me think long and hard about booking any form of travel until I'm satisfied that Covid-19 is under enough control that government regulators world wide relax such restrictive measures.  In addition to making sure it is medically safe to travel, one should also ensure that they don't run afoul of strict mitigation measures.  This certainly makes the travel decision making process more complex.

[D C]

18 minutes ago, Daniel A said:

I'm certainly not advocating that anyone get on a cruise ship anytime soon.  With that said, I have concerns about any travelling due to overreactions on the part of local authorities.  For example, many US states now require that anyone entering the state (including their own residents) must quarantine for at least 14 days.  You are instructed to bring enough food and necessities for 14 days with you as you will not be permitted to do local shopping or dining.  That's just travelling within the US.  What does a driving vacation in Europe entail?  If local governments have similar regulations requiring quarantines how would one travel?  For example how many jurisdictions would one travel through driving from Paris to Prague?  Can you imagine if each jurisdiction required a quarantine upon entry?  I don't know what the answers are or will be but these are concerns that make me think long and hard about booking any form of travel until I'm satisfied that Covid-19 is under enough control that government regulators world wide relax such restrictive measures.  In addition to making sure it is medically safe to travel, one should also ensure that they don't run afoul of strict mitigation measures.  This certainly makes the travel decision making process more complex.

I would think that going forward, the cruise companies would be in constant contact with local authorities and would have procedures and processes worked out before guests even board.  Even going into COVID, ships had to report illnesses to the ports.  There was a lot of fear about COVID initially as it had not yet been confirmed in a lot of locations.  Today, the treatment options are improving as we understand more about it.  I would expect there to be less panic going forward when there is a case onboard (and there most certainly will be at some point).  

 

 

[Hlitner]

28 minutes ago, Daniel A said:

I'm certainly not advocating that anyone get on a cruise ship anytime soon.  With that said, I have concerns about any travelling due to overreactions on the part of local authorities.  For example, many US states now require that anyone entering the state (including their own residents) must quarantine for at least 14 days.  You are instructed to bring enough food and necessities for 14 days with you as you will not be permitted to do local shopping or dining.  That's just travelling within the US.  What does a driving vacation in Europe entail?  If local governments have similar regulations requiring quarantines how would one travel?  For example how many jurisdictions would one travel through driving from Paris to Prague?  Can you imagine if each jurisdiction required a quarantine upon entry?  I don't know what the answers are or will be but these are concerns that make me think long and hard about booking any form of travel until I'm satisfied that Covid-19 is under enough control that government regulators world wide relax such restrictive measures.  In addition to making sure it is medically safe to travel, one should also ensure that they don't run afoul of strict mitigation measures.  This certainly makes the travel decision making process more complex.

DW and I are very independent travelers and driving through Europe is pretty routine...under normal circumstances.  However, with this COVID-19 issue one would certainly need to do their pre trip homework on any existing restrictions.  I see you are from New York and must admit that folks from your State are not exactly welcomed in many places.  In fact, a couple of weeks ago we drove down to Baltimore (the liquor stores are closed in PA but open in Maryland) and there was a temporary electric sign along Rte 83 just over the Maryland-PA border which said that anyone from New York, New Jersey or CT were required to self-quarantine for 14 days.  Not sure how that could be enforced, but the State did put up those signs.

 

The question is how long are all these restrictive efforts going to last?  1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4!   What has happened is something akin to worldwide panic without thinking through all the ramifications.  If the authorities manage to push us all into a worldwide economic depression, millions are going to die from depression and poverty.   Like many things these days there is no shortage of critics but those offering reasonable solutions are very rare indeed.

 

As to the cruise lines, I think they are now seen as a problem and a threat (to health).  While it is an important industry to most of us here on CC,  I am afraid the industry is in an awful position and could easily become a victim of the worldwide panic.  While Carnival thinks they can resume some Caribbean operations in August, we wonder where they will take their ships.  Just this week we have seen several Caribbean countries still resisting the repatriation of their own citizens (who work on cruise ships).  Are those islands going to welcome thousands of cruisers in less than 3 months?   Will the USA even allow their no-cruise order to expire in July?    And we continue to ask a simple question for which no cruise line has provided an answer.  What will happen when a ship has even a single person who has a respiratory illness?  Until there is an acceptable answer to that question we see little chance for the resumption of cruising.

 

Hank

[AF-1]

Hank,  very good observation and I agree with your post

[D C]

15 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

DW and I are very independent travelers and driving through Europe is pretty routine...under normal circumstances.  However, with this COVID-19 issue one would certainly need to do their pre trip homework on any existing restrictions.  I see you are from New York and must admit that folks from your State are not exactly welcomed in many places.  In fact, a couple of weeks ago we drove down to Baltimore (the liquor stores are closed in PA but open in Maryland) and there was a temporary electric sign along Rte 83 just over the Maryland-PA border which said that anyone from New York, New Jersey or CT were required to self-quarantine for 14 days.  Not sure how that could be enforced, but the State did put up those signs.

 

The question is how long are all these restrictive efforts going to last?  1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4!   What has happened is something akin to worldwide panic without thinking through all the ramifications.  If the authorities manage to push us all into a worldwide economic depression, millions are going to die from depression and poverty.   Like many things these days there is no shortage of critics but those offering reasonable solutions are very rare indeed.

 

Hank

They'll last only as long as people are willing to abide by the rules.  That's not very long.

The current attitude is that it's ok to suffer and die from anything, so long as it's not COVID.   We're approaching the end of the tolerance for that.

 

I need to see two different doctors for what are considered "elective" visits.  Both issues cause me pain daily.  One doc offered a video visit for an issue that rightfully will require an x-rax and physical exam.  When the government is telling an experienced MD that he is unable to operate his business safely in the presence of what amounts to a low risk virus (as a percentage of clients who are potentially infected this far into a stay-home environment), and is telling citizens that debilitating pain is ok, so long as they don't have COVID, we have a situation that people will not tolerate for long.  

 

People will accept the risk of contracting a virus and will go about their lives in a normal-ish fashion to the extent the government lacks enforcement of their rules.  People in London went about their lives as normally as possible in WW2, even though they knew German bombs could drop on them at any moment.  They accepted the risk and chose to live in a normal-ish fashion.  People today will do the same. 

 

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by D C

[Paula_MacFan]

3 hours ago, D C said:

I must be on the wrong cruise ships, as I find them anything but crowded with people jammed together.  Maybe it's just how I utilize the space on a ship.  I spend a lot of time outside in uncrowded areas.   I'd say that I come in close contact to a very very small percentage of the population on a ship.  We tend to see the same people hanging out in the same areas of the ship.  We also don't go to the theatre as we find the shows generally not appealing.  

 

Transmission studies are interesting, but do people not hit up the hand sanitizer AFTER the buffet and before eating? I always do.    If the buffet switches to a "we serve you", that transmission by touch goes to nearly zero.   

 

Either way, we booked a trip for this November, and have one in Feb as well.  Looking forward to both.

 

 

 

I agree with you on some points -- my husband and I rarely go to theater shows and tend to spend a lot of time on our balcony.  We rarely eat in the MDR and instead eat on our balcony or do specialty dining.  We also never use the elevators and take the stairs.  However, just getting on the ship, attending the muster drill, going ashore on a tender, and disembarking brings us in close contact with many other passengers.  Even though we already tend to 'social distance' on our cruises, until processes change, I don't see how cruising can continue as we've known it in the past.  

[AF-1]

Hey I wonder if cruise lines will only sail to ports with docks;  at least in the near future; so people won't have to crowd on the tenders

[voljeep]

easy enough to not crowd on tenders … just hand out a limited amount of tickets per tender - and use more ship lifeboats as tenders, as they are just hanging there anyway … 

[Paula_MacFan]

2 minutes ago, AF-1 said:

Hey I wonder if cruise lines will only sail to ports with docks;  at least in the near future; so people won't have to crowd on the tenders

Hey I wonder what ports will even be open to allow any ships to dock?  At least in the near future......I don't expect anyone to be willing to accept a ship with thousands of potentially ill passengers.  

[AF-1]

Paula_MacFan;   I get what you are saying.  I was wondering "what if";  when cruise lines start up again. 

[Daniel A]

I don't see cruising opening up anytime soon.  I can envision the cruise lines as well as various ports of call requiring Covid-19 vaccination certificates.  I think that once vaccines become available lots of options will reopen.  For those who resist the concepts of vaccines for anything will just be affecting themselves, but they won't be allowed on cruise ships.  

 

I'd love to have stock in whatever company develops the most effective Covid-19 vaccine but my crystal ball is temporarily shut down...🥴

[voljeep]

as soon as Port Everglades announces a date, either privately or publicly , that they will be open to cruise ships … Princess will have a ship sailing that day to Princess Cays , and maybe St Thomas as it seems they may be in the process of re-opening..

 

stay safe

peace out

[D C]

27 minutes ago, voljeep said:

easy enough to not crowd on tenders … just hand out a limited amount of tickets per tender - and use more ship lifeboats as tenders, as they are just hanging there anyway … 

I've been fortunate enough to have tendered only a handful of times.  Most of those have been on open-air tenders that were port-provided.  I think only once was it a lifeboat-tender.   The open air tenders should be low-risk for transmission.   I suppose it's possible that tender type could be a factor. 

[HappyInVan]

39 minutes ago, D C said:

People will largely abide by reasonable rules. "Reasonable" is subject to interpretation, of course.  If the restrictions are such that the personal tolls (emotional and financial) exceed the perceived risk/reward of returning to some sort of normalcy, the restrictions will be ignored.  Perhaps that's a more "American" attitude that isn't indicative of other places.

 

 

 

'Reasonable' is an individual interpretation. Science and public health is not. That's why there are rules and standards for the food sold, regardless of your interpretation.

 

It is amazing that in your country, there are so many intellectually challenged people who are smarter than the doctors and scientists. Such clever interpretations of the Blitz etc.

 

Yes, all these clever people should get together on a cruise. Quite possible that the problem will solve itself in a  few weeks.

 

Countries like China, Korea, Norway, Oz and NZ have succeeded in squashing their epidemic. While the most infected countries (USA, UK, Russia) have flawed leaders. Ignored the scientists. Pursued risky untried strategies.

 

In the end, the only thing that matters are the results. A good outcome indicates strong fundamentals. A bad outcome suggests weak fundamentals. That is the truth about society and leadership.
 

As I said earlier.

 

"Polls of your country indicate that the majority of your people think that the restrictions are being eased too soon. But, a minority are sabotaging the guidelines written by the doctors."

 

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by HappyInVan

[LACruiser88]

44 minutes ago, D C said:

I've been fortunate enough to have tendered only a handful of times.  Most of those have been on open-air tenders that were port-provided.  I think only once was it a lifeboat-tender.   The open air tenders should be low-risk for transmission.   I suppose it's possible that tender type could be a factor. 

Fyi, tenders are now called "Water Shuttles."  The name change occurred about a year ago...

[npcl]

1 hour ago, D C said:

I've been fortunate enough to have tendered only a handful of times.  Most of those have been on open-air tenders that were port-provided.  I think only once was it a lifeboat-tender.   The open air tenders should be low-risk for transmission.   I suppose it's possible that tender type could be a factor. 

In most ports the tenders are the ones carried by the ship which except for the entry doors and a couple of small windows, which may be closed or open, not open air.

[Cruise Raider]

1 hour ago, D C said:

Everything in the US medical system is based on codes for procedures and whatnot.  I suspect that's the same in Canada.

 

When it comes to paying hospitals, they do get a 20% bonus payment over the standard code $$ if 1) the patient has COVID, and if 2) the insurance is medicaid (federal health coverage).  Given that the majority of serious cases are in the elderly, and that medicaid is common among the elderly, saying that they get a bonus for COVID isn't incorrect, though it is a blanket statement that doesn't apply to all cases.  That 20% was provided for through the CARES Act.  I doubt private insurers are doing the same. 

 

Actually, there is additional payment for CoVid for Medicare patients in the hospital ... $13K extra for anyone with CoVid and $39K extra for CoVid patients on a ventilator.  Ventilator patients, whether it be for acute (or acute on chronic) respiratory failure with or without an infectious process, have a very high paying DRG as they are very resource intensive patients.  Most elderly patients are on Medicare vs Medicaid ... Medicaid picks up where Medicare leaves off if they are also indigent (no negative connotations added).   

As for coding, if the reason for admission to the hospital was not CoVid, it wouldn't be listed as the principal diagnosis but it would count as a comorbidity whether or not it was present on admission and even whether or not is was just probable or suspected.  This is why the number of CoVid deaths on the CDC website differs drastically from the number of deaths reported by the public health department from death certificates.  

Private insurers will sometimes use Medicare reimbursement as their guide depending on the contracts they set up with hospitals.  

Medicaid reimbursement may very well be an additional 20% as it is generally the lowest reimbursement payer for hospitals. 

[npcl]

1 hour ago, HappyInVan said:

 

 

I see that I need to help you in analysis. There are other countries that have tested more people per capita...

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_testing#Virus_testing_statistics_by_country

 

The countries with the highest tests per million people are Iceland, UAE and Bahrain. The large countries with the highest tests per capita are Denmark, Portugal and Spain. Double the rate of USA.

 

BTW, South Korea was able to contain their infection to Daegu (2/3 of the nation's cases). Means that they may have tested up to 10% of the city of Daegu (pop 2.5m). That's real testing.

 

BTW, how many tests does USA need to reopen?

 

"Coronavirus testing chief says ‘no way on Earth’ US can test 5 million a day, despite what Trump says"

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/29/coronavirus-testing-chief-says-no-way-on-earth-us-can-test-5-million-a-day.html

 

 

The issue is not so much the number of tests, but how well testing is integrated into contact tracing and how fast one can get the test and results.

 

Basically what is needed is 

1. Whenever anyone shows symptoms, no matter how mild they should be able to easily get a test, with results back within 24 hours at latest

2. Contact tracing should be initiated immediately upon each and every positive test, with notification to any known contacts within 24 hours.

4. Close contacts should then self quarantine to the degree possible for 14 days after the contact and self monitor for symptoms.  Test upon development of any symptoms or near end of isolation period

 

Do this in line with social distancing and you can get it under control

 

Testing just for the sake of increasing testing numbers accomplishing nothing.

 

The US is currently at about 30k tests per million .Australia is a little over 35k.  The major difference is that they were aggressive in locking down, stopping travel outside of ones home area, quarantine anyone that is traveling both from outside as well as inside the country, aggressively contact tracing any cases that show up.

 

South Korea has only tested  13,500 per million population.  They are considered to be a model in how to fight this, yet less than half of the US testing level.  Again they have aggressive contact tracing down to a art as well as a science. 

 

 

[npcl]

23 minutes ago, DaveSJ711 said:

 

So many misstatements.  Let's focus on three:

 

1.  The suggestion that extreme death estimates assumed social distancing is just false.  The Imperial College London predicted 2.2 million deaths in the US "in the (unlikely) absence of any control measures or spontaneous changes in individual behavior."  And Mike Pence agreed that the 2.2 million figure assumed no mitigation measures, e.g., social distancing.

 

https://www.cato.org/blog/how-one-model-simulated-22-million-us-deaths-covid-19

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/01/trump-coronavirus-millions-saved-160814

 

2.  NYC didn't need 30,000 ventilators because the city and NY State recommended certain mitigation measures and imposed others.  These measures lessened COVID's impact on hospitals.  Without these efforts, the need for ventilators (and the ultimate death toll) would have been far greater.  Cause and effect.

 

3.  The claim that COVID deaths has been exaggerated is a popular canard on right-wing social media.  It started when a Minnesota state senator gave an interview on Fox News.  More recently, however, in an interview with Factcheck.org, the same gentleman admitted he had no evidence that hospitals were intentionally classifying COVID cases for financial reasons.

 

Yesterday, Dr. Fauci testified before the Senate that COVID deaths are most likely undercounted, not overcounted.  I'll take his word over the word of a CC member's cousin.

 

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/hospital-payments-and-the-covid-19-death-count/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/12/fauci-puts-it-bluntly-coronavirus-deaths-are-undercounted/

 

 

 

A couple of additions

 

2. NYC came very close.  They had to borrow ventilators from Oregon and California (and anywhere else they could get them) to keep from running out.  They also went with 2 patients per ventilator in some cases.  An act which can be done in emergencies, but does need to be closely monitored and the people sharing should be similar in ling volume or injury is risked.

 

3.  Filing for reimbursement under the wrong ICD-10 code is considered to be fraud, and is a criminal offense.  I doubt that hospitals are performing a criminal act in order to get a relatively slight increase  over the standard medicare rate for similar medical treatment under the existing ICD-10 codes.  If any hospital was dumb enough to do this for a relatively minor reward I am quite sure that they will have a fraud investigator visit in their future.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by npcl

[Cruise Raider]

34 minutes ago, npcl said:

If you noticed I did reference the extra, as I mentioned due to the need for increased PPD and other procedures for dealing with an infectious disease.  That is the 20% increased over the existing rates.

 

Don't know many hospital administrators that are going to risk a fraud conviction for using an invalid ICD-10 Code.

 

However the main point of your previous posting was stating that they got 13k extra if it was a covid patient or 39k extra on a ventilator.  Which is not correct.  It is what is being paid for those patients without any insurance of any kind.

 

Again the hospitals are not faking COVID-19 diagnosis for extra funding.  It is 1 minimal and 2 not worth going to jail

 

 

 

Whoa ... hold on there!!!  I NEVER indicated hospitals were committing fraud for the extra money!!  Where the heck did you get that from?  You seem to have been reading more into it than was actually written.  

 

As far as your information from the Kaiser Foundation, this is not how all hospitals bill for traditional Medicare.  The increase in reimbursement is an overall average, which I didn't make clear.  Obviously, this must be noted. 

Edited May 13, 2020 by Cruise Raider

[susancruzs]

These last few pages of posts don't seem to have anything to do with the actual subject of this thread, arguing about the virus but not talking about cruises.  I know it isn't politics but there is a post about sticking to the subject of cruising.

[Cruise Raider]

2 minutes ago, susancruzs said:

These last few pages of posts don't seem to have anything to do with the actual subject of this thread, arguing about the virus but not talking about cruises.  I know it isn't politics but there is a post about sticking to the subject of cruising.

 

Point taken!!  Sorry for the diversion.  I will stop...it's not productive.