Jump to content

New Covid Regulations Coming?


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, njhorseman said:

Yes...and both Richard Fain and Frank Del Rio say so:

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/5607/

"Fain and Del Rio said each company will use the panel's recommendations to inform the development of new, detailed operating protocols, which will be submitted to the CDC and other authorities around the globe for review and approval -- an important milestone in the process of resuming sailing around the world."

Creating paper does not solve anything.  All the written procedures in the world are useless when the world is experiencing a pandemic.  They will create a cruising experience that will be about as enjoyable as a root canal without anesthesia.  All that’s fine but once a regulation is written, they are never undone.  Not sure if the future of cruising includes us in it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, susiesan said:

If it were up to the CDC they would prefer that there never be any more cruises at all. The CDC would like to see the US on permanent lockdown, mandatory masks for everyone at all times, having us all living in fear if disease for the rest of our lives. They have managed to put themselves in the position of being totally in control of how Americans get to live and work.

That’s it 🙄,  I read 1984 as well.

Edited by KirkNC
Link to post
Share on other sites

KirkNC, susiesan, yep that is the game plan.

 

The CDC and its equivalents in all G20 countries need to demonstrate a far greater level of common sense ie balancing other interests and pressures (cruising only being one interest) versus complete submission of the G20 population to 100% removal of the virus.

 

For example, there is no "Second Wave" - that is a total lie and anyone saying this is not correct. There were articles here in Canada yesterday from Doctors stating that this was incorrect. Yet our Prime Minister is spouting off using this not accurate term.

 

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/why-doctors-dont-like-to-talk-about-covids-second-wave

 

More common sense and less hyperbole would be helpful on this and every other topic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ABoatNerd said:

or example, there is no "Second Wave" - that is a total lie and anyone saying this is not correct.

Here's an article from yesterday from one of the San Francisco Bay Area papers:

 

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/09/25/california-could-see-89-increase-in-hospitalizations-next-month-health-official-warns/

 

I don't care what it's called but it doesn't seem like it's decreasing. I also don't think that you should hurl the word "lie" around like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ABoatNerd said:

KirkNC, susiesan, yep that is the game plan.

 

The CDC and its equivalents in all G20 countries need to demonstrate a far greater level of common sense ie balancing other interests and pressures (cruising only being one interest) versus complete submission of the G20 population to 100% removal of the virus.

 

For example, there is no "Second Wave" - that is a total lie and anyone saying this is not correct. There were articles here in Canada yesterday from Doctors stating that this was incorrect. Yet our Prime Minister is spouting off using this not accurate term.

 

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/why-doctors-dont-like-to-talk-about-covids-second-wave

 

More common sense and less hyperbole would be helpful on this and every other topic.

The article you've cited doesn't say what you're claiming it does. To put it simply, it says "second wave" is a bad choice of terminology because it leads to incorrect assumptions about what is occurring when there's a resurgence of infections. People incorrectly assume there's been some inherent change in the nature of the virus, when actually what's occurred is a change in human behavior when societal restrictions are lifted, and that change in behavior is what causes the resurgence of infections. To quote the article:

 

"The notion that a virus races around the world like a wave comes from the distinctive peaks and surges of the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic. But that isn’t how a virus works, said Raywat Deonandan, an epidemiologist and associate professor at uOttawa. 

“The reason we don’t talk about waves is that it implies there is something innate about the disease that makes it cyclical. And it isn’t,” Deonandan said.

“The reason it goes up and down is because human behaviour goes up and down.”

Talking about waves of infections can even be harmful, he said.

“If you say we’re in a second wave, people will think they just have to wait it out and the wave will diminish on its own. That’s not the way it works.”

Think of it more as a house fire. Pour water on it and the flames die down. Shut off the hose and the embers can quickly rekindle into an inferno."

 

In fact a key graph in the article  clearly shows the existence of the "second wave", or infection resurgence if you prefer, in Ottawa. So, no the "second wave" ir not a lie and is in fact very clear and obvious:

2020-09-24-Confirmed_COVID-19_cases_in_Ottawa_outbreak_association.jpg?quality=100&strip=all&w=555

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, clo said:

Here's an article from yesterday from one of the San Francisco Bay Area papers:

 

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/09/25/california-could-see-89-increase-in-hospitalizations-next-month-health-official-warns/

 

I don't care what it's called but it doesn't seem like it's decreasing. I also don't think that you should hurl the word "lie" around like that.

Looks like we have a case of someone with a political ax to grind who has completely misinterpreted, misunderstood  and twisted the article they're citing in order to support their personal opinion. In fact the data in the article clearly show the existence of a "second wave" in Ottawa, even if "second wave" isn't the best epidemiological  terminology to describe it.

Anyone who reads the passage I quoted in my previous post can clearly see the epidemiologist is expressing a dislike for the terminology, not denying the existence of a resurgence of  COVID-19.

 

Edited by njhorseman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you very much to everyone.

 

There is no second wave. There is more testing as it were, which results in changes to the numbers. 

 

The article and many others like it show that it is the human element, the actions of humans AND the changes to testing, that change the numbers, not the virus itself. It is the end of the summer in Ottawa, Toronto, Vancouver, so it makes sense. Just as in May, Florida's numbers changed when they instituted their testing program on May 21. Everyone had a meltdown, no. No need for that, it was simply more testing that showed a different profile.

 

There is no Second Wave. Viruses don't work like that.

 

As my father's doctor said - if we tested more more cancer, well of course we would find more cancer, skin issues, dental disease, osteoporosis and onwards.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cases are going up and deaths are going down.  Sounds like great news to me.  The number of cases is irrelevant, the percentage of fatalities is critical.  A vaccine is right around the corner.....

 

This one , according to CNN (J&J) is 99% effective after phase 1 and 2 trials.  Pfizer trials are complete, Moderna has two weeks left and data is being analyzed in both.  J&J is a month or two behind.

 

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/09/25/us/johnson-and-johnson-vaccine-strong-immune-response/index.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, the more ports the better said:

 A vaccine is right around the corner.....

"

Fauci's take on vaccines

 

Meanwhile, Dr. Anthony Fauci, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director, says Covid-19 vaccinations could very likely start in November or December.

But he warns it may be late 2021 before things are back to normal.

"By the time you get enough people vaccinated so that you can feel you've had an impact enough on the outbreak, so that you can start thinking about maybe getting a little bit more towards normality, that very likely, as I and others have said, will be maybe the third quarter or so of 2021. Maybe even into the fourth quarter," he said in an online conversation with Dr. Howard Bauchner, editor-in-chief of the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fauci loves to see his name in the Press. After the US November elections the main stream Press  will abandon him. 
 

By May of next year, if you want to get on a cruise ship or take an international flight you’ll have gotten the vaccine shot. If you’re an antivax er or have an excuse, you’ll be allowed to hunker at home. Very little middle ground will exist. If you don’t want the shot, then hunker! Relatively simple simple choice, you choice! Just choose and be silent about it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/24/2020 at 2:22 AM, comcox said:

Found report that has been given by medical consultants for recommendations to U.S. cruise lines as what they need to do to safely restart cruising: https://www.royalcaribbeangroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Healthy-Sail-Panel_Full-Recommendations_9.21.20_FINAL.pdf

Quite a lengthy document but list of 74 recommendations starts on page 9.

 

Thanks for sharing this link.   I read through the recommendations.  They cover a lot of ground & are interesting to be sure. 

 

One kind of had me scratching my head.  #55 covers the need for ports to agree to allow safe passage of covid infected folks to leave the ship and travel home.   That sounds great, but how does that person with covid get home if it involves flights.   Will airlines allow someone known to have covid to board -- seems doubtful.     

 

Anyway, thanks again.  

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Idubs, your point is spot on.

 

If identified positive at the pier, who will allow you to fly home?

 

The cruise lines will have rid themselves of you.  Then what happens?

 

This is one of the sweet spots in the chess game of the virus and cruising, one that the cruise industry and its cheerleaders want to sweep under the rug.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

Thanks for sharing this link.   I read through the recommendations.  They cover a lot of ground & are interesting to be sure. 

 

One kind of had me scratching my head.  #55 covers the need for ports to agree to allow safe passage of covid infected folks to leave the ship and travel home.   That sounds great, but how does that person with covid get home if it involves flights.   Will airlines allow someone known to have covid to board -- seems doubtful.     

 

Anyway, thanks again.  

 

 

 

It will probably be like in the Spring when cruise lines had to put pax on a private transport to the airport  then chartered flights to their home town ..cannot recall  what happened the  other end of the flight  but I am guessing they had to provide transportation to their home

That was for pax without the virus

 most lines just kept the infected pax onboard until  they tested negative

 

What they will do  if they get to sail  anytime soon is anyone's guess

JMO

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where I live, Kansas City Missouri, our case numbers are increasing because people keep going for FREE covid tests being offered to anyone who wants one. Hundreds of people are getting tested out of curiosity or because they want FREE stuff. The majority being tested have no symptoms, have not been exposed, are not sick. So of course, the health authorities log in a few more cases. But hospitalization and death rates are way down. Me, I refuse to get tested for no reason. I am over 65, working every day, going to my gym 4 days a week, going on a US vacation next month, just out and about living my life. I rarely wear a mask, only when I am forced to by a store I want to go into.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, susiesan said:

Where I live, Kansas City Missouri, our case numbers are increasing because people keep going for FREE covid tests being offered to anyone who wants one. Hundreds of people are getting tested out of curiosity or because they want FREE stuff. The majority being tested have no symptoms, have not been exposed, are not sick. So of course, the health authorities log in a few more cases. But hospitalization and death rates are way down. Me, I refuse to get tested for no reason. I am over 65, working every day, going to my gym 4 days a week, going on a US vacation next month, just out and about living my life. I rarely wear a mask, only when I am forced to by a store I want to go into.

Good grief, one would hope that the majority of those tested are not positive..

 

In fact Missouri is currently experiencing one of the worst outbreaks in the country with 25.3 daily positive cases per 100K population, which is 8th highest in the US. Compare that to my home state of NJ, one of the hardest hit places in the US early on, which currently ranks 47th in daily positive cases per 100K population at 5.2.

 

Missouri has  a 12.3% positive test rate, ranked 10th highest in the country. New Jersey at 1.7% is 47th.

 

You should check the data at Covid Act Now https://covidactnow.org/?s=1078236 .  if like pictures better than  numbers you'll see that Missouri is one of only 8 states colored red on the map, with red defined as "Active or imminent outbreak".

Edited by njhorseman
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

Good grief, one would hope that the majority of those tested are not positive..

 

In fact Missouri is currently experiencing one of the worst outbreaks in the country with 25.3 daily positive cases per 100K population, which is 8th highest in the US. Compare that to my home state of NJ, one of the hardest hit places in the US early on, which currently ranks 47th in daily positive cases per 100K population at 5.2.

 

Missouri has  a 12.3% positive test rate, ranked 10th highest in the country. New Jersey at 1.7% is 47th.

 

You should check the data at Covid Act Now https://covidactnow.org/?s=1078236 .  if like pictures better than  numbers you'll see that Missouri is one of only 8 states colored red on the map, with red defined as "Active or imminent outbreak".

Well let's not let facts get involved here. We don't worry about that here in Missouri. Of course our Gov & his wife both have it now. I love these people that believe they won't get it, until they do.

 

If nothing else this thread sure does provide entertainment for a lovely Sunday afternoon. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, njhorseman said:

Good grief, one would hope that the majority of those tested are not positive..

 

In fact Missouri is currently experiencing one of the worst outbreaks in the country with 25.3 daily positive cases per 100K population, which is 8th highest in the US. Compare that to my home state of NJ, one of the hardest hit places in the US early on, which currently ranks 47th in daily positive cases per 100K population at 5.2.

 

Missouri has  a 12.3% positive test rate, ranked 10th highest in the country. New Jersey at 1.7% is 47th.

 

You should check the data at Covid Act Now https://covidactnow.org/?s=1078236 .  if like pictures better than  numbers you'll see that Missouri is one of only 8 states colored red on the map, with red defined as "Active or imminent outbreak".

Most of the cases are in St. Louis. Many are related to college students. Just because it is labeled a case doesn't mean anyone is sick. Who cares how many "cases" there are? I don't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, susiesan said:

Most of the cases are in St. Louis. Many are related to college students. Just because it is labeled a case doesn't mean anyone is sick. Who cares how many "cases" there are? I don't.

113 of the 115 counties in Missouri show more daily cases per 100K of population than NJ, with 57 of the 113 counties...that's half, but who's counting...having a cases per 100K rate from 5 to 17 times higher than NJ's, so don't try to feed me any BS about it mostly being in St. Louis. In fact St. Louis City has a rate per 100K  of 12.0, ranking 98th in the state...one of the lowest rates per 100K in the state, not the highest.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, clo said:

But that's just your opinion, right?

Absolutely my opinion.

 

Here are the options. Restrict long international flights to those that have taken the vaccine or, continue to make all passengers wear a mask on a 6-15 hr flight with limited services. For cruise Lines, require all passengers to have gotten the vaccine OR, continue to operate with reduce capacity on cruises and provide possible disruptions to facilitate the antivaxers!
 

My bet is the cruise lines will want to fill as many cabins as they can as soon as they can. Airlines don’t want to disgruntle even more flyers than they already do. My opinion is as soon as the vaccines are readily available one will either get the shots or not board the international flights nor get on a cruise ship. Just my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, pinotlover said:

Absolutely my opinion.

 

Here are the options. Restrict long international flights to those that have taken the vaccine or, continue to make all passengers wear a mask on a 6-15 hr flight with limited services. For cruise Lines, require all passengers to have gotten the vaccine OR, continue to operate with reduce capacity on cruises and provide possible disruptions to facilitate the antivaxers!
 

My bet is the cruise lines will want to fill as many cabins as they can as soon as they can. Airlines don’t want to disgruntle even more flyers than they already do. My opinion is as soon as the vaccines are readily available one will either get the shots or not board the international flights nor get on a cruise ship. Just my opinion.

And I agree with you. I'm thinking for intl. flights business class and a mask and the vaccine. I wouldn't have a problem with masks on a ship or pretty much all the other things. But I wouldn't be keen if we had to take the ship's shore excursions period. And I'm guessing that would be a hefty hike in fare. Or will you sign up and pay for each one. We probably wouldn't cruise again if we can't DIY.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Word on the street is that it is going to take months if not years for a critical mass of people to be vaccinated with an effective vaccine.  Until that happens, and you want to travel, masks and social distancing will be a fact of life.  I understand how Oceania cruisers feel genuinely put upon if they cannot pick their own shore excursions and go where they want in each port.  Having been on several Oceania and Regent cruises, using the ship's tours is just the way it is on Regent.  It may be more expensive but it is easier and generally the tours are good.  I would rather pay more and be as safe as possible, then go out by myself (with DH of course)  not knowing what we are getting ourselves into.  JMHO

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/26/2020 at 7:22 AM, susiesan said:

They have managed to put themselves in the position of being totally in control of how Americans get to live and work.

I wish they had that authority.

They are mostly just telling us what works and what doesn't but half the country doesn't want to listen - because they know better. And thus we have what we have - the worst outcome in the "civilized" world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, susiesan said:

Just because it is labeled a case doesn't mean anyone is sick. Who cares how many "cases" there are? I don't.

I care because even though they have no symptoms they can infect me (especially as they probably take no precautions because they feel healthy). I don't think they will be thrilled when they infect one of their grandparents or parents who may pay the ultimate price..

Edited by Paulchili
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ladys Mom said:

 I understand how Oceania cruisers feel genuinely put upon if they cannot pick their own shore excursions and go where they want in each port.

It will mean that we won't cruise. We'll fly into a (probably) European city, travel about or stay put, go to another major city, do the same and fly home.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • SPECIAL EVENT: Q&A with RiverCruising.co.uk
      • Q&A: Cruise Insurance with Steve Dasseos of TripInsuranceStore.com
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...