Would you get on a ship today?

[nocl]

12 minutes ago, PTC DAWG said:

My link is clear on when deaths peaked...

did not comment on peak though they are climbing again, the new cases today impact the death count 30 days from now. they are a lagging indicator.

 

what I commented on is your misuse of the data from the multiple morbidity data base.

[cangelmd]

12 hours ago, nocl said:

I would have to disagree.  the cruise line certainly did not demonstrate the ability to manage covid on crew only ships, even after the passengers left. Even after masks and distancing became standard in many countries. Covid outbreak on crew only ships continued into August and September based on testing required by home countries when crew members disembarked.

 

If they cannot control outbreak with only crew on board months after the passengers, how can we count on them to be able to do so when crew staffing is ramped up and passengers added.

Well, I have a feeling I know why they couldn’t manage Covid during the crew only period!

Think about for a minute, it might be unfair to say that discipline was lax, but I’m sure people got very very antsy closed up in those small cabins. No country on earth has completed controlled Covid in the 18-30 age range (I know many of the crew are over 30, but they still skew younger), why should a cruise ship be any different?

Also, the incubation and illness period is so long, it is hard to know what the exact chain of infection was - Covid is perfect for long slow transmission, even if it is the exponential transmission we worry about.

 

Also, I think that the measures taken when cruising recommences may be very different than what was happening during those long months of isolation - I think crew attitudes will be different too. I didn’t mention this in my first post, but another thing I would check before feeling safe is that improvements are made to air handling - I think improved air turnover will be really important in enclosed public spaces like corridors and lounges.

 

There will be cases, and likely limited transmission, no doubt, and if I was even a little older or had a serious underlying condition, I wouldn’t do it and Would not suggest anyone else cruise.

 

Its a balancing of risk reduction and the benefit of what is, at the end an optional activity.

 

The people though who are insistent about being safer at home make me uneasy, though.

Most cases we see now, particularly in people over about 50, they caught Covid from their family, often at home.

We are social creatures, most of us can only tolerate so much isolation. People who are desperate or depressed or just sick of it, tend to make less thoughtful decisions.

[nocl]

9 minutes ago, Threedrones said:

CDC.gov.. go to their report on 2009 H1N1 virus.   Then, still on CDC.gov, look at current numbers for covid19.   CDC reported 60.8 million cases of h1n1 from April 12, 2009 to April 12: 2010. Current Covid numbers are 8.7 million. Even adding a few million to make a full year would still show H1N1 being 5 or 6 times greater than Covid.

Your response indicates that you do not even have a clue what R0 means.  R0 is a measure of rate of infection. the number of people an infected person passes e infection on to

 

you also demonstrate a lack of understanding of the numbers you referenced.

 

The H1N1 numbers are total estimate of the number of H1N1 cases. Not confirmed tested cases. The CDC does the estimate using a number of factors.

 

In the case of Covid the data is actual confirmed, diagnosed cases. The current estimate of actual covid cases is up to 5X the confirmed number. The difference is because most asymptomatic cases don't get diagnosed (no reason to test unless they were notified of close contact to a confirmed case), many mild cases do not get tested, some groups such as undocumented immigrants do not get tested because they do not want to attract attention.

[Threedrones]

1 minute ago, nocl said:

Your response indicates that you do not even have a clue what R0 means.  R0 is a measure of rate of infection. the number of people an infected person passes e infection on to

 

you also demonstrate a lack of understanding of the numbers you referenced.

 

The H1N1 numbers are total estimate of the number of H1N1 cases. Not confirmed tested cases. The CDC does the estimate using a number of factors.

 

In the case of Covid the data is actual confirmed, diagnosed cases. The current estimate of actual covid cases is up to 5X the confirmed number. The difference is because most asymptomatic cases don't get diagnosed (no reason to test unless they were notified of close contact to a confirmed case), many mild cases do not get tested, some groups such as undocumented immigrants do not get tested because they do not want to attract attention.

And your using data from an article written on April 20th shows that you think no progress has been made since that time. THOSE numbers were estimates made when nothing was known about the virus.

[nocl]

20 minutes ago, cangelmd said:

Well, I have a feeling I know why they couldn’t manage Covid during the crew only period!

Think about for a minute, it might be unfair to say that discipline was lax, but I’m sure people got very very antsy closed up in those small cabins. No country on earth has completed controlled Covid in the 18-30 age range (I know many of the crew are over 30, but they still skew younger), why should a cruise ship be any different?

Also, the incubation and illness period is so long, it is hard to know what the exact chain of infection was - Covid is perfect for long slow transmission, even if it is the exponential transmission we worry about.

 

Also, I think that the measures taken when cruising recommences may be very different than what was happening during those long months of isolation - I think crew attitudes will be different too. I didn’t mention this in my first post, but another thing I would check before feeling safe is that improvements are made to air handling - I think improved air turnover will be really important in enclosed public spaces like corridors and lounges.

 

There will be cases, and likely limited transmission, no doubt, and if I was even a little older or had a serious underlying condition, I wouldn’t do it and Would not suggest anyone else cruise.

 

Its a balancing of risk reduction and the benefit of what is, at the end an optional activity.

 

The people though who are insistent about being safer at home make me uneasy, though.

Most cases we see now, particularly in people over about 50, they caught Covid from their family, often at home.

We are social creatures, most of us can only tolerate so much isolation. People who are desperate or depressed or just sick of it, tend to make less thoughtful decisions.

many of the recommendations for the say if possible. if they did not spread them out when the ships were empty. how are they going to do so when the ships have passengers?

 

one of the main reasons that they did not control the outbreaks is because they did not follow CDC recommendations. They did not test. The cases were mostly identified home countries forced testing upon disembarcation. they did not enforce distancing. they removed ships from US waters.  if they are allowed to restart without enhanced CDC oversite and CDC approval of exact protocols are you confident that they will actually what is needed. Or only what they think looks good to make the passengers feel comfortable

 

While they are improving filtering and adding fresh air how much will it impact air flow and virus clearance in the public indoor spaces. most likely flow will not change so the impact will be limited. the air flow is not top down like air craft.

 

I would like to see them do particle disburse studies to demonstrate how fast particles are cleared with the new enhanced ventilation. but I somehow doubt the cruise lines would run and publish such studies. more they will just point to the enhanced ventilation without proof of real impact.

Edited October 28, 2020 by nocl

[nocl]

15 minutes ago, Threedrones said:

And your using data from an article written on April 20th shows that you think no progress has been made since that time. THOSE numbers were estimates made when nothing was known about the virus.

Actually the April numbers from the first antibody studies indicated the under counting to be 5x to 10X under counting.

 

Current estimates are 3X to 5X.

 

So testing has improved but under counting still exists.

Edited October 28, 2020 by nocl

[garyl62]

2 hours ago, phoenix_dream said:

When I read your comments, it makes me wonder if you are inferring that your staff members have not been taking care of themselves and making good choices.  Otherwise, based on your logic, they would not have caught the virus.  ………….

 

Certainly not inferring this, thanks for the opportunity to correct that thought if that's the way it came across.

 

Someone can become infected many ways, sometimes it may never be known how they become infected and some are infected even if they take many precautions.  Everyone needs to make their own decisions about precautions, cruise experience expected under restricted conditions, and all those many other detailed questions you've asked.  The OP asked "Would you get on a ship today?" and my answer was that I would, but I know many would not.  Since the question asked was about our own personal opinion and our own personal action, there is no correct or incorrect answer. 

 

While I respect everyone else who needs more guarantees like safety, being able to take part in many of the things on the ship, or having the shore experiences we all enjoy, quite frankly I don't need all those guarantees.  I do want to know what rules will be in place, but beyond that I'm ok for now.  We have a suite with a very large balcony booked for an upcoming trip I hope we can take and we've said even if we sit on the balcony with room service the entire time we'll feel it was money well spent and it will give us a great break from being at home.  So given that opportunity, I'd get on a ship today.

 

 

[nocl]

one other comment

 

I have traveled over 10,000 miles since the start of the outbreak. Visited 5 national parks. Spent 30 days in lodges and hotels. Purchased a new home 600 miles away and moved. so not staying home.

 

but I would not get on board a cruise ship, with the corresponding surrendering of control that takes place when one climbs on board. The cruise lines have not demonstrated the transparency and competence with the outbreak  for me to give them that level of trust.

[excitedofharpenden]

3 hours ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

 

No... I wouldn't grt on a ship today. For the record, I'm not trying to change your mind or anyone's mind for that matter. I'm attempting to get a 'feel' from the real cruise enthusiasts on how they're feeling about cruising in today's world. Perhaps it's meaningless to you, but not to me. So just deal with it and move along. 

Oh no. I've got the popcorn out now. See what you started?🍿

 

Phil 

[PTC DAWG]

51 minutes ago, nocl said:

did not comment on peak though they are climbing again, the new cases today impact the death count 30 days from now. they are a lagging indicator.

 

what I commented on is your misuse of the data from the multiple morbidity data base.

I have no doubt "cases" are up.  I know folks that get tested once a week...different results every week...it's somewhat hard to believe the numbers at times.  Positive one day, negative 2 days later..seems like a nightmare for permission to sail.  I will say that.  

[PTC DAWG]

5 minutes ago, excitedofharpenden said:

Oh no. I've got the popcorn out now. See what you started?🍿

 

Phil 

Popcorn is about we have, unfortunately.  🙂

[LGW59]

4 minutes ago, excitedofharpenden said:

Oh no. I've got the popcorn out now. See what you started?🍿

 

Phil 

while I have given up commenting on the topic, I've not given up reading the posts, it has become must see CC.  🤣

[verizon]

When you look at countries like Germany,France, Spain,Italy and USA its much safer to stay at sea than land.

[Threedrones]

37 minutes ago, nocl said:

Actually the April numbers from the first antibody studies indicated the under counting to be 5x to 10X under counting.

 

Current estimates are 3X to 5X.

 

So testing has improved but under counting still exists.

Source

[nocl]

6 minutes ago, Threedrones said:

Source

here is one from July that uses date from earlier periods (takes time to collect data, analyze and publish) that puts the number at 10X.

 

https://www.statnews.com/2020/07/21/cdc-study-actual-covid-19-cases/

 

will post others when I get the chance.

[BigAl94]

River cruising in Europe is having problems https://www.cruiselawnews.com/2020/10/articles/disease/60-passengers-infected-with-covid-19-on-river-cruise-ship/?fbclid=IwAR3HGs37RRAa45TcCUSDTIfUfsqsCq_w5B3T8cdDoyq9ScMXYNRigXngNf4

[nocl]

37 minutes ago, PTC DAWG said:

I have no doubt "cases" are up.  I know folks that get tested once a week...different results every week...it's somewhat hard to believe the numbers at times.  Positive one day, negative 2 days later..seems like a nightmare for permission to sail.  I will say that.  

one way to get an idea of the infection, that does not depend upon the number of tests is hospitalization and mortality numbers. they are not impacted by the number of tests. they are however lagging indicators with hospitalizations lagging infections by about 14 days and fatalities by about 30 days. both are heading up

Edited October 28, 2020 by nocl

[mahdnc]

I would get on a ship, but my wife won't, so that means I won't.

[ECCruise]

Like most here, I am a "no" at the present time, for a number of reasons.

 

1st and foremost, I am not willing to repeat our experience in March when we were banned by 6 of 7 ports (including our disembarkation port) because of the fear of COVID (no cases and we had been on the ship without outside contact for 9 days). Floating around the Indian Ocean without knowing where, when and if we would disembark can be a drag.

 

2nd.  I have no problem wearing a mask.  Wear one without incident even when hiking in the mountains. But I am NOT going to risk encounters with flat earth non-maskers who, like on land, will likely flaunt the system.  Oh, they will go with the program to get on the ship (like they do to get into stores on land) but will play their games once they have boarded.  Unless the penalties for non-compliance are harsh and unforgiving, I can already see the potential problems.

 

3rd.  I am not willing to pay full price (let alone a premium) just to "sail."  Although the appeal of cruising is strong still after 85+ sailings, it is not enough to push me to spend Stupid $$$.

[LGW59]

5 minutes ago, ECCruise said:

Like most here, I am a "no" at the present time, for a number of reasons.

 

1st and foremost, I am not willing to repeat our experience in March when we were banned by 6 of 7 ports (including our disembarkation port) because of the fear of COVID (no cases and we had been on the ship without outside contact for 9 days). Floating around the Indian Ocean without knowing where, when and if we would disembark can be a drag.

 

2nd.  I have no problem wearing a mask.  Wear one without incident even when hiking in the mountains. But I am NOT going to risk encounters with flat earth non-maskers who, like on land, will likely flaunt the system.  Oh, they will go with the program to get on the ship (like they do to get into stores on land) but will play their games once they have boarded.  Unless the penalties for non-compliance are harsh and unforgiving, I can already see the potential problems.

 

3rd.  I am not willing to pay full price (let alone a premium) just to "sail."  Although the appeal of cruising is strong still after 85+ sailings, it is not enough to push me to spend Stupid $$$.

Totally agree.  I hope the penalty for any flagrant violation of what they establish as healthy sail protocols will result in removal from the ship at next port of call as well a permanent ban from cruising.

[cangelmd]

1 hour ago, nocl said:

many of the recommendations for the say if possible. if they did not spread them out when the ships were empty. how are they going to do so when the ships have passengers?

 

one of the main reasons that they did not control the outbreaks is because they did not follow CDC recommendations. They did not test. The cases were mostly identified home countries forced testing upon disembarcation. they did not enforce distancing. they removed ships from US waters.  if they are allowed to restart without enhanced CDC oversite and CDC approval of exact protocols are you confident that they will actually what is needed. Or only what they think looks good to make the passengers feel comfortable

 

While they are improving filtering and adding fresh air how much will it impact air flow and virus clearance in the public indoor spaces. most likely flow will not change so the impact will be limited. the air flow is not top down like air craft.

 

I would like to see them do particle disburse studies to demonstrate how fast particles are cleared with the new enhanced ventilation. but I somehow doubt the cruise lines would run and publish such studies. more they will just point to the enhanced ventilation without proof of real impact.

If cruise lines deliberately don’t follow the CDC recommendations or institute the framework  of bodies like the Healthy Sail panel, then all bets are off. At some level you have to trust them a little that it is in their overall best interest to do the right thing - I know that their track record with Noro, for instance, is not great, but this is a different situation where the existence of the industry is at stake.

It would not surprise me if when cruising resumes it is only on the newest ships for a longer time than we are thinking now. Why embark on extensive retrofitting of older ships if the number of passengers remains low for many months. I would guess that retrofitting more than a few ships will wait for a vaccine and for CDC and the Euro CDC to offer guidance on what measures will be permanent and which can be temporary.

 

Does airflowcon a ship go top down then?

[davekathy]

21 hours ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

We have all read & in some cases re-read the suggestions of changes that RCL has sent to the CDC. Knowing what we know today.. and add to it the latest news of another uptick of covid infections across 40+ states and across Europe as well, would you get on a plane & fly to your RCL ship to take a 7 day or longer cruise today if you were allowed to?  

Would you? 

[nocl]

11 minutes ago, cangelmd said:

If cruise lines deliberately don’t follow the CDC recommendations or institute the framework  of bodies like the Healthy Sail panel, then all bets are off. At some level you have to trust them a little that it is in their overall best interest to do the right thing - I know that their track record with Noro, for instance, is not great, but this is a different situation where the existence of the industry is at stake.

It would not surprise me if when cruising resumes it is only on the newest ships for a longer time than we are thinking now. Why embark on extensive retrofitting of older ships if the number of passengers remains low for many months. I would guess that retrofitting more than a few ships will wait for a vaccine and for CDC and the Euro CDC to offer guidance on what measures will be permanent and which can be temporary.

 

Does airflowcon a ship go top down then?

on airplane the flow goes from inlets at the top to vents along the floor all along the cabin. the air flow is mostly vertical vent directly above exhaust.

 

With cruise ships have mostly see vent up high, but exhaust vents, when I have seen them along walls with substantial horizontal flow. So if someone emits particles in the center of the room they would go sideways along with the air flow. Changes in fresh air mix and improved filter means more and better air coming in, but by itself does not answer the particle clearance question, which for a large air plane tests have show to be about 6 minutes.

 

Do not know how the new systems compare to the old because as far as I can find no published data on either. Maybe the Chief might know from his NCL days if any studies were ever done.

 

For me my trust comes after cruise lined demonstrate transparency in their procedures, decision making and health reporting. Something they have not exactly demonstrated in the past.

Edited October 28, 2020 by nocl

[C-Dragons]

1 hour ago, nocl said:

 

will post others when I get the chance.

Oh please don’t. 🙄

Maybe you 4 guys should get your own thread. 😁

I'm sure it would be a lot easier for you all to communicate without the rest of us who are trying to discuss the OP's topic. 😎

[cheeseheads4ever]

As much as we would love to cruise we just can’t. So no to cruising now. We were looking at November 2021 but will wait to see how the cruise lines handle things and when a vaccine comes out .

Ive been looking at You Tube videos of others on cruises on the same Celebrity ships and it brings back great memories. Seems to pacify me for the time being and also looking at cruise critic postings plus doing mock bookings. Of course not as nice as being on a cruise but you have to take what you can get for the time being. Trying to be patient....All I can say is wear your mask and stay safe...