Why even think about it

[Formula280SS]

19 hours ago, pcakes122 said:

And don't forget being willing to risk other people's lives.

 

You won't be risking other people's lives on a cruise if you choose not to go on the cruise and others do.  You won't be there; i.e., your life can't be at risk.  Further, if one adheres to the risk awareness of severe age, heart, lung, diabetes and obesity as comprising almost all deaths, and stays away from risk activities, your life isn't at risk and (if they adhere also) their life isn't at risk as they, like you, won't be there also.  It's quite simple if one is cognizant of and understands the statistical realities of the virus.

[PATRLR]

2 hours ago, graphicguy said:

Just look at the posts here in CC.  People complain, but mostly, they want to cruise.

Yeah, just look at the posts in CC. 

 

I notice that two posts I made yesterday (about 24 hours ago) are still visible on the main/first NCL page as the last posts in those two threads.  That's unheard of that in 24 hours only 13 threads recieved any updates.  In the last 24 hours there has been about 100 posts/replies in the NCL forum.  I don't know what that number would have been last year at this time, but I am sure it was significantly higher. 

Point is, draw all the conclusions you want from CC, the conclusion I draw is that hardly anyone is here and that reflects society in general's lack of interest in cruising any time soon.

[goldmom]

1 hour ago, PATRLR said:

Yeah, just look at the posts in CC. 

 

I notice that two posts I made yesterday (about 24 hours ago) are still visible on the main/first NCL page as the last posts in those two threads.  That's unheard of that in 24 hours only 13 threads recieved any updates.  In the last 24 hours there has been about 100 posts/replies in the NCL forum.  I don't know what that number would have been last year at this time, but I am sure it was significantly higher. 

Point is, draw all the conclusions you want from CC, the conclusion I draw is that hardly anyone is here and that reflects society in general's lack of interest in cruising any time soon.

While that is most likely true to some extent.  I also think that part of the reason people aren't posting as much as there just isn't that much to discuss with cruises not sailing.

 

Normally there would be reviews, questions about cabins, talking about dining, shore excursions, etc.  While I realize that there are bigger problems right now than when cruising will start up again, I do miss cruising and dream of a time when I'll be on a ship again even if there are restrictions.

 

Stay healthy everyone and hope for an end to this soon!

 

 

 

[pcakes122]

7 hours ago, Formula280SS said:

 

You won't be risking other people's lives on a cruise if you choose not to go on the cruise and others do.  You won't be there; i.e., your life can't be at risk. 

I won't be, but the employees working on the ship would be at risk of exposure, as would any essential workers or family members an exposed person came in contact with on the way home or once at home (especially if you are asymptomatic and don't realize you have the virus.)

 

But, I guess you could just blame the cruise ship workers for going to work. 

[lvcrzn]

Perhaps a safe vaccine might change all the speculation. Fingers crossed! 

[dexddd]

14 hours ago, PATRLR said:

Yeah, just look at the posts in CC. 

 

I notice that two posts I made yesterday (about 24 hours ago) are still visible on the main/first NCL page as the last posts in those two threads.  That's unheard of that in 24 hours only 13 threads recieved any updates.  In the last 24 hours there has been about 100 posts/replies in the NCL forum.  I don't know what that number would have been last year at this time, but I am sure it was significantly higher. 

Point is, draw all the conclusions you want from CC, the conclusion I draw is that hardly anyone is here and that reflects society in general's lack of interest in cruising any time soon.

You are right.  Even many of the die hards are absent.  MSC board down to 5 new replies in 24 hours.   Even those who love to argue every point finding no audience.

[farmersfight]

19 minutes ago, lvcrzn said:

Perhaps a safe vaccine might change all the speculation. Fingers crossed! 

 

🤞

[Formula280SS]

9 hours ago, pcakes122 said:

I won't be, but the employees working on the ship would be at risk of exposure, as would any essential workers or family members an exposed person came in contact with on the way home or once at home (especially if you are asymptomatic and don't realize you have the virus.)

 

But, I guess you could just blame the cruise ship workers for going to work. 

 

On the ship, exclusively?  No, because it is a convenient excuse that disregards others in society; i.e., retired part-timers (high risk) and legions of high schoolers working at the grocery stores, drug stores, Walmart, Target, Lowes, Home Depot, convenience stores, restaurants and delivery, etc.  I guess it is appropriate to blame those millions for going to work?  Of course not, and the same for the crew on a cruise ship.

 

Again, the cruise ship has to apply the protocols to the crew also.  In doing such, at-risk employees crew should not be allowed back until the virus has reduced risk of death for them via vaccines and therapeutics.  It's that simple a precaution to "focus on protecting who are at risk of death" (and not waste the medical resources, or the collapse of an economy; personal, family, local, state or country).

 

Such at-risk crew, if not there, simply cannot be affected. 

Edited October 29, 2020 by Formula280SS

[roger001]

1 hour ago, lvcrzn said:

Perhaps a safe vaccine might change all the speculation. Fingers crossed! 

That's going to be the only answer to all of this mess.  

[DCGuy64]

As I suspected, after chatting online with a friend who's also an MSC crew member, I can assure you that the crew wants to get back to sailing ASAP. I shared with him that I"d weighed in on the CDC's website during the public comment period about lifting the No Sail Order, I wrote to one of my own Senators about supporting bill S. 4592 (to establish a maritime task force), https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/4592/titles

and I wrote to Senator Marco Rubio yesterday (co-sponsor of the above). My friend from MSC said that things are rough for him and others, and that MSC's success in Europe shows sailing can resume safely.

[oteixeira]

9 minutes ago, HaveWeMetYet said:

There is no way to know if MSC has had disease outbreaks. Ships departing and returning to Italian ports are not required to disclose that information. And they don't.

We knew about the refused entry before cruising, and every passenger that missed the bubble excursion because the news agencies are drooling for some bad news.  We knew about 7 cases on Costa that turned out to all be false positive (even the guy with the Flu in hospital).  So what I am trying to say is there is no way the news media would not find out if there were cases on any of the ships in any area of the globe at this time (I am including Tui, and the ships sailing in Asia right now).

 

 

[pcakes122]

8 hours ago, Formula280SS said:

 

On the ship, exclusively?  No, because it is a convenient excuse that disregards others in society; i.e., retired part-timers (high risk) and legions of high schoolers working at the grocery stores, drug stores, Walmart, Target, Lowes, Home Depot, convenience stores, restaurants and delivery, etc.  I guess it is appropriate to blame those millions for going to work?  Of course not, and the same for the crew on a cruise ship.

 

Again, the cruise ship has to apply the protocols to the crew also.  In doing such, at-risk employees crew should not be allowed back until the virus has reduced risk of death for them via vaccines and therapeutics.  It's that simple a precaution to "focus on protecting who are at risk of death" (and not waste the medical resources, or the collapse of an economy; personal, family, local, state or country).

 

Such at-risk crew, if not there, simply cannot be affected. 

There is no way to predict who will get Covid-19, whether you want to believe that or not.  There ARE groups that are "high-risk", but that doesn't mean they are the ONLY people who get Covid.  Otherwise "healthy" people who have no history of heart disease, pulmonary disease, diabetes, obesity, cancers, etc. and children are getting Covid daily.

 

There is simply NO WAY to predict who is "safe" and who isn't.  If you think so, you are kidding yourself.

[Formula280SS]

1 minute ago, pcakes122 said:

There is no way to predict who will get Covid-19, whether you want to believe that or not.  There ARE groups that are "high-risk", but that doesn't mean they are the ONLY people who get Covid.  Otherwise "healthy" people who have no history of heart disease, pulmonary disease, diabetes, obesity, cancers, etc. and children are getting Covid daily.

 

There is simply NO WAY to predict who is "safe" and who isn't.  If you think so, you are kidding yourself.

 

You will have to read the posts again as there was no inference regarding who would get Covid; rather, the alternate regimen (from most governments currently) of focusing on who is at risk of death if infected from Covid.

 

That was and is my focus.

 

On the inference that there is no way to determine who is at risk of death if infected from Covid, I would disagree based on the simple reference to the data on the deaths.  The data doesn't kid (even as presented and there is good cause to believe that Covid has been propagated in the data). 

 

There will be always be a statistically negligible (essentially zero) percentage that might result in death in the non-at-risk categories.  However, if that threshold is "that there cannot be any deaths" is the application determinant by governments then I don't believe that a planet with almost 8 billion human inhabitants could continue to be considered an evolved species if such follow that path.

 

A related consideration would be asking why are the annual deaths by the cold, the flu and and lung and coronary disease "acceptable?"  Worse, why is human starvation "acceptable?"

 

 

[Roger88]

I can bet that more people died of other factors than of Covid, in my opinion the threat of a regular flue named covid 19 is over exaggerated. People are the ones who are responsible for their safety. Wash your hands, avoid massive groups of people, try to visit your doctor more often and you should be just fine  

[wowzz]

29 minutes ago, Roger88 said:

I can bet that more people died of other factors than of Covid, in my opinion the threat of a regular flue named covid 19 is over exaggerated. People are the ones who are responsible for their safety. Wash your hands, avoid massive groups of people, try to visit your doctor more often and you should be just fine  

Sometimes words just fail me!

[SpainAlien]

https://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/23778-royal-caribbean-ships-can-be-safer-than-main-street.html

 

[phillyguy31]

The problem isn't infecting someone on the ship but it is what happens AFTER you get off. I don't think anyone thinks that Covid won't get on the ship, but if it isn't caught on the ship and isolated and everyone else on the ship told to quarantine, which we all know won't happen with some. So now the cruise becomes a "super spreader" and that is where the problem lies. The press will eat that up.

With everything going on in Europe is it really smart to believe that they caught no more positive cases before embarking. Personally I think MSC is doing a really good job of media control. I also don't think using how well it is going in Europe will translate into the US cruises. They are basically staying within  the  European Union and removing someone from a cruise is not a major effort. However you tell one of the Caribbean islands or Mexico that you are kicking someone off because they didn't follow your rules and see if they are as happy to help. Worse, tell them they have to be disembarked because they tested positive. Now that country has an additional covid case(s) and they have to stay there because they can't fly home. Now you are in a hospital in a 3rd world country. I can see the lawyers standing in line now.

[ilovetotravel1977]

18 minutes ago, phillyguy31 said:

The problem isn't infecting someone on the ship but it is what happens AFTER you get off.

 

Same can be said for flying, especially if you have a layover.

 

Flying should be banned as well then.

[HaveWeMetYet]

3 minutes ago, ilovetotravel1977 said:

 

Same can be said for flying, especially if you have a layover.

 

Flying should be banned as well then.

Good point about flying. Read this.

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2020-10-28/57-covid-infections-one-flight-airlines-lie

[luckyinpa]

what countries are receiving ships now without any issues? i was thinking about flying to bermuda for fun but i read all the rules. i cannot imagine any cruisers going thru all that. 

 

but i was really curious about bahamas/mexico/ alaska/canada etc and if they are open to receiving cruisers because if not, then all the arguing about starting is pointless. 

[All-ready2cruise]

1 minute ago, luckyinpa said:

what countries are receiving ships now without any issues? i was thinking about flying to bermuda for fun but i read all the rules. i cannot imagine any cruisers going thru all that. 

 

but i was really curious about bahamas/mexico/ alaska/canada etc and if they are open to receiving cruisers because if not, then all the arguing about starting is pointless. 

In NA, no cruise lines are being rec'd in any countries that I know of. Canada has just updated their restrictions for cruise ships, stating that no ships carrying more than 100 pax will be permitted to dock in any Cdn port until after the end of Feb. 2021.  Having said that, there really aren't any cruises scheduled for Canada ports until next spring anyway, unless some of the Nov. cruises to see the fall colours are a go... doubt it.  

 

I think European cruises are only being allowed/accepted at ports within the country of origin (Italy).  US citizens, as far as I know, are not yet being permitted in any European country.  I could be wrong about that but don't think it has changed yet. 

 

Hopefully, C-19 will be under control soon and all will be well in the world.  

[luckyinpa]

1 minute ago, All-ready2cruise said:

In NA, no cruise lines are being rec'd in any countries that I know of. Canada has just updated their restrictions for cruise ships, stating that no ships carrying more than 100 pax will be permitted to dock in any Cdn port until after the end of Feb. 2021.  Having said that, there really aren't any cruises scheduled for Canada ports until next spring anyway, unless some of the Nov. cruises to see the fall colours are a go... doubt it.  

 

I think European cruises are only being allowed/accepted at ports within the country of origin (Italy).  US citizens, as far as I know, are not yet being permitted in any European country.  I could be wrong about that but don't think it has changed yet. 

 

Hopefully, C-19 will be under control soon and all will be well in the world.  

 

well 'some' country has to be accepting us. otherwise why would the cruise lines be fighting to start in nov/dec/ or whenever? i refuse to believe they are so stupid to be fighting about somethign that even if they win, there's nowhere to go. what kind of win would that be lol. 

 

i did see one yacht cruise line doing cruises somewhere in the bahamas in november. like under 200 people and daily stops at places. starts at 3K for the cheapest cabin

[All-ready2cruise]

Sounds great! Book it! 

[RaftingJeremy]

We really still whining about wearing a mask?  Ridiculous 

[farmersfight]

2 hours ago, ilovetotravel1977 said:

Same can be said for flying, especially if you have a layover.

 

Flying should be banned as well then.

 

2 hours ago, HaveWeMetYet said:

Good point about flying. Read this.

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2020-10-28/57-covid-infections-one-flight-airlines-lie

 

Passengers Spready COVID-19 Despite Wearning N95 Mask

 

An example of just how dangerous flying can be is the experience of a virologist and epidemiologist who, because he was all too well aware of the risks of COVID-19, was very careful to wear a mask and gloves, and to wipe down all the surfaces which he touched, on a single recent flight.

He nevertheless contracted COVID-19 just days after his flight, and believes that - because of the many precautions he was so careful to take - it had to come from airborne virus particles which entered through his eyes during the flight.

 

So, if this is true, that COVID-19 can infect you by entering through your eyes, why the hell are we all wearing masks then?