CDC requested to reinstate NSO

[nelblu]

1 minute ago, ipeeinthepool said:

 

 

Unfortunately, this will likely happen a few months after that moment of passion. 

Whoa, that's deep.☺️

[Biker19]

3 hours ago, twangster said:

 

Source?

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

[A&L_Ont]

11 hours ago, Sunshine3601 said:

I suspect RCL has been watching the rise in covid cases across the globe and has their own concerns.   They know they don't need any bad press with an outbreak on an initial sailing.    I suspect they are no rush right now.    Everywhere is a hot mess (except for asia and australia and probably a couple other places like artic circle). 

If I was them I would be in no hurry at this current point. Once the vaccine was becoming available then I would be starting to gear up. 

 

11 hours ago, mworkman said:

I ask at what point can the cruise line continue to hang-on without any revenue coming in, before foreclosure/bankrupt filings? There is a substantial amount of loans outstanding at this time and every month/quarter puts them closer to a point of no return.

 

It has been reported that are current spending rates December of 2021 is when they will have financial issues. 

 

10 hours ago, mek said:

At the same time all it will take are one or possibly two sailings with outbreaks and they are toast.  There really isn't a good path for them to take right now.  

I agree with you 100%. 

[ECCruise]

40 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

Two quotes you might find interesting.  There is no predicted spike in 2020.  It takes the government a few years to compile data.  I will check the insurance companies at my convenience.  Nope, we are not dying off as a species.  With everyone staying home I imagine we will have record births???😁

 

CDC 2018

 

CDC 1950 on

NOTE: All 2020 and later data are UN projections and DO NOT include any impacts of the COVID-19 virus.

[mek]

7 hours ago, zalusky said:

Good luck but I would put health workers, teachers and a few others ahead of you in line since we can stay home.

Im also 70 and fully expect the above mentioned people to be ahead of me.

[chengkp75]

11 hours ago, zalusky said:

They can do nothing about the behavior in other countries but these companies do business in the US and the govt can make life difficult for the US operations if they see they are playing around the rules.

 

For example if a ship has an itinerary that is completely non US and does not play by the US rules if that ship later has an itinerary that was supposed to hit the US they could ban it, require quarantining it or possibly have issues with the crew.  We are one of the largest markets for cruising dollars.

When a ship operates outside the US, and doesn't follow US regulations, they are not "playing around the rules", any more than any foreign corporation in a foreign country is "playing around the rules" when they conduct business in that foreign country in a manner that may not follow US laws, even if their merchandise is later sold in the US.

 

As I stated back in September, when the CDC issued the "request for information", I thought that the requirements of the NSO would become permanent (that "request" is a prerequisite for permanent federal regulation change), and the CDC has hinted at this in the CSO.  What people still don't understand is that the CDC really does not care whether any particular passenger has decided to risk covid on a cruise ship, or whether that person actually gets covid on the cruise ship.  What they care about is the possibility of those people bringing the disease back into the US.  So, regardless of what a ship does in international waters, or in foreign ports, as the CSO states, before that ship can enter US waters, it must meet the conditions of the CSO.  And that takes care of the re-introduction of the disease into the US, according to their (CDC) best practices.

5 hours ago, twangster said:

The CSO is actually worse than the NSO.  

 

The CSO provided no clear path to glory by design.  Lots of milestones and checkpoints with unclear requirements how to get there.  The whole "if you offer a cruise longer than 7 days you have violated the CSO" says it all.  The CSO was created when the CDC was directed "do not extend the NSO" but it was created so that the same result occurred. No ships sailing. 

 

The CSO represents micro management of the cruise industry while the the NSO was more high level in nature.

 

The unfortunate reality is that an NSO is appropriate right now.  Politics aside, our numbers don't support getting people together for Thanksgiving.  Going on a cruise?  Nope.  

 

The primary reason I would love the CDC to rip off the bandaid and put in place an NSO is so that cruise lines can't continue to string guests along, require them to make final payments then cancel cruises a few days or week later and holding onto the money for 90 to 120 days after that.  

I find this interesting, since for months people have been clamoring for the "CDC to step up and declare exactly what is required to restart cruising, when the requirements of the NSO were a generally accepted form of governmental regulation, where the agency sets the requirements based on their expertise and best practices (epidemiology), and leaves the "nuts and bolts" of how to accomplish these requirements to those whose expertise and best practices are in the arena of actually operating cruise ships.  The CDC are not business people, and the cruise line executives are not scientists.  Both sides have to come together and put both of their expertise together to make things work, just as the CDC and cruise lines did with the VSP for sanitation.  The CDC stated the requirements, the cruise lines said what was possible and what wasn't, both practically and financially, and the two sides compromised to get the plan formed.

 

I don't see any terms in the CSO to be any more micro-managed than the VSP is, and the cruise lines have lived with that for decades.  And, since the cruise lines themselves failed for months to come up with action plans to meet the requirements of the NSO, the CDC stepped a little further down the chain of "details" to make things a little "clearer" for the executives.

 

Do I think a NSO order is appropriate at this time?  No.  Do I think the requirements of the CSO will be onerous for the cruise lines?  Yes.  Do I think they are attainable?  Yes, after the expected "tweaking" brought about by testing (simulated cruises).  Do I think it's smart to cruise at this time?  No.  But, neither do I think it's smart to go to theaters, theme parks, concerts, or walk around without a mask.  Do I think the requirements of the CSO will be 100% effective?  No.  Can you stop people from doing things that would get them infected, whether it is cruising or going without a mask in large groups?  No.  So, for cruising, you make it as safe as possible, which I feel the CSO requirements do, and you let adults decide whether to engage in the activity or not.  Then you control the effect that these people will have on others, by enacting the other requirements of the CSO, where there are quarantines if needed, and private health care paid for by the cruise line, before these people can re-enter the US if they are infected.

 

Not having a NSO takes a big target off the CDC, especially when they have gotten everything they wanted in the NSO in the CSO, and now have the ability to make the requirements permanent.  The CDC is not in favor of a lockdown of cruises, provided that the terms of the CSO are met.

[bucfan2]

22 minutes ago, Biker19 said:

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

 

I concur.  Unfortunately, the 'fear mongering' is so ingrained it should be pretty easy to extend the NSO.

[Ourusualbeach]

1 hour ago, nelblu said:

When was GS announcement.

April 16, 2020

[livingonthebeach]

I don't know much about the California congress woman behind this but I do know what drives the Connecticut senator.  

 

Richard Blumenthal, the CT senator hails from the same town as George Smith, who went overboard while on the Brilliance of The Seas in the Mediterranean on his honeymoon.  The way Royal handled the case did not sit well with Smith's family.  The senator joined George Smith's family in a crusade in Congress to require ships to implement additional safety measures. 

 

https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/blumenthal-family-of-george-smith-iv-urge-federal-action-to-require-cruise-ships-to-implement-life-saving-technology-critical-passenger-protections

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_George_Smith

Edited November 14, 2020 by livingonthebeach

[nelblu]

45 minutes ago, Ourusualbeach said:

April 16, 2020

So it's more advantageous to apply the FCC to my upcoming April cruise and in case it's cancelled, the new FCC are extended to a future date and not Dec. 31, 2021.  I was hoping that things would be a bit better so that I could apply to another  '21 cruise.

[Ourusualbeach]

4 minutes ago, nelblu said:

So it's more advantageous to apply the FCC to my upcoming April cruise and in case it's cancelled, the new FCC are extended to a future date and not Dec. 31, 2021.  I was hoping that things would be a bit better so that I could apply to another  '21 cruise.

Yes, that is a way to get the FCC extended.  Remember through, Royal has not been cancelling cruises until after final payment so you would have to add cash to the reservation to get your FCC extended.  
 

[KirkNC]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

When a ship operates outside the US, and doesn't follow US regulations, they are not "playing around the rules", any more than any foreign corporation in a foreign country is "playing around the rules" when they conduct business in that foreign country in a manner that may not follow US laws, even if their merchandise is later sold in the US.

 

As I stated back in September, when the CDC issued the "request for information", I thought that the requirements of the NSO would become permanent (that "request" is a prerequisite for permanent federal regulation change), and the CDC has hinted at this in the CSO.  What people still don't understand is that the CDC really does not care whether any particular passenger has decided to risk covid on a cruise ship, or whether that person actually gets covid on the cruise ship.  What they care about is the possibility of those people bringing the disease back into the US.  So, regardless of what a ship does in international waters, or in foreign ports, as the CSO states, before that ship can enter US waters, it must meet the conditions of the CSO.  And that takes care of the re-introduction of the disease into the US, according to their (CDC) best practices.

I find this interesting, since for months people have been clamoring for the "CDC to step up and declare exactly what is required to restart cruising, when the requirements of the NSO were a generally accepted form of governmental regulation, where the agency sets the requirements based on their expertise and best practices (epidemiology), and leaves the "nuts and bolts" of how to accomplish these requirements to those whose expertise and best practices are in the arena of actually operating cruise ships.  The CDC are not business people, and the cruise line executives are not scientists.  Both sides have to come together and put both of their expertise together to make things work, just as the CDC and cruise lines did with the VSP for sanitation.  The CDC stated the requirements, the cruise lines said what was possible and what wasn't, both practically and financially, and the two sides compromised to get the plan formed.

 

I don't see any terms in the CSO to be any more micro-managed than the VSP is, and the cruise lines have lived with that for decades.  And, since the cruise lines themselves failed for months to come up with action plans to meet the requirements of the NSO, the CDC stepped a little further down the chain of "details" to make things a little "clearer" for the executives.

 

Do I think a NSO order is appropriate at this time?  No.  Do I think the requirements of the CSO will be onerous for the cruise lines?  Yes.  Do I think they are attainable?  Yes, after the expected "tweaking" brought about by testing (simulated cruises).  Do I think it's smart to cruise at this time?  No.  But, neither do I think it's smart to go to theaters, theme parks, concerts, or walk around without a mask.  Do I think the requirements of the CSO will be 100% effective?  No.  Can you stop people from doing things that would get them infected, whether it is cruising or going without a mask in large groups?  No.  So, for cruising, you make it as safe as possible, which I feel the CSO requirements do, and you let adults decide whether to engage in the activity or not.  Then you control the effect that these people will have on others, by enacting the other requirements of the CSO, where there are quarantines if needed, and private health care paid for by the cruise line, before these people can re-enter the US if they are infected.

 

Not having a NSO takes a big target off the CDC, especially when they have gotten everything they wanted in the NSO in the CSO, and now have the ability to make the requirements permanent.  The CDC is not in favor of a lockdown of cruises, provided that the terms of the CSO are met.

But the recent failed Caribbean restart followed those protocols (with the exception of masks but did have two versus one CV test) and passengers ended up quarantined in their cabins with their cruise cancelled.  I don’t see any solution until CV is gone.

[firefly333]

9 hours ago, zalusky said:

Good luck but I would put health workers, teachers and a few others ahead of you in line since we can stay home.

I expect they will be before me from everything I read, though they had free covid testing here for I think was either age 60 or 65 and up at the drive thru testing sites before they opened the free sites to front line workers. 

 

So many front line workers showed up they cut them off after a day, the free test sites were overwhelmed.

 

Just my experience in dallas when they opened the free test sites. They took seniors first. I also hear national news talk otherwise, so I'm just going to wait and be ready. Maybe we have fewer seniors here who were willing to wait in line for 3 to 5 hours.. or fewer seniors than say florida. My parents at their age arent able to wait for hours in line. They are also fearful of catching covid by getting out.

 

Hopefully within a month or so we will know.

[nelblu]

8 minutes ago, Ourusualbeach said:

Yes, that is a way to get the FCC extended.  Remember through, Royal has not been cancelling cruises until after final payment so you would have to add cash to the reservation to get your FCC extended.  
 

Yes, I'm aware of that, but I've got 3 add'l cabins fully covered by FCCs from the April '20 Harmony cruise.  Final payment is due in December and I'm caught in a bind. 

 

I got a great deal on the April 4th Anthem cruise and will be really sad if cancelled.   More and more, suspect this cruise will be cancelled as our Governor is a tight a_s.

[livingonthebeach]

6 minutes ago, KirkNC said:

But the recent failed Caribbean restart followed those protocols (with the exception of masks but did have two versus one CV test) and passengers ended up quarantined in their cabins with their cruise cancelled.  I don’t see any solution until CV is gone.

 

The Sea Dream I restart in the Caribbean did not require masks nor social distancing until someone came down with CV-19.  Their mistake was relying too heavily on testing, which by itself, is no guarantee of creating a "covid free zone" as they touted. 

[chengkp75]

6 minutes ago, KirkNC said:

But the recent failed Caribbean restart followed those protocols (with the exception of masks but did have two versus one CV test) and passengers ended up quarantined in their cabins with their cruise cancelled.  I don’t see any solution until CV is gone.

I don't know that the Sea Dream actually met the CDC protocols, or whether they met the Healthy Sail recommendations, or whether they merely went with what was either used in Europe or what their management team felt was sufficient.  As I said, no protocol is going to be 100%, testing is only a snapshot of the person at that time, and is no guarantee that they won't contract it at any time in the future (or be merely "not detectable", which is the actual "negative" result), and people will do what they want, regardless of laws, regulations, or rules.

 

But, again, the CDC's main concern is not whether anyone contracts covid on the cruise, but what happens when they return to the US.  Many of the requirements in the CSO are to prevent the spread onboard, but that is merely to limit the number of possible cases that leave the ship, and the more important requirements, from the CDC viewpoint, are the ones for shoreside treatment and quarantine.

[jean87510]

59 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

I don't know much about the California congress woman behind this but I do know what drives the Connecticut senator.  

 

Richard Blumenthal, the CT senator hails from the same town as George Smith, who went overboard while on the Brilliance of The Seas in the Mediterranean on his honeymoon.  The way Royal handled the case did not sit well with Smith's family.  The senator joined George Smith's family in a crusade in Congress to require ships to implement additional safety measures. 

 

https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/blumenthal-family-of-george-smith-iv-urge-federal-action-to-require-cruise-ships-to-implement-life-saving-technology-critical-passenger-protections

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_George_Smith

I don't think you can equate a murder by a bunch of thugs with closing down a cruise industry for months for a virus that has a 99% survival rating.  That story was bizarre but really has nothing to do with covid.  

[livingonthebeach]

Just now, jean87510 said:

I don't think you can equate a murder by a bunch of thugs with closing down a cruise industry for months for a virus that has a 99% survival rating.  That story was bizarre but really has nothing to do with covid.  

 

Not trying to equate the two incidences at all. The point being that Richard Blumenthal is very much anti-cruising and has been lobbying against cruise lines for almost anything since the George Smith incidence.  He is using the Sea Dream I incident to further his cause.  Looking at past history gives us insight on why things are occurring at the present time. 

[nelblu]

1 hour ago, livingonthebeach said:

I don't know much about the California congress woman behind this but I do know what drives the Connecticut senator.  

 

Richard Blumenthal, the CT senator hails from the same town as George Smith, who went overboard while on the Brilliance of The Seas in the Mediterranean on his honeymoon.  The way Royal handled the case did not sit well with Smith's family.  The senator joined George Smith's family in a crusade in Congress to require ships to implement additional safety measures. 

 

https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/blumenthal-family-of-george-smith-iv-urge-federal-action-to-require-cruise-ships-to-implement-life-saving-technology-critical-passenger-protections

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_George_Smith

l Remember this case.  Wikipedia mentions that there was blood stains in the cabin, but I don't remember that being the case.  Blood stains was all over the canopy.  Initially they blamed on the Russian Mafia, but that was not the case. 

 

An interesting theory in Vanity Fair magazine, was that  George was a cigar smoker and loved to smoke in the balcony.  Paxs around their cabin complained of the cigar smoke to GS.  Theory was that he was smoking and sitting on the cabin rail so that the smell of smoke would not permeate, and since he was so drunk that he lost his balance and fell into the sea.

 

Also, his wife was found drunk in the hallway.  She had no idea where her husband was.  

 

See blow by blow description by RCL:

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20090725105309/http://www.royalcaribbean.com/ourCompany/pressCenter/pressReleases/info.do%3Bjsessionid%3D00005GUDOofYbxJCe1iwbwC5BiV%3A12hdhu87a?prDate=01-05-2006&prCode=A

[KirkNC]

Wow, quite a story 

[livingonthebeach]

2 minutes ago, nelblu said:

l Remember this case.  Wikipedia mentions that there was blood stains in the cabin, but I don't remember that being the case.  Blood stains was all over the canopy.  Initially they blamed on the Russian Mafia, but that was not the case. 

 

An interesting theory in Vanity Fair magazine, was that  George was a cigar smoker and loved to smoke in the balcony.  Paxs around their cabin complained of the cigar smoke to GS.  Theory was that he was smoking and sitting on the cabin rail so that the smell of smoke would not permeate, and since he was so drunk that he lost his balance and fell into the sea.

 

Also, his wife was found drunk in the hallway.  She had no idea where her husband was.  

 

See blow by blow description by RCL:

 

https://web.archive.org/web/20090725105309/http://www.royalcaribbean.com/ourCompany/pressCenter/pressReleases/info.do%3Bjsessionid%3D00005GUDOofYbxJCe1iwbwC5BiV%3A12hdhu87a?prDate=01-05-2006&prCode=A

 

I already got railed at by someone for bringing this case up.  It was to show why one of the politicians involved in urging the CDC to impose the NSO, had an axe to grind against the cruise industry.

 

But you are right, the canopy was where the blood stains were found.  It was also reported that while they were in Greece, the couple smuggled the liquor Absinthe onboard.  Absinthe is a very powerful spirit which they were drinking along with having drinks at the bars with people they had just met. 

[KirkNC]

3 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

I already got railed at by someone for bringing this case up.  It was to show why one of the politicians involved in urging the CDC to impose the NSO, had an axe to grind against the cruise industry.

 

But you are right, the canopy was where the blood stains were found.  It was also reported that while they were in Greece, the couple smuggled the liquor Absinthe onboard.  Absinthe is a very powerful spirit which they were drinking along with having drinks at the bars with people they had just met. 

Apparently, Mrs Smith was found “passed out” in a hallway on the other side of the ship from her cabin.

[Ocean Boy]

18 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

The Sea Dream I restart in the Caribbean did not require masks nor social distancing until someone came down with CV-19.  Their mistake was relying too heavily on testing, which by itself, is no guarantee of creating a "covid free zone" as they touted. 

However, even if they had been requiring masks an distancing I suspect that when the one person became ill and tested positive the result would have been the same.... a shipwide lockdown and an aborted cruise. Until a less drastic response can be put into place to finding cases aboard I don't see how cruising moves forward as it is pretty much a given that the virus is going to get onto the ships.

 

In addition to what the general cruise experience is like once restarted, until I see the response to on board cases of the virus I am in no rush to sail as it is petty much a given that the situation will be faced. 

[KirkNC]

1 minute ago, Ocean Boy said:

However, even if they had been requiring masks an distancing I suspect that when the one person became ill and tested positive the result would have been the same.... a shipwide lockdown and an aborted cruise. Until a less drastic response can be put into place to finding cases aboard I don't see how cruising moves forward as it is pretty much a given that the virus is going to get onto the ships.

 

In addition to what the general cruise experience is like once restarted, until I see the response to on board cases of the virus I am in no rush to sail as it is petty much a given that the situation will be faced. 

Since five of the seven were from one group, I doubt masks would have helped them.  The other two it might have prevented.

[livingonthebeach]

1 minute ago, Ocean Boy said:

However, even if they had been requiring masks an distancing I suspect that when the one person became ill and tested positive the result would have been the same.... a shipwide lockdown and an aborted cruise. Until a less drastic response can be put into place to finding cases aboard I don't see how cruising moves forward as it is pretty much a given that the virus is going to get onto the ships.

 

In addition to what the general cruise experience is like once restarted, until I see the response to on board cases of the virus I am in no rush to sail as it is petty much a given that the situation will be faced. 

 

Yes, I agree, all it takes is just one positive case to abort a cruise, impose lockdown and quarantine.  However, wearing masks and social distancing does help in preventing the spread.  

 

Until there is an effective vaccine, there is no guarantee that CV-19 will not find its way onboard a cruise ship.