If cruise line only "recommends" vaccination and doesn't "require" it, will you cruise?

[clo]

13 minutes ago, 2wheelin said:

 

I think the point being made was that there is nothing magical about a state line (except maybe for HI). One can go a couple miles from Kansas City Kansas to Kansas City MO and cross a state line. You can also go from San Diego to northern CA and not cross a state line. Limiting travel to a certain distance is also variable and 25 miles in New York City is certainly different then 25 miles in Montana. A state line is just a convenient terminology to use but it is certainly no virus boundary.

In Calif. they have, I believe five regions that include specific counties and it's the ICU capacity that determines the controls. So Lake Tahoe for instance is in Placer Co. and Placer Co. is in the Sacramento area region. When the region gets below 15% ICU capacity they shut it down. Seems about as sensible as an arbitrary thing like this can be.

[Ashland]

Ventura, Santa Barbara & San Luis Obispo are considering becoming our own region...great idea but doubt we'll make that happen any time soon.

[navybankerteacher]

2 hours ago, 2wheelin said:

Not sure why you posted this link. Obviously I got my data from the MN Dept of Health website but I summarized the current week by week numbers which are on a different page. Yes, you found the correct website if you are interested in individual states, but this page gives cumulative and demographic data. Cumulative data is less useful for the point I was discussing as it will always go up.

It is not “Cumulative data” that is under discussion here.   It is current new infections, hospitalizations and deaths which are going up in most areas of the country.

[Charles4515]

2 hours ago, 2wheelin said:

 

I think the point being made was that there is nothing magical about a state line (except maybe for HI). One can go a couple miles from Kansas City Kansas to Kansas City MO and cross a state line. You can also go from San Diego to northern CA and not cross a state line. Limiting travel to a certain distance is also variable and 25 miles in New York City is certainly different then 25 miles in Montana. A state line is just a convenient terminology to use but it is certainly no virus boundary.

I live in Maryland and am I two blocks from DC. I can see Tysons Corner VA from my window and could be there in Virginia in 15 minutes. Also could be in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Delaware with a relatively short drive or train ride. 

[slidergirl]

3 hours ago, clo said:

Sounds like here. The ski resorts are open but limited access. But all the hotels, airbnbs are closed. Restaurants are take out only. Bar etc are closed and retail is at 20% capacity. They lost their best snow last March and who knows what's up. But Christmas/New Years is THE big money maker.

We heard here that Tahoe and Mammoth were shut down for skiing right now.  Apparently, not correct.  Mammoth looks like the exact same policy as Deer Valley, both part of the Ikon Pass: Pass people can show up anytime and ski, others have to reserve a very limited amount of space availability.  Park City is part of the Epic Pass (Vail).  Even Pass holders have to make reservations, non-pass people only have a short window of availability.  Alta and Snowbird is reservation-only also.  So, coming to Utah instead of California isn't going to buy anyone more ski time.  Utah lost it's best revenue maker last year, also, when we had to close in March before Spring Break showed up.  Spring Break and Sundance are our best financial times.  But, Sundance is going virtual this year, so no craziness.  We think Sundance brought COVID with them last year, anyway.  

 

We're in the Red Zone here right now.  Limited restaurant and bar access, but hotels and rental properties are all open.  The catering and private chefs are doing a booming business right now, bring food to the owners in my condo project!  

[2wheelin]

1 hour ago, navybankerteacher said:

It is not “Cumulative data” that is under discussion here.   It is current new infections, hospitalizations and deaths which are going up in most areas of the country.

Exactly! That is the point I was making in response to Clo posting the link to cumulative data. I (me, this poster, the poster you are now reading) posted new infection, etc data which is going down IN MY STATE and the response I got was argument and posting of the cumulative data link.

I give up.

[Hlitner]

On 12/21/2020 at 8:55 AM, broberts said:

 

Yet in theory, if travel between states did not take place the virus would be contained. So, while the reaction may have been overblown and for the wrong reasons, it certainly was not wrong to protest interstate travel.

I disagree.  Interstate travel is no different then walking across the street.  The "interstate" is just a ridiculous line drawn by politicians.  It has become a battle of Governors who are essentially saying, "my lock down is better then your lock down."   And by the way, speaking of Interstate travel what about folks who live right on the border of two States (this has actually created some strange situations).  On one side of the street all the restaurants are locked down (and likely bankrupt) where on the other side of the street the restaurants are open and doing OK.

 

What has happened with COVID is that common sense has been tossed out with the trash (trash = anyone who doesn't agree with me).  So "experts" push mask wearing while ignoring the fact that not all masks are created equal.  So while a properly worn N95 or KN95 mask certainly affords some level of protection and single layer cotton bandana (often worn under one's nose) is likely worse then no mask.  Rand Paul (who is a physician) recently made just this point (but was ignored by the media).  And 6 feet is a very arbitrary number (not accepted by WHO).  Social distancing needs to be done with some common sense.  If you are walking outside on a breezy day there is little risk if you pass within 2 or 3 feet of another.  But inside a restaurant you might need 10 feet because of the lousy ventilation/air flow.   And no amount of separation is going to be effective in a closed elevator!  But politicians think we are all idiots so they come up with these arbitrary guidelines which they routinely ignore in their own lives.

 

And that is my problem with the CDC Guidelines for cruise ships.  They are ridiculous.  There is a lot of stress on cleaning of surfaces (very low risk of COVID transmission) while offering no solutions to the social distancing problems on a ship.  For example, you can block off every other seat in a theater but then what happens at the end of the show when everyone crowds together in the tiny area you must use to exit that same theater.   And does anyone really think it can ever be safe inside a cruise ship elevator?  The CDC could have simply banned the use of passenger elevators (stairs only) which actually makes sense (and would have guaranteed few cruisers).  Some might say, just limit elevators to 2 persons (if traveling together) but that would mean a long queue in the confined elevator areas with its own heightened risk.

 

Hank 

[broberts]

20 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

I disagree.  Interstate travel is no different then walking across the street. ...

 

In agree. Which is why, as a general rule people should not be visiting neighbors.

 

[jperry2011]

Probably, I most likely will be getting vaccinated but I don't think it's fair to force it on everyone. People over 60 should be forced to show proof of vaccination before cruising but it seems unrealistic to force everyone under 60 to get it with a survival rate of over 99.9%. 

Ultimately it would depend on what the cruise lines response to a covid case onboard would be. 

[Mary229]

It all depends on whether they are planning to halt the cruise if covid is present or simply disembark that ill person.  Currently they are turning around and making everyone go home.  That is what I don't want to participate in.   If instead they simply evacuate that person and continue on then I don't care, I will have my vaccine and the others can make their own decisions.    

 

But it is likely out of the cruise lines' hands.  This decision will be made by countries.

Edited December 22, 2020 by Mary229

[Joebucks]

22 hours ago, clo said:

We live about 40 miles from the Calif. border and we won't be going there any time soon. They're begging us not to. LA is out of ICU beds. And on and on. It's not remotely "overblown" and I think it's dangerous to say that.

 

If anything, all you did was reinforce my point.

 

LA and California are not the same measuring sticks. Assuming that because someone crosses the state line of California, they are now subject to all of the horrors of LA is a bunch of bull. Let's say there was a neighboring state within 40 miles of LA compared to a neighboring CA city of LA, 40 miles away. Is there really a existential threat in the matter of the different state lines? Or maybe, the real threat is the cities themselves that have the issues. 

 

As far as not wanting to go to LA, I can't fault your stance there. But there is no reason to group an entire state together.

[Hlitner]

1 hour ago, jperry2011 said:

Probably, I most likely will be getting vaccinated but I don't think it's fair to force it on everyone. People over 60 should be forced to show proof of vaccination before cruising but it seems unrealistic to force everyone under 60 to get it with a survival rate of over 99.9%. 

Ultimately it would depend on what the cruise lines response to a covid case onboard would be. 

I think what you say makes little sense.  Consider that a single case of COVID on a ship would end the cruise, close all ports to the ship, likely mean immediately returning to the original port and possibly deny everyone on the vessel access to public transportation (airlines) for several days.   The cruise lines are going to have to do everything possible to prevent any cases of COVID and the only current solution is to mandate everyone (with zero exceptions) have proof of being vaccinated.   I also think we are going to see mandated vaccinations on many airlines and as a requirement to enter most countries.

 

As to mandated vaccinations not being fair, there are many things about COVID that are not fair.  Just ask restaurant owners, students who have lost out on school, the families of those who have died, etc.  

 

Hank

[jperry2011]

10 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

I think what you say makes little sense.  Consider that a single case of COVID on a ship would end the cruise, close all ports to the ship, likely mean immediately returning to the original port and possibly deny everyone on the vessel access to public transportation (airlines) for several days.   The cruise lines are going to have to do everything possible to prevent any cases of COVID and the only current solution is to mandate everyone (with zero exceptions) have proof of being vaccinated.   I also think we are going to see mandated vaccinations on many airlines and as a requirement to enter most countries.

 

As to mandated vaccinations not being fair, there are many things about COVID that are not fair.  Just ask restaurant owners, students who have lost out on school, the families of those who have died, etc.  

 

Hank

Your trying to compare apples to oranges Hank. Forcing restaurant owners to shut down, forcing children out of schools, and forcing the sick back into nursing homes to infect other elderly is unfair to me.. covid didn't do that failed local leadership did it. 

As for the cruise situation why would it be a big deal if you had 1 case of covid onboard and everyone else is vaccinated? Quarantine that person and the cruise goes on as planned. Destination ports will most likely require vaccination to leave the shop anyways.

[Hlitner]

30 minutes ago, jperry2011 said:

Your trying to compare apples to oranges Hank. Forcing restaurant owners to shut down, forcing children out of schools, and forcing the sick back into nursing homes to infect other elderly is unfair to me.. covid didn't do that failed local leadership did it. 

As for the cruise situation why would it be a big deal if you had 1 case of covid onboard and everyone else is vaccinated? Quarantine that person and the cruise goes on as planned. Destination ports will most likely require vaccination to leave the shop anyways.

So, assume there are 4000 aboard a ship and 200 are not vaccinated.  Then what?  And what you fail to accept is that it is more then likely that most countries will require 100% vaccination as the price of entry.  And even that might not be good enough if it turns out that those are vaccinated can still spread COVID (still to be determined).   Lets face it, this COVID thing is an absolute nightmare.  When we first heard about it last January I figured it would be an issue for a few months and friends thought I was being an alarmist.  The smartest in the room was DW who immediately thought it would be the "Zombie Apocalypse" which may turn out to be close to the truth in terms of worldwide economics.  

 

Consider the cruise industry.  Three of the major cruise corporations (CCL, RCI, and Norwegian Holdings) arranged for financing (sold their souls and future) that would be able to get them through the first half of 2021 without operating income.  But now, it is unlikely there will be a lot of cruise operations in the first half of 2021.  And to make matters worse, many of those who will try to cruise in the next year will be doing it with generous FCCs which means little new income for the cruise lines.  I bring up the financial situation because it will play a big part of future policies.  Cruise lines cannot gamble on having COVID cases (that did not work well in Europe with their cruise restarts) since their very continued existence depends on getting it right!   

 

As one who spent most of his life working in the healthcare system I agree with those who consider the fast development of vaccines are scientific miracle.  We need to leverage these vaccines as the means to turn around a faltering world economy.  Otherwise we are looking at many dark years (like 2021).

 

Hank

[jperry2011]

11 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

So, assume there are 4000 aboard a ship and 200 are not vaccinated.  Then what?  And what you fail to accept is that it is more then likely that most countries will require 100% vaccination as the price of entry.  And even that might not be good enough if it turns out that those are vaccinated can still spread COVID (still to be determined).   Lets face it, this COVID thing is an absolute nightmare.  When we first heard about it last January I figured it would be an issue for a few months and friends thought I was being an alarmist.  The smartest in the room was DW who immediately thought it would be the "Zombie Apocalypse" which may turn out to be close to the truth in terms of worldwide economics.  

 

Consider the cruise industry.  Three of the major cruise corporations (CCL, RCI, and Norwegian Holdings) arranged for financing (sold their souls and future) that would be able to get them through the first half of 2021 without operating income.  But now, it is unlikely there will be a lot of cruise operations in the first half of 2021.  And to make matters worse, many of those who will try to cruise in the next year will be doing it with generous FCCs which means little new income for the cruise lines.  I bring up the financial situation because it will play a big part of future policies.  Cruise lines cannot gamble on having COVID cases (that did not work well in Europe with their cruise restarts) since their very continued existence depends on getting it right!   

 

As one who spent most of his life working in the healthcare system I agree with those who consider the fast development of vaccines are scientific miracle.  We need to leverage these vaccines as the means to turn around a faltering world economy.  Otherwise we are looking at many dark years (like 2021).

 

Hank

That's very globalist of you Hank.

I'll stick to this economy not worry about sending our money to failing countries.

Edited December 22, 2020 by jperry2011
Typo

[2wheelin]

2 hours ago, jperry2011 said:

Probably, I most likely will be getting vaccinated but I don't think it's fair to force it on everyone. People over 60 should be forced to show proof of vaccination before cruising but it seems unrealistic to force everyone under 60 to get it with a survival rate of over 99.9%. 

Ultimately it would depend on what the cruise lines response to a covid case onboard would be. 

Why the arbitrary age of 60? The CDC recommended guidelines I believe say over 75 to be in one of the first waves (after front line healthcare workers) and under that age are lumped with a lot of younger much later. But even that is irrelevant since it is now known that the under 60 (or 65, or 70) age people are just as likely to contract and spread the virus, just maybe not get as sick.

[2wheelin]

3 hours ago, Hlitner said:

I disagree.  Interstate travel is no different then walking across the street.  The "interstate" is just a ridiculous line drawn by politicians.  It has become a battle of Governors who are essentially saying, "my lock down is better then your lock down."   And by the way, speaking of Interstate travel what about folks who live right on the border of two States (this has actually created some strange situations).  On one side of the street all the restaurants are locked down (and likely bankrupt) where on the other side of the street the restaurants are open and doing OK.

 

What has happened with COVID is that common sense has been tossed out with the trash (trash = anyone who doesn't agree with me).  So "experts" push mask wearing while ignoring the fact that not all masks are created equal.  So while a properly worn N95 or KN95 mask certainly affords some level of protection and single layer cotton bandana (often worn under one's nose) is likely worse then no mask.  Rand Paul (who is a physician) recently made just this point (but was ignored by the media).  And 6 feet is a very arbitrary number (not accepted by WHO).  Social distancing needs to be done with some common sense.  If you are walking outside on a breezy day there is little risk if you pass within 2 or 3 feet of another.  But inside a restaurant you might need 10 feet because of the lousy ventilation/air flow.   And no amount of separation is going to be effective in a closed elevator!  But politicians think we are all idiots so they come up with these arbitrary guidelines which they routinely ignore in their own lives.

 

And that is my problem with the CDC Guidelines for cruise ships.  They are ridiculous.  There is a lot of stress on cleaning of surfaces (very low risk of COVID transmission) while offering no solutions to the social distancing problems on a ship.  For example, you can block off every other seat in a theater but then what happens at the end of the show when everyone crowds together in the tiny area you must use to exit that same theater.   And does anyone really think it can ever be safe inside a cruise ship elevator?  The CDC could have simply banned the use of passenger elevators (stairs only) which actually makes sense (and would have guaranteed few cruisers).  Some might say, just limit elevators to 2 persons (if traveling together) but that would mean a long queue in the confined elevator areas with its own heightened risk.

 

Hank 

It’s like a breath of fresh air to read such common sense. I have said these things all along but still people get upset if you walk the wrong way down the store aisle. I realize they had to “dumb it down” for the general public by making absolutes because as evidenced just on these boards, too many cannot rely on reading comprehension and make educated decisions. But it is time for people to start thinking.

[Hlitner]

10 minutes ago, jperry2011 said:

That's very globalist of you Hank.

I'll stick to this economy not worry about sending our money to failing countries.

Like one or two others here on CC, we are very active world travelers.  And the last time I looked at the industry, the cruise industry is quite international with ships moving to and fro on all 7 Continents.   I do understand that some folks do not think beyond a 7 day Caribbean or Alaskan cruise but there are some of us who rarely even cruise in those waters.   I am not even sure why you bring up "sending our money to failing countries" which has nothing to do with the topic of vaccines and cruising.  And speaking of "globalist" the first approved vaccine in the USA (and much of Europe) was developed by a small company in Germany (Biontech with Pfizer as a partner). 

 

I would also suggest that no country is going to base entry requirements on age.  But they will insist on vaccinations (and may even go beyond COVID vaccinations).   I guarantee you that it will be many years (of longer) before New Zealand allows unvaccinated folks to enter their country.  And indications are that Australia will likely adopt a similar policy.  Qantas Airlines has already announced their intent to require vaccinations to even fly on their aircraft and it is likely that many other airlines will eventually adopt a similar policy.  In our own neck of the woods it is likely that Canada will require vaccinations for entry.  As to the EU and Schengen countries one can assume that there will be a lot of debate but I suspect that they will also adopt a mandatory vaccination policy with perhaps some exceptions for those who quarantine for two weeks after entry.   In the Caribbean I suspect that many islands will require mandatory vaccination policies of cruise ships that enter their waters.  The islands have limited medical facilities and have already shown that they are not going to mess around with COVID risk.

 

Even if the cruise lines do not want to mandate vaccinations their hand will likely be forced by the countries these lines visit.  COVID has caused a lot of grief around the world and governments will do what is necessary to limit future risk.  I should also mention that we have an incoming government who has given every indication of being very "globalist" (to use your word) when it comes to policy.

 

Hank

[jperry2011]

43 minutes ago, 2wheelin said:

Why the arbitrary age of 60? The CDC recommended guidelines I believe say over 75 to be in one of the first waves (after front line healthcare workers) and under that age are lumped with a lot of younger much later. But even that is irrelevant since it is now known that the under 60 (or 65, or 70) age people are just as likely to contract and spread the virus, just maybe not get as sick.

The age of 60 is a huge deal because if your not going to die and will only get sick or maybe not even that after contracting the virus who cares?? 

The media has been fearmongering this virus for far too long. With a survival rate of 99.9% to 99.98% of those under 60 your more likely to die from drugs, car accidents, other diseases or illnesses..

[broberts]

4 hours ago, jperry2011 said:

Probably, I most likely will be getting vaccinated but I don't think it's fair to force it on everyone. People over 60 should be forced to show proof of vaccination before cruising but it seems unrealistic to force everyone under 60 to get it with a survival rate of over 99.9%. 

Ultimately it would depend on what the cruise lines response to a covid case onboard would be. 

 

So a perfectly healthy 70 year old with no risk factors has to show a vaccination record while a 25 year old that is morbidly obese, suffers from asthma, and has high blood pressure doesn't? I wonder how long it would take a judge to grant an injunction against such unthinking discrimination?

 

1 hour ago, jperry2011 said:

That's very globalist of you Hank.

I'll stick to this economy not worry about sending our money to failing countries.

 

😂 It might surprise you to learn that a good portion of the world would put the US in your "failing countries" classification.

[Mary229]

21 minutes ago, broberts said:

😂 It might surprise you to learn that a good portion of the world would put the US in your "failing countries" classification.

By most metrics given on international organizations such as the United Nations, WHO, UNESCO and others that is simply not true.  

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, jperry2011 said:

The age of 60 is a huge deal because if your not going to die and will only get sick or maybe not even that after contracting the virus who cares?? 

The media has been fearmongering this virus for far too long. With a survival rate of 99.9% to 99.98% of those under 60 your more likely to die from drugs, car accidents, other diseases or illnesses..

Percentages are great for statistics, but it helps to think about the size of the group whose percentages you bandy about.  If only one tenth of one percent of people who are under 60 are at risk of dying of COVID it seems that there has been a lot of “fearmongering”.   Of course, if COVID were not contained and essentially spread through the whole population that one tenth of one percent of those under 60 would mean close to 300,000 deaths -among those “not at risk”.

 

Then, too, many of those who do recover do so after spending many days (or weeks) undergoing costly hospital care —-   which no one has even started to think about paying for.

 

Along with COVID, something to fear is the unthinking tendency of some people to not even try to understand something which they think will not threaten them.

[broberts]

6 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

By most metrics given on international organizations such as the United Nations, WHO, UNESCO and others that is simply not true.  

 

I don't think any of the organizations you mention have a "failed nation" list. Any such assessment would be subjective. Something the WHO at least, is not prone to doing.

 

Given that the poster I quoted provided no criteria I fail to see why you would impose qualifications for the opinions of others.

[jperry2011]

21 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

Percentages are great for statistics, but it helps to think about the size of the group whose percentages you bandy about.  If only one tenth of one percent of people who are under 60 are at risk of dying of COVID it seems that there has been a lot of “fearmongering”.   Of course, if COVID were not contained and essentially spread through the whole population that one tenth of one percent of those under 60 would mean close to 300,000 deaths -among those “not at risk”.

 

Then, too, many of those who do recover do so after spending many days (or weeks) undergoing costly hospital care —-   which no one has even started to think about paying for.

 

Along with COVID, something to fear is the unthinking tendency of some people to not even try to understand something which they think will not threaten them.

I don't live my life in fear.. if that's how you want to live then that's on you.

[clo]

6 hours ago, Hlitner said:

What has happened with COVID is that common sense has been tossed out with the trash (trash = anyone who doesn't agree with me). 

I'd say that pretty much describes what you wrote. There's plenty of data but ya gotta read it and understand it.