Mandatory vaccination

[ziggyuk]

19 hours ago, milolii said:

Thanks for the information. Does this allow for vaccination documentation?   

 

Not currently but will in the future:

"proof of test status for both antibody or viral testing, and (in the future) proof of vaccine."

[sugcarol]

Found out yesterday from my doctor that we are half way there for vaccination passport. Every person vaccinated is put into the CDC data base. Your name, birthdate, name of vaccine and lot number, for each injection. This is to prevent anyone trying to game the system. Also dont laminate your card, they have left room on it for additional boosters.

[HMR74]

Laminate a photocopy.

[ColeThornton]

2 minutes ago, sugcarol said:

Also dont laminate your card, they have left room on it for additional boosters.

 

 

That's a good tip!  Thanks.

[ColeThornton]

1 minute ago, HMR74 said:

Laminate a photocopy.

 

 

Take a picture with your phone!   🙂

Edited February 26, 2021 by ColeThornton

[graphicguy]

17 hours ago, complawyer said:

i fail to see why there appears to be such reluctance to getting the shots. if you arent vaccinated, there is a good chance you wont be able to board the ship anyway.

 

it's free, relatively painless, and it's like chicken soup... it may not be the cure,but it couldn't hurt..the old cliche... an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure

I concur.  

 

Regardless of your reasons for not getting the vaccine, or its general availability for everyone (which should ease a bit by this summer), it IS going to be a requirement to cruise.  You can complain about it, you can whine about it, you can attempt to justify your unwillingness, unpreparedness, unabide by it.  You and your fellow cruisers will HAVE to be inoculated before gettin on the ship.

 

Personally, I'm happy it will be required.  I don't expect the vaccine will be available to me until Spring.  But, if they let me, I'll be first in line.  It's just good citizenry and protection for me and those around me.  

[HMR74]

1 minute ago, ColeThornton said:

 

 

Take a picture with your phone!

yes, however, the fewer things I have to pull out going thru security or check in  etc the happier I am. Even with the higher level of TSA approval. Copies work well.

 

We have our passports insurance etc on phones when on vacation. I tried putting boarding pass on phone one time and I woudl rather carry the paper one. The phone is One more thing to drop or lose at the wrong time.

 

[HMR74]

11 minutes ago, graphicguy said:

I concur.  

 

Regardless of your reasons for not getting the vaccine, or its general availability for everyone (which should ease a bit by this summer), it IS going to be a requirement to cruise.  You can complain about it, you can whine about it, you can attempt to justify your unwillingness, unpreparedness, unabide by it.  You and your fellow cruisers will HAVE to be inoculated before gettin on the ship.

 

Personally, I'm happy it will be required.  I don't expect the vaccine will be available to me until Spring.  But, if they let me, I'll be first in line.  It's just good citizenry and protection for me and those around me.  

I think , while I have received the vaccination, that ther is a decent amount of concern about the intermediate and long term adverse effect of the vaccines-it probably is fine, however, its not proven .

 

Remember ordinarily it takes 5 years to develop and trial a vaccine and they did it in less than a year. Cutting red tape  to fast track is one thing, cutting trials is another. The EUA was meant to be used in extreme situations for basically people on deathbeds so the untested unapproved vaccines were used as a last ditch effort under the EUA. It is also why drug companies have indemnification.

 

Now many are  running  to it right or wrong.

My tipping point in favor is a bunch of our friends have kids who are "hip" and doctors and said the risk is worth it. But to deny that there is risk is crazy.

 

Edited February 26, 2021 by HMR74

[HMR74]

by the way, if the cruise lines were able to check us in while wearing masks and distancing for the near future, and check for vaccinations and  or proof you have had the virus and now have antibodies, I would think that once you leave the terminal you can take the masks off and have a normal vacation even in ports as if the vaccine is effective,  then risks is minimal.

 

 Its probably smart if there were periodic tests of the crew and passengers anyway, so that the people on board woudl more or less be in a private bubble. Not perfect but close enough to balance the goals.

 

Imagine if you are sitting on deck with a drink and someone from ship comes by and tests you  for a temp or some other means where it is a minimal hardship, no waiting in line. or, you are in fitness center between "routines". There are ways to address this that make it not so cumbersome. They use your seapass (Celebrity term) and its logged in immediately. If you fall a bit behind in testing you get a text message or something like that.

 

We have to deal with it so might as well do it in the most innocuous manner possible.

Edited February 26, 2021 by HMR74

[Buford T Justiice]

4 hours ago, sugcarol said:

Found out yesterday from my doctor that we are half way there for vaccination passport. Every person vaccinated is put into the CDC data base. Your name, birthdate, name of vaccine and lot number, for each injection. This is to prevent anyone trying to game the system. Also dont laminate your card, they have left room on it for additional boosters.

I believe the states (dept of health, etc.) have the responsibility to determine if they want to keep this information.  This link says the cdc does not maintain a vaccine database:

 

Locating and Tracking Adult Vaccine Records | CDC

[sugcarol]

That was published in 2016 and has nothing to do with Covid. The Covid virus program is Federal and not state. The data is being submitted directly to CDC, states are not getting the data directly.

Edited February 26, 2021 by sugcarol

[RocketMan275]

8 hours ago, HMR74 said:

 

I think you may have missed my point.

 

IMHO, people should be reasonably healthy otherwise they should  be denied boarding. The Cruise lines already had that before covid where upon check in if you say coughed too much you could be denied boarding. Then early in covid at least Celebrity sent an e mail saying we, people 70 or over,  would have to have our Doctor fill out a form just prior to trip saying we were in good overall health.

I think thats a good idea permanently and for just about everyone.

 

Not just for transmittable diseases or viruses, but I bet a couple thousand people on board do not want to be diverted if someone already having several active  co morbidities and needed higher skilled medical attention was allowed on board. Not to mention diversion of cruise or a helicopter is an expensive proposition.

 

Look, we know "stuff" happens, but again, if the cruise lines can continue to eliminate a large chunk of the risk for everybody with a minimum amount of effort on everybody's part, it works for everybody. But if we and they are looking for and expecting perfection, that's not going to happen.

 

What I am saying is 80% of the benefit can be gained with 20% of the effort. And not just in general shut out people from cruising. Somewhere common sense needs to be brought into the process and not everybody will be perfectly happy.

 

 

Perhaps, I did miss  your point as it seems we're in agreement.

I was pointing out the reaction to restrictions on who could board a cruise.  For example, the possibility of having a doctor attest that passengers were 'healthy' received an intensely negative response here on Cruise Critic.

Second, I agree completely  that people who look for and expect perfection will be disappointe.

[milolii]

15 hours ago, Trimone said:

Tests, vaccination like any documents now you put the test code in also vaccine code 

Thanks 

[HMR74]

1 hour ago, RocketMan275 said:

Perhaps, I did miss  your point as it seems we're in agreement.

I was pointing out the reaction to restrictions on who could board a cruise.  For example, the possibility of having a doctor attest that passengers were 'healthy' received an intensely negative response here on Cruise Critic.

Second, I agree completely  that people who look for and expect perfection will be disappointe.

we are pretty close on this.

 

Since I am over 70, and while in pretty good health, I understand its not going to improve in the future, but it has to go the other way. I think most everybody would agree on that.

 

I like the doctors letter, even though the doctor probably might be inclined to call a close one in favor of his  or her patient.

 

Nonetheless, if someone comes on board for a cruise of more than a day  and that someone is over 70 statistically we know things happen. Especially on the repositioning cruises where the ship goes 6-7 days not close to anything and with a slight numbers weighting to older passengers.

 

Its a game of statistics for that and covid or novo or even the flu. The more older or ill the passengers are the more likely something bad will happen requiring immediate health care the ship might not be able to  provide.

As I think about it , the cruise line and the passenger  when the passenger is over 70 should have the acceptable health letter provided a week or two before the cruise, as its a shame to show up at check in and have a controversy. And the form the doctor signs should point out that he or she sees no current problem that would  require the ship to head in a different route etc.

 

Its not just costly for the cruise line but also ticks off the passengers, who probably would be gracious ,  but who lose a port probably.

 

Then during check in there needs to be, if not already there, a cruise line health official there to arbitrate in a controversy.

 

'And now in covid the attending physician can state in a form letter prepared by the cruise lines legal staff, that as of say 2 weeks before the cruise any passenger, not just 70 or over, is currently healthy to go on cruise without endangering other passengers or crew. That would include signing off on the patient having received the vaccine, or had covid and is well and has antibodies. Kind of the same thing when at work if somebody showed up for work with the flu, we just sent them home.

 

That way things are covered in many ways so that we all can have the cruise we want.

The cruise lines would make sure that its sponsored excursions would meet the standards, and then brainstorm how to get non cruise line excursions to be the same. That would require some brainstorming by the people who know it best,.

But from a management perspective, and risk management perspective , it can be done and I know it can be done since I was risk manager at a large manufacturing company--and the CEO on major issue tasked me with making sure we dotted i's and crossed t's when it came to risks.

 

Problem is they have to deal with CDC which I think sees things as absolute. Which is how we got into the lockdown problems to begin with. My CEO had a basic rule relating to judgement: do not leave me in a position to be embarrassed-a pretty tough standard.

 

 

 

[HMR74]

just read a headline where the global airlines are going to have a vaccine passport by the end of March.

[BirdTravels]

10 hours ago, HMR74 said:

by the way, if the cruise lines were able to check us in while wearing masks and distancing for the near future, and check for vaccinations and  or proof you have had the virus and now have antibodies, I would think that once you leave the terminal you can take the masks off and have a normal vacation even in ports as if the vaccine is effective,  then risks is minimal.

The challenge is that the vaccines (esp the J&J vaccine) prevent you from getting moderately and severely sick when you catch the virus. Vaccinated <> immune. 
 

There is no proof that when you catch the virus and your antibodies are killing it off, that you are not contagious at some point. As Dr Fauci stated last week, studies in Israel and Spain show some promise that transmission by vaccinated people is low, there is no science to back up. 
 

And you could be in the 5%-15% that the vaccine is not effective. 

[Markanddonna]

The EU is moving to a vaccine passport...although you can still test and quarantine for two weeks as an option!

https://www.dw.com/en/eu-coronavirus-summit-vaccine-certificates-expected-by-summer/a-56701869

[winterbliss]

I am one that says no to an experimental vaccine for the whole world and I think I realize at this point that people have made up their minds and I hope for the best for everyone.

 

I would like to offer my opinion on something related to covid that I do believe can potentially help someone who did actually become ill. I also know that being a 'positive covid case' does not mean that you have a clinical infection but this little intervention will not hurt you either way.

 

I purchased a pulse oximeter months ago. Silent hypoxia (and you can easily do a little research on this) has been common in people who have had this virus, in particular those who have gotten severely ill. Your oxygen levels can be dropping and for some reason, our body does not let us know in the way that it normally would. By the time you do become short of breath and end up going to the ER, the lung damage can already be well on its way. The pulse oximeter is a tool.... Of course, it isn't a substitute for clinical assessment. Think about it for a moment...I believe it's the same in many places....you test positive..... you're told to go home, self isolate, monitor your symptoms and go to the ER if you become unwell or short of breath.

 

I'm a retired RN. I'm not an expert on tv telling you what to do and why. I thought a simple device such as this could, in the remote chance that you could be one that becomes ill, potentially help you. My husband thinks it's a nifty gadget and checks his oxygen sats once or twice a day, just for fun it seems....no harm done!

 

 

[Trimone]

Pulse 61 oxy level 93-96 

Faltered slightly taking photo ! 

[skywonder]

On 2/19/2021 at 8:54 AM, ace2542 said:

They should also not issue a refund for anyone who doesn't want the vaccination.

If someone chooses not to get vaccinated then they should get their money refunded period. If they feel it is not worth the risk or they have health problems then that is their right, they should be able to make that choice without penalty. Not refunding the money would be equal to the cruise lines flat out stealing from them. I will get vaccinated but people who do not should have the right to make their own choice without penalty or punishment. I'm willing to take the risk but others may not and that is OK with me.

[JamieLogical]

16 minutes ago, skywonder said:

If someone chooses not to get vaccinated then they should get their money refunded period. If they feel it is not worth the risk or they have health problems then that is their right, they should be able to make that choice without penalty. Not refunding the money would be equal to the cruise lines flat out stealing from them. I will get vaccinated but people who do not should have the right to make their own choice without penalty or punishment. I'm willing to take the risk but others may not and that is OK with me.

 

I agree. If vaccines are mandated, then the people who are unwilling/unable to get one should be able to get refunds for their previously received FCC. I already have my first dose and cruising can't start soon enough for me, so I will be unaffected by a vaccine mandate. But it does seem like it would be a violation of the terms that cruisers agreed to when the booked if they now required vaccines and refused refunds.

[ace2542]

12 hours ago, JamieLogical said:

 

I agree. If vaccines are mandated, then the people who are unwilling/unable to get one should be able to get refunds for their previously received FCC. I already have my first dose and cruising can't start soon enough for me, so I will be unaffected by a vaccine mandate. But it does seem like it would be a violation of the terms that cruisers agreed to when the booked if they now required vaccines and refused refunds.

They would not give a refund if you didn't want to go because you didn't want to wear a mask for 2 weeks would they? So why give a refund if you don't WANT to get vaccinated?. If you genuinely cannot receive the vaccine for legitimate medical reasons then yes you should be refunded once proof is shown. And that proof is checked of course.

[JamieLogical]

2 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

They would not give a refund if you didn't want to go because you didn't want to wear a mask for 2 weeks would they? So why give a refund if you don't WANT to get vaccinated?. If you genuinely cannot receive the vaccine for legitimate medical reasons then yes you should be refunded once proof is shown. And that proof is checked of course.

 

I don't know. There is a big difference between wearing a mask and doing something that will permanently alter your body. I am obviously, by no means, an anti-vaxxer. I literally got mine the moment it was a available to me. I personally don't understand why anyone would not get one when the benefits so clearly outweigh the risks. But, I can see that it is invasive. I don't think there is anything wrong with any private sector company/organization requiring customers and staff to get vaccines. But it does seem legally dicey and morally wrong to not offer refunds to people who agreed to one set of terms and conditions and now are being required to physically alter their bodies permanently.

[ace2542]

5 minutes ago, JamieLogical said:

 

I don't know. There is a big difference between wearing a mask and doing something that will permanently alter your body. I am obviously, by no means, an anti-vaxxer. I literally got mine the moment it was a available to me. I personally don't understand why anyone would not get one when the benefits so clearly outweigh the risks. But, I can see that it is invasive. I don't think there is anything wrong with any private sector company/organization requiring customers and staff to get vaccines. But it does seem legally dicey and morally wrong to not offer refunds to people who agreed to one set of terms and conditions and now are being required to physically alter their bodies permanently.

Dicey. I like that phrase. 🤣

 

I am the opposite btw. I fully intend to get the vaccine. But I don't and my father really doesn't want to wear the mask and everything else on our upcoming 26 night 3 ship trip final payment date august. It sounds like being in jail to me. So i might just blag it and say I wasn't offered the vaccine until August (and be unavailable when the docs contact me)  - so I won't be fully covered till December (15 weeks to full protection) and get the deposit back our transfer to another sailing in a year's time maybe.

[roger001]

For now this is all just debated speculation, what ifs.  There is nothing at all decided about vaccine requirements, yes or no,  or refunds for now.  When we start cruising, then the policies, what ever they might end up being can be challenged. For now, just interesting what if.