Jump to content

CDC denies cruise sector's request to lift US sailing restrictions


mnocket
 Share

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, markeb said:

 

The decision to lift the CSO will be at the recommendation, based on health information, epidemiology, etc., of the CDC. It will be made at the White House, and implemented in all probability by keeping, modifying, or revoking the CSO, which will be issued by the CDC since they have the international and interstate quarantine authorities. The President has required coordination on all actions in his travel related Executive Order through the Executive Office Building and the West Wing. If the CDC continues to recommend no non-essential travel, and they include cruising, and everyone accepts that, it'll stay in place. But she's a recommender, not a decision maker on that. Hence her Senate statement that other agencies had input. And the reply to the email that started this mostly factually incorrect thread.

 

Her lane is health. She has a lot of authorities in law and regulation. But the tone of the EO is a public requirement for coordination. The first 100 days priorities were pretty clear, and enabling a leisure activity wasn't one of them. I can't imagine any scenario where there's any change other than facilitating vaccination and steps to minimize transmission announced before May 1st. 

Mark, as usual, your words make a lot of sense. So, for me, here's hoping on or about May 1st, CDC will come forth with their pending technical guidance to get us all back to cruising from/to US ports. 🤞🤞

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ken the cruiser said:

Mark, as usual, your words make a lot of sense. So, for me, here's hoping on or about May 1st, CDC will come forth with their pending technical guidance to get us all back to cruising from/to US ports. 🤞🤞


If things are going well, you could see more than that. But it looks like it will be one part of a consolidated set of actions. Not all of which will be effective immediately...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, cltnccruisers said:

US Travel Association calls for CDC to lift restrictions on cruise industry, allow sailing to resume (yahoo.com)

 

Regardless, I still don't think cruising is going anywhere fast in what has become a political issue as much as a health issue.

COVID has been a political issue since the pandemic started.  No news here.  People shouldn't pretend that just started on January 21.

Edited by harkinmr
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Auntiemomo said:

That's basically what I said.  The vaccine will not immunize you like the polio or the small pox, etc.  You are still are susceptible to catch covid after the vaccine -- just limited affects if one was not vaccinated. 

 

Actually... it is an 'unknown'. And I wish folks would understand and realise this. Pfizer & Moderna vax was NOT tested for immunization results. But early return of the known data from the field studies show that Pfizer is at a 95% clip of immunizations.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nocl said:

Largely because

 

1. Every case is a potential for a vaccine resistant mutation.  If someone has partial protection but the virus can still infect them it makes a good environment for a more resistant strain.  Then if there is no protection between them and other vaccinated a resistant strain can break out and we are back to pre vaccine days very quickly

 

2. Not everyone can be vaccinated at this point - children, those that have medical conditions where it is contra-indicated.  As a an infected vaccinated individual can spread it to those that cannot be vaccinated at this time.  As in point one every case is a potential mutation source, especially with the number of mutations already circulating.

 

3. There is still a lot unknown about COVID at this time.  There is plenty of proof that with even mild or asymptomatic case long term damage can occur (often hidden until found by appropriate diagnostics) including damage to heart, lungs, kidneys, etc. Impacts that can effect both longevity and quality of life.  At this stage it is not known if mild cases occurring in vaccinated individuals will show this same damage. 

 

With the current incidence rate the vaccine should be the protection of last resort.  Something to fall back on when other protective measures fail because if the other measures are dropped the odds of encountering an infected individual is still too high.  Once the incidence rate is lower, and the odds of encountering an infected individual is low, then the measures can be dropped and vaccine moves forward to become the primary protective measure.

Protection of last resort??

There is NO practical way out besides vaccines or infecting everyone.

You can hide (i.e. Australia) and have a population full of people with no resistance. 

You can allow it to spread (controlled or unchecked)

You can vaccinate to provide as much protection as possible to as many people as possible

 

It's that simple. 

 

Mutations are pointless to discuss.  It's a coronavirus. It mutates. It's what they do.  By your logic, there is literally no end to the pandemic until the virus is 100% eradicated.  Not going to happen. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, D C said:

Protection of last resort??

There is NO practical way out besides vaccines or infecting everyone.

You can hide (i.e. Australia) and have a population full of people with no resistance. 

You can allow it to spread (controlled or unchecked)

You can vaccinate to provide as much protection as possible to as many people as possible

 

It's that simple. 

 

Mutations are pointless to discuss.  It's a coronavirus. It mutates. It's what they do.  By your logic, there is literally no end to the pandemic until the virus is 100% eradicated.  Not going to happen. 

Any idea what's causing the big spike of cases in Michigan?

 

Have we flattened the curve in the US? - Johns Hopkins (jhu.edu)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ken the cruiser said:

Any idea what's causing the big spike of cases in Michigan?

 

Have we flattened the curve in the US? - Johns Hopkins (jhu.edu)

Unfortunately, no.  Michigan does a horrible job of publishing data.  It's still locked down more than a lot of other states that are doing better (Florida for example).  Understanding the demographics of the cases may shed some light on it, but the state omits that from the data.  My guess is that people were sick of a multi-month lockdown, and the weather has been very warm, so people are getting out and getting together.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, D C said:

Protection of last resort??

There is NO practical way out besides vaccines or infecting everyone.

You can hide (i.e. Australia) and have a population full of people with no resistance. 

You can allow it to spread (controlled or unchecked)

You can vaccinate to provide as much protection as possible to as many people as possible

 

It's that simple. 

 

Mutations are pointless to discuss.  It's a coronavirus. It mutates. It's what they do.  By your logic, there is literally no end to the pandemic until the virus is 100% eradicated.  Not going to happen. 

Yes at the current stage of the pandemic is it the protection of last resort.  You vaccinate as many as possible, but you do not send them out without other methods of protection.  The number of cases are still too high.  You utilize the other methods, then if they fail and someone comes in close contact with an infected individual, the last line of defense is the vaccine.

 

Once the infection levels are low enough and the chance of contact is low then you remove the other methods and the vaccine moves forward until it is the first line.

 

That is the case as with the other diseases such as measles, pertussis, etc.  The incidence is low so we can use the vaccine as the first line. But when there is an outbreak such as with measles a few years ago they did not say oh we have people vaccinated no need to do anything else.  No they initiated quarantines, contact tracing, and other protective measures.

 

The logic on the end is very simple.  When the number of cases gets low enough that the odds of a person going through their normally daily life is very low.  When cases occur, but the amount of spread in low in a community (minimal community spread).  When the outbreaks that do occur are localized, and it is not at fairly high levels everywhere.  That is when the pandemic is over and the state of emergency end.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, nocl said:

Yes at the current stage of the pandemic is it the protection of last resort.  You vaccinate as many as possible, but you do not send them out without other methods of protection.  The number of cases are still too high.  You utilize the other methods, then if they fail and someone comes in close contact with an infected individual, the last line of defense is the vaccine.

 

Once the infection levels are low enough and the chance of contact is low then you remove the other methods and the vaccine moves forward until it is the first line.

 

That is the case as with the other diseases such as measles, pertussis, etc.  The incidence is low so we can use the vaccine as the first line. But when there is an outbreak such as with measles a few years ago they did not say oh we have people vaccinated no need to do anything else.  No they initiated quarantines, contact tracing, and other protective measures.

 

The logic on the end is very simple.  When the number of cases gets low enough that the odds of a person going through their normally daily life is very low.  When cases occur, but the amount of spread in low in a community (minimal community spread).  When the outbreaks that do occur are localized, and it is not at fairly high levels everywhere.  That is when the pandemic is over and the state of emergency end.

Oh NO!  What about my pina colada on the poop deck?  I want it and you can't force me not to have it!  Wah!  Wah!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Ken the cruiser said:

Any idea what's causing the big spike of cases in Michigan?

 

Have we flattened the curve in the US? - Johns Hopkins (jhu.edu)

Have not seen any data about what  variants are showing up  there but have seen data that the spike is largely occurring in younger age groups (less than 50 being younger).  As well as schools in the 10-19 age group are showing large outbreaks.

 

Keep in mind two things.  The weather has been warming up in the southern states so people are spending more time out doors.  In the north it is still cool, so still indoors. If there is less masking and more social activity indoors it might have an impact.

 

Another item when someone travels,  such as on spring break, if they developed a case, it would most likely be counted in their home state, not the state they traveled to. Last year when google showed its map of cell phone movements from the crowds on the beaches it showed that when they left, a lot went to the northern mid west states. Probably too early for that, but something to consider when looking at cases.  Where one is counted is not necessarily where they were infected.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ken the cruiser said:

Any idea what's causing the big spike of cases in Michigan?

 

Have we flattened the curve in the US? - Johns Hopkins (jhu.edu)

Just found one article reporting B.1.1.7 (UK variant) is becoming widespread in Michigan.  Since that strain is considered to be more infectious I would expect that to be a contributor.  Fortunately the vaccine does well against it, so the cases are in the younger not yet vaccinated age groups.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, nocl said:

Yes at the current stage of the pandemic is it the protection of last resort.  You vaccinate as many as possible, but you do not send them out without other methods of protection.  The number of cases are still too high.  You utilize the other methods, then if they fail and someone comes in close contact with an infected individual, the last line of defense is the vaccine.

 

Once the infection levels are low enough and the chance of contact is low then you remove the other methods and the vaccine moves forward until it is the first line.

 

That is the case as with the other diseases such as measles, pertussis, etc.  The incidence is low so we can use the vaccine as the first line. But when there is an outbreak such as with measles a few years ago they did not say oh we have people vaccinated no need to do anything else.  No they initiated quarantines, contact tracing, and other protective measures.

 

The logic on the end is very simple.  When the number of cases gets low enough that the odds of a person going through their normally daily life is very low.  When cases occur, but the amount of spread in low in a community (minimal community spread).  When the outbreaks that do occur are localized, and it is not at fairly high levels everywhere.  That is when the pandemic is over and the state of emergency end.

 

How exactly do you define "low enough"?  

 

If we assume 65k new cases per day and 10 days of cases lying in wait spreading infection, that's roughly 1 out of every 500 people who are currently infected but don't yet know it.  You would need to have an encounter with one of those people at a close enough distance for a long enough time to become infected yourself.  Those odds are extremely low in my book, and transmission comes down to a matter of personal responsibility. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, nocl said:

Just found one article reporting B.1.1.7 (UK variant) is becoming widespread in Michigan.  Since that strain is considered to be more infectious I would expect that to be a contributor.  Fortunately the vaccine does well against it, so the cases are in the younger not yet vaccinated age groups.

Possible, but it doesn't spread by itself.  Who are the people having long close contact, and where?  If our state gov't knows, they're keeping hush about it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lyndarra said:

Meaning??

Australia is among a number of places that chose pure isolation (or close to it) at the onset.  That is an extremely fragile situation as we've seen when cases have popped up down under.   There is simply no exit strategy other than waiting for it to go away globally or vaccinating the population.  Herd immunity never happens with the former.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, D C said:

Australia is among a number of places that chose pure isolation (or close to it) at the onset.  That is an extremely fragile situation as we've seen when cases have popped up down under.   There is simply no exit strategy other than waiting for it to go away globally or vaccinating the population.  Herd immunity never happens with the former.

 

Australia is among a number of countries that have had very successful mitigation. Outbreaks there are measured in single digits, not hundreds and thousands. No point in repeating what we all know is needed for excellent mitigation.

 

Australia will vaccinate its population to achieve herd immunity. This is the preferred method since it means far fewer deaths.

 

What is the point of needlessly killing large numbers of people to achieve an alternate "exit" strategy?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, D C said:

 

How exactly do you define "low enough"?  

 

If we assume 65k new cases per day and 10 days of cases lying in wait spreading infection, that's roughly 1 out of every 500 people who are currently infected but don't yet know it.  You would need to have an encounter with one of those people at a close enough distance for a long enough time to become infected yourself.  Those odds are extremely low in my book, and transmission comes down to a matter of personal responsibility. 

That length of contact time changed a couple of months back.  With B.1.1.7 and some other variants even passing, unprotected contact can be sufficient.  

 

One change to your formula.  Yours is good for a lower bound, the upper bound needs to make an estimate for the cases that are not tested and therefor not reported.

 

So at current levels of the 65k the lower bound is as you say around 1 in 500, the upper bound using the CDC and others assumption that as there may be as may as 5 X the reported number you get around  1 in 100.

 

You may think its low enough but go ask an epidemiologist that models spread.  They would not.

 

Don't forget the second component that cases do appear, but community spread is limited.  Outbreaks stay local, not generally wide spread. Basically R0 stays well below 1 on average

 

We probably need to be down in the less than 5k cases range with limited spread.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, D C said:

Australia is among a number of places that chose pure isolation (or close to it) at the onset.  That is an extremely fragile situation as we've seen when cases have popped up down under.   There is simply no exit strategy other than waiting for it to go away globally or vaccinating the population.  Herd immunity never happens with the former.

From the outset our leaders listened to the science and made decisions accordingly. If we had followed your leader's example there would have been 43000 Australians no longer with us today. Some mistakes were inevitably made early on but were quickly recognised and acted upon.

Nothing fragile about it.Yes, there have been a few spot fires to put out along the way but it is what we chose to do until a vaccine came along. Contact tracing and testing are working extremely well. Vaccinations have been slow to start with due to EU blocking export but we are now manufacturing our own. Our country was not totally shut off to the rest of the world. US film makers have been coming here to make movies, presumably because it was safer than making them over there. Our economy has not fallen in a hole it is growing. Employment is almost back to pre-pandemic levels. We do not have streets filling up with the unemployed and homeless.

Personally, my movements were only restricted in the early phase of the pandemic. And, except for the previously mentioned spot fires, life is pretty much normal. I can go to the movies, theatres and restaurants. I haven't had to wear a mask except for doctor or hospital visits. In three weeks I'll be going to the stage production Hamilton. Where else in the world is it playing?

Sadly, for many, cruising looks like being off the menu for the rest of this year but it will return and there will more of us enjoying it than might have been.

 

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

Australia is among a number of countries that have had very successful mitigation. Outbreaks there are measured in single digits, not hundreds and thousands. No point in repeating what we all know is needed for excellent mitigation.

 

Australia will vaccinate its population to achieve herd immunity. This is the preferred method since it means far fewer deaths.

 

What is the point of needlessly killing large numbers of people to achieve an alternate "exit" strategy?

However, the challenge for Australia is how many will get the vaccine.  My understanding is that vaccine uptake in Australia for other illnesses such as the flu is similar to the US.  In that case you may get 60 to 70% of the population vaccinated, having had relatively few cases of the illness that leaves a substantial portion of the population at risk when Australia does decide to open up.

 

It is going to be an interesting situation and it will be interesting to see what the strategy is for managing the opening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Goodtime Cruizin said:

You are still are susceptible to catch covid after the vaccine

...and also able to spread it. 

 

3 minutes ago, lyndarra said:

If we had followed your leader's example there would have been 43000 Australians no longer with us today

Love it....assuming you're referring to the "leader" I think you are 😆

Edited by OnTheJourney
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, OnTheJourney said:

...and also able to spread it. 

 

Love it....assuming you're referring to the "leader" I think you are 😆

Apparently neither one of you realizes that each of the 50 states sets the rules and restrictions and enforcement?  Perhaps they are referring to Cuomo.  Some states have done well others very poorly.

Edited by NMTraveller
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, nocl said:

However, the challenge for Australia is how many will get the vaccine.  My understanding is that vaccine uptake in Australia for other illnesses such as the flu is similar to the US.  In that case you may get 60 to 70% of the population vaccinated, having had relatively few cases of the illness that leaves a substantial portion of the population at risk when Australia does decide to open up.

 

It is going to be an interesting situation and it will be interesting to see what the strategy is for managing the opening.

Uptake is the unknown quantity. Time will tell. When talking with others among my cohort I have heard very few expressing non vaxxing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, lyndarra said:

Uptake is the unknown quantity. Time will tell. When talking with others among my cohort I have heard very few expressing non vaxxing.

 

Hopefully so.  Hope it is quite high, otherwise the reopening could be bumpy. 

 

My wife's cousin in New Zealand is waiting so she can go to Australia and see her grandson (born during the pandemic).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, OnTheJourney said:

...and also able to spread it. 

 

Love it....assuming you're referring to the "leader" I think you are 😆

The data out of Israel indicated that with the original strain and the B.1.1.7 variant Moderna and Pfizer vaccines reduce asymptomatic infection by 94%, in the same ball park as symptomatic infection. That basically transmission from a vaccinated individual was reduced by similar amounts.

 

The data also indicated mortality was reduced by 98%.

 

There was a US study that made the news a couple of days ago but I have not looked at that one yet to see exactly what they looked at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • ANNOUNCEMENT: AmaWaterways Announces an Extended Season on the Douro River
      • ANNOUNCEMENT: Oceania Cruises NEW 2024 Collection of Voyages
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...