Jump to content

Could CDC or the President BAN Americans from cruising?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, ace2542 said:

How would any mask requirement at some point in the future when everyone has been vaccinated work in international waters. Particularly on relocation cruises in Atlantic or for ships in  Caribbean and travel up to Canada. After all the CDC only has sway over U.S waters which is a distance of 12 miles from shore isn't it? 12 miles of the coast is considered to be international waters isn't? But what about the supposed  so called continuing territory area of U.S immigration control which as far as I am aware covers Canada, Mexico, the entire distance from LA to Hawaii and some distance beyond Hawaii, all of the Caribbean and even towards Iceland and Ireland. You have to travel pretty far to be considered to have left the USA for immigration purposes as a foreign national you know.

 

They currently have some jurisdiction on preventing ships arriving in US after leaving foreign lands if the voyage exceeds 7 days

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Joseph2017China said:

Did the OP want to know if US citizens can actually be "banned" in "quotes" from going on a cruise?  I think that was a valid question, and the question concerning Cuba was also valid.  Maybe it is just someone that wants to understand how it works.  But the answer is that the word Banned is not the right word.  We are not Banned from going on a ship.......but a ship is prohibited right now from sailing from the USA.  However, we can go on a cruise.....we are not banned. 

 

The OP doesn't want to know anything.😉

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, John&LaLa said:

 

They currently have some jurisdiction on preventing ships arriving in US after leaving foreign lands if the voyage exceeds 7 days

But surely not how the ship conducts itself during transit?. Ok Royal and other ships may always be within the 12 limit. A lot of people on the Cunard board particularly solo travellers who make up a fair number are not willing to put with the social distancing and being your own bubble eating by yourself et al? I can't really see Cunard enforcing all of that in international waters hundreds of miles from anywhere. Or Royal on the twice year T/A and T/P or on the Hawaii runs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ace2542 said:

So what happens when for instance the Anthem of the Seas does a TA at least 5 days at sea. Or perhaps for relevant to the Cunard brand the QM2 does the repeated crossings 7 nights at sea. Whose decision is mask wearing et all then? The cruise line?

 

No but the cruise lines might or might not if passengers have to. I can see the argument for it and for it forever doesn't mean I would do it though nor would I stand any passenger telling me what to do. And those crew are getting paid and looked after not paying for watered down service in international waters.

 

41 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

But surely not how the ship conducts itself during transit?. Ok Royal and other ships may always be within the 12 limit. A lot of people on the Cunard board particularly solo travellers who make up a fair number are not willing to put with the social distancing and being your own bubble eating by yourself et al? I can't really see Cunard enforcing all of that in international waters hundreds of miles from anywhere. Or Royal on the twice year T/A and T/P or on the Hawaii runs.

Any nation can make any regulation regarding what is required to enter their territorial waters without going to quarantine.  The mask mandate for vessels, actually only applies to non-passenger vessels, but that is because the CDC is working on different requirements for passenger vessels, and that will likely include mask wearing by passengers as well (to date, that is what is stated).  It then becomes the shipping company's or cruise line's choice whether they want to comply with the requirement.  If they choose not to comply, then the nation can prohibit the vessel from entering their waters.  It has nothing to do with whether the ship is within US waters during the cruise, it has to do with receiving health clearance to enter US waters.  Likewise, if a passenger chooses to not want to meet the mask requirement, then they choose not to cruise on a ship that calls at a US port.  The whole thing about "health clearance" is that if a ship does not submit a request for "free pratique" (the maritime term for a "healthy ship"), it can then be subject to being required to anchor offshore in US waters, and await a health inspection of the ship by government agencies, and if necessary, the ship can be required to stay at anchor until no illness is found onboard (quarantine, from the Latin for "40 days"), before being allowed to dock.  The requirement for ship crew to wear a mask for a number of days before entering US waters is a way of assuring some form of quarantine for the vessel.  Trust me, the UK operates exactly the same way, having specific rules that have to be followed to obtain "free pratique".

 

The CDC could say that any ship wishing "free pratique" has to have had 10,000 balloons inflated onboard since the last port call, and if a ship wants to enter US waters, they better get busy blowing them up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

The mask mandate for vessels, actually only applies to non-passenger vessels, but that is because the CDC is working on different requirements for passenger vessels, and that will likely include mask wearing by passengers as well (to date, that is what is stated)

Then I have not been chatting crap or chatting wet as we say in the UK about possibly masks being forever as some people here say I have. If it CDC decision and CDC decision only as you say and I believe you. You seem to know your stuff. You seem very technically minded in this area.

 

Would they enforce masks forever is another question. The answer dependant upon if they have anti cruising agenda or not? I can see the argument for masks forever on a cruise ship btw. No one needs to get sick it can be prevented. Especially if lines will not be trusted to report outbreaks correctly or passengers not trusted to get tested for Covid or even Noro.

 

 

Edited by ace2542
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it could become a permanent requirement, but not likely, and only for cruises that call at US ports.  The CDC doesn't have an "anti-cruise agenda", regardless of what many posters here on CC think.  As I've stated many times, if the CDC wanted to stop the cruise lines in the US, they would simply revoke the Vessel Sanitation Program, and watch the US cruise industry implode.  The VSP replaces what the CDC/USPH is mandated with, inspecting every ship that enters US waters for proper sanitation and the health of passengers and crew, every time a ship enters US waters, with a set of procedures that, if followed, will allow the ship to not be inspected every time, but just randomly by USPH inspectors, around twice a year.  A typical USPH sanitation inspection for a cruise ship requires 4-5 inspectors, and 8 hours of ship's time (the delays resulting from these random inspections are a regular source of ire for cruisers).  Imagine having that every week, and health interviews with a percentage of the crew and passengers, before anyone can disembark.  The annoyance factor alone would drive passengers to not book cruises calling at US ports.  The VSP was adopted decades ago, so the CDC could have stopped cruising dead in the water years ago, if they were "anti-cruise".

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

Yes, it could become a permanent requirement, but not likely, and only for cruises that call at US ports.  The CDC doesn't have an "anti-cruise agenda", regardless of what many posters here on CC think.  As I've stated many times, if the CDC wanted to stop the cruise lines in the US, they would simply revoke the Vessel Sanitation Program, and watch the US cruise industry implode.  The VSP replaces what the CDC/USPH is mandated with, inspecting every ship that enters US waters for proper sanitation and the health of passengers and crew, every time a ship enters US waters, with a set of procedures that, if followed, will allow the ship to not be inspected every time, but just randomly by USPH inspectors, around twice a year.  A typical USPH sanitation inspection for a cruise ship requires 4-5 inspectors, and 8 hours of ship's time (the delays resulting from these random inspections are a regular source of ire for cruisers).  Imagine having that every week, and health interviews with a percentage of the crew and passengers, before anyone can disembark.  The annoyance factor alone would drive passengers to not book cruises calling at US ports.  The VSP was adopted decades ago, so the CDC could have stopped cruising dead in the water years ago, if they were "anti-cruise".

I have never heard of or encountered the VSP until you mentioned it. Given the impact of any revoking of that I am surprised cruise lines lie about Noro outbreaks the way they do.

 

I was on the NCL Pearl TA 2 years ago and they had a Noro outbreak. I know it was reported but the more I think about it the more I think it was also covered up. Cases where far higher than reported I know I was there. But something else happened that I can't explain unless it was already in the previous cruise. On the NCL Gem and Jade the entertainment teams hang out in the club after the show. They didn't do it on the Pearl not one night I was in the club every night. Why didn't they hang out? Was that the cruise directors decision for that ship or was it that Noro was onboard from the previous trip and they didn't want get the entertainers to get infected as it revamped up again? And fwiw they didn't introduce enhanced cleaning until the 3rd day perhaps or 4th day perhaps.

 

Do you think threats will be made to revoke it over Covid?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ace2542 said:

But surely not how the ship conducts itself during transit?. Ok Royal and other ships may always be within the 12 limit. A lot of people on the Cunard board particularly solo travellers who make up a fair number are not willing to put with the social distancing and being your own bubble eating by yourself et al? I can't really see Cunard enforcing all of that in international waters hundreds of miles from anywhere. Or Royal on the twice year T/A and T/P or on the Hawaii runs.

 

Queen Mary can make it over in 6 or 7 days, correct. 

 

So your issue is Cunards problem

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

Do you think threats will be made to revoke it over Covid?

I think it was the CD's decision, or the entertainment team's decision not to hang out in the club.

 

I don't believe that NCL, or any cruise line,  lies about noro.  The cruise lines are required to report to the CDC every voyage, even if there are no cases of GI illness, and these records are audited by the USPH when they make their inspections.  I'm not sure on what basis you feel they were "covering it up", but they aren't required to give out information to passengers about other passengers' health, and the numbers get reported to CDC.  You won't see any report about a noro outbreak on the CDC website until the size of the outbreak reaches the second reporting trigger level of 3% of crew or passengers, and many folks think that these that are listed on the website are the only "outbreaks" that happen.  When I worked for NCL, I can't recall a single cruise where there was not at least one case of GI illness.

 

No, of course it won't be revoked because of noro.  It is a fine tool, that works very well, and allows the cruise line to maintain high standards and not interfere with the passenger experience too much.  But, my point is that many, many here on CC feel that the CDC is "anti-cruise", and I respond that if they wanted to be "anti-cruise", they could have revoked the VSP many years ago, and done away with the cruise industry in the US altogether.  I also use the VSP (129 pages of construction rules, and 291 pages of operational rules) as an example of what the CDC was expecting from the cruise lines in response to covid.  The VSP was worked out in conjunction between the CDC and the cruise lines, and the CDC was expecting the same thing.  All the "recommendations" propounded by the cruise lines in response to covid are far from detailed enough to compare to the VSP, and are not "action plans".  I would expect that covid mitigation methods will be integrated into the VSP in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

  The CDC doesn't have an "anti-cruise agenda", regardless of what many posters here on CC think. 

Then why are they dictating what cruise lines can do with year old information while not subjecting any other industry to the same scrutiny?

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

Then why are they dictating what cruise lines can do with year old information while not subjecting any other industry to the same scrutiny?

Are you an epidemiologist?  Do you have access to evaluate the data and models the CDC uses to design mitigation methods for covid?  Does your "information" come from news articles, or a few research pieces, which may be very good studies, but which may be contradicted by other, very good studies?  I'm certainly not an infectious disease expert, and I sure as heck know that not all the studies and data is being presented to the general public, who wouldn't understand most of it.  So, I tend to not second guess them.  As for other industries, sigh, it's been pointed out to you many times, the comparable industries to cruising are resorts, hotels, and nursing homes, and the CDC does not have jurisdiction over these.

 

What, pray tell, is the reason for the CDC's "anti-cruise" attitude?  What's in it for them?  What about cruising annoys them?  Enquiring minds want to know, you posited it so many times, you must know the reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, John&LaLa said:

 

Queen Mary can make it over in 6 or 7 days, correct. 

 

So your issue is Cunards problem

Yes and 4 days at maximum speed. Fastest cruise ship in the world I believe though I may be wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

Yes and 4 days at maximum speed. Fastest cruise ship in the world I believe though I may be wrong.

 

Might be fastest currently, but the US built  United States is the all time record holder. Supposedly she could hit 43 knots

 

Isn't QM2 French?  You might want to check out her welds.😉🤣🤣

 

Some hovercraft did it faster after the United States retired

Edited by John&LaLa
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ace2542 said:

Yes and 4 days at maximum speed. Fastest cruise ship in the world I believe though I may be wrong.

 

1 hour ago, John&LaLa said:

 

Might be fastest currently, but the US built  United States is the all time record holder. Supposedly she could hit 43 knots

 

Isn't QM2 French?  You might want to check out her welds.😉🤣🤣

 

Some hovercraft did it faster after the United States retired

Yes, QM2 has a service speed of 30 knots, the SS United States 35, meaning she crossed from Southampton to NYC in 15 hours less than QM2.

 

It was not a hovercraft, it was Richard Branson in a monohull speed boat in 1986 that beat the SS United States by 2 hours, but was disqualified from the Blue Riband trophy because it was not a "commercial vessel", and more importantly because it stopped to refuel 3 times.  I was there on an offshore oil rig off Newfoundland when the Virgin Atlantic Challenger II stopped to refuel from one of our supply boats, and lost 10 hours due to mistakes by the Challenger's crew in the refueling operation.  I believe the boat made a speed of 43 knots.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

What about cruising annoys them?

That capacity for mass illness and that every cruise ship is a super spreader for Cold, Flu and Noro and Covid. The potential for passengers to lie or not come forward with Covid or Noro symptoms is very real and they do and will you know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

I would expect that covid mitigation methods will be integrated into the VSP in the future

Integrated in what respect? How will the CDC defend against passengers not reporting Covid symptoms onboard or not seeking tests?  Many don't report Noro now you know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

That capacity for mass illness and that every cruise ship is a super spreader for Cold, Flu and Noro and Covid. The potential for passengers to lie or not come forward with Covid or Noro symptoms is very real and they do and will you know.

 

You left off botulism, dengue, diphtheria, rubella, meningitis, herpes, typhoid fever, anthrax, hepatitis, ebola, listeria, zika, etc. etc., add those to your masks forever crusade...AWGTHTGTTA?  AYFKMWTS?

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

You left off botulism, dengue, diphtheria, rubella, meningitis, herpes, typhoid fever, anthrax, hepatitis, ebola, listeria, zika, etc. etc., add those to your masks forever crusade...AWGTHTGTTA?  AYFKMWTS?

I have never really heard of any of those outbreaks on cruise ships.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

I have never really heard of any of those outbreaks on cruise ships.

 

Most of those were said in jest. 🤣

 

However, from the CDC site, there have been documented outbreaks of Enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC), C. perfringens enterotoxin, Campylobacter, Shigella sonnei, Salmonella, Sappovirus, Giardia, Legionella, etc etc -- none of these could have been prevented by the use of masks. 
 

https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/vsp/surv/gilist.htm

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

What, pray tell, is the reason for the CDC's "anti-cruise" attitude?  What's in it for them?  What about cruising annoys them?  Enquiring minds want to know, you posited it so many times, you must know the reason.

 

We all want to know why the CDC is keeping cruising locked down yet not any other industry has any restrictions at the federal level.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ace2542 said:

That capacity for mass illness and that every cruise ship is a super spreader for Cold, Flu and Noro and Covid. The potential for passengers to lie or not come forward with Covid or Noro symptoms is very real and they do and will you know.

Cruise ships are no more or less super spreaders for the diseases you mention than conventions, nursing homes, hospitals, or college dorms, all of which have had outbreaks, some very serious, but are not reported as public information on the CDC website, since they are controlled by the various states' CDCs.  And, if the CDC felt that the cruise ships were such a super spreader source, don't you think they would have changed the sanitation and mitigation requirements years ago, instead of just sitting by and saying "oh, we hate cruising, but let's not do anything about infectious diseases onboard, since that just happens to be our expertise"?

1 hour ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

You left off botulism, dengue, diphtheria, rubella, meningitis, herpes, typhoid fever, anthrax, hepatitis, ebola, listeria, zika, etc. etc., add those to your masks forever crusade...AWGTHTGTTA?  AYFKMWTS?

 

36 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

I have never really heard of any of those outbreaks on cruise ships.

Botulism, listeria, legionella, e coli, salmonella, among others have had outbreaks on cruise ships, but have been eliminated as serious threats by the VSP.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, smokeybandit said:

 

We all want to know why the CDC is keeping cruising locked down yet not any other industry has any restrictions at the federal level.  

Perhaps because no other industry is controlled at border entry points, which is the CDC's concern, but again, you seem to have intimated before that the "anti-cruise" attitude at the CDC is a long term issue, dating to before the covid pandemic, but you won't give any possible reasons for it.

 

As I've said, the closest industries to cruising are resorts and nursing homes, and the federal government has no jurisdiction over these.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

Most of those were said in jest. 🤣

 

However, from the CDC site, there have been documented outbreaks of Enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC), C. perfringens enterotoxin, Campylobacter, Shigella sonnei, Salmonella, Sappovirus, Giardia, Legionella, etc etc -- none of these could have been prevented by the use of masks. 
 

https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/vsp/surv/gilist.htm

 

Most of these can be avoided by following the CDC guidelines for food preparation, which are known in the cruise industry as the gold standard. Others, just by washing hands, which 60% of people do not do appropriately after using the toilet.

Link to post
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
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • SPECIAL EVENT: Q&A with Barbara Muckermann, CMO Silversea Cruises
      • ICYM Our Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Explore the Remote World with Hurtigruten!
      • 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...