Jump to content

Face Burning Lava or Escape on Rescue Cruise Ship - US Embassy Warns


Recommended Posts

The Royal Group owns the Celebrity Reflection.  You can't make this stuff up.

 

"In reaction, Royal Caribbean Blog tweeted out, “The CDC actually warned people fleeing a volcano that cruise ships are unsafe because of Covid-19.”"

 

https://dnyuz.com/2021/04/16/u-s-embassy-warns-people-fleeing-an-active-volcano-about-the-covid-dangers-associated-with-cruise-ships/

 

 

 

1188585633_CDCWARN.JPG.254c1c3f3620b222bf9dbec7c11436e3.JPG

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently, the refugees would be limited to those "that had been vaccinated."

 

The 16,000 that Royal is evacuating to St. Lucia is only 47 miles!  Royal, Carnival and Celebrity have all dispatched cruise ships.

 

However, St Vincent prime minister Ralph Gonsalves confirmed that only those who had been vaccinated against Covid-19 would be allowed on board the ships.

 

He said: “The chief medical officer would be identifying the persons already vaccinated so that we can get them on the ship.”

 

https://travelweekly.co.uk/news/tourism/cruise-ships-help-with-evacuation-after-st-vincent-volcanic-eruption

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, At Sea At Peace said:

The Royal Group owns the Celebrity Reflection.  You can't make this stuff up.

 

"In reaction, Royal Caribbean Blog tweeted out, “The CDC actually warned people fleeing a volcano that cruise ships are unsafe because of Covid-19.”"

 

https://dnyuz.com/2021/04/16/u-s-embassy-warns-people-fleeing-an-active-volcano-about-the-covid-dangers-associated-with-cruise-ships/

 

 

 

1188585633_CDCWARN.JPG.254c1c3f3620b222bf9dbec7c11436e3.JPG

 

 

That tweet was nonsense and nothing but unnecessary snark under the circumstances. The Embassy put out that precautionary information as part of their warning to US citizens. The CDC made that statement months ago and not directly to American evacuees. But naturally, anything to attack the CDC. 

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

11 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

That tweet was nonsense and nothing but unnecessary snark under the circumstances. The Embassy put out that precautionary information as part of their warning to US citizens. The CDC made that statement months ago and not directly to American evacuees. But naturally, anything to attack the CDC. 

I don't see it as unnecessary snark.  I see it as pointing out how completely one-issue the CDC is.  Lockdowns to the point that people lose their businesses - OK with the CDC.  Schools virtual to the point that children are behind in school and may never catch up - OK with the CDC.  The CDC does not even have an idea of the metric required for people to be able to have a normal life again.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, At Sea At Peace said:

Apparently, the refugees would be limited to those "that had been vaccinated."

 

The 16,000 that Royal is evacuating to St. Lucia is only 47 miles!  Royal, Carnival and Celebrity have all dispatched cruise ships.

 

However, St Vincent prime minister Ralph Gonsalves confirmed that only those who had been vaccinated against Covid-19 would be allowed on board the ships.

 

He said: “The chief medical officer would be identifying the persons already vaccinated so that we can get them on the ship.”

 

https://travelweekly.co.uk/news/tourism/cruise-ships-help-with-evacuation-after-st-vincent-volcanic-eruption

 

 

The fact that only vaccinated individuals were allowed on the ships had nothing to do with the CDC, and everything to do with the fact that St Lucia and Barbados would only accept vaccinated individuals.

 

The headline posted is VERY misleading. If you read the entire US Embassy memo to their staff it had one line referring to the CDC concerns of LEISURE cruise ship travel, then went into great detail of how one should secure their spot on the ship.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Keksie said:

I don't see it as unnecessary snark.  I see it as pointing out how completely one-issue the CDC is.  Lockdowns to the point that people lose their businesses - OK with the CDC.  Schools virtual to the point that children are behind in school and may never catch up - OK with the CDC.  The CDC does not even have an idea of the metric required for people to be able to have a normal life again.

No kidding!  CDC’s primary focus right now is this virus. That’s their mandate as a public institution.  Lockdowns were never the CDC’s call. That was state and local governments.  The CDC has made no statement yet regarding metrics for normal life because there are currently no “absolute” determinants. They can only make predictions based on current information.  So let’s see. They come out and say tomorrow “Everything’s back to 100% normal on July 1st. Everybody enjoy!”.  Then that date arrives and turns out they were wrong. People would be slamming them for that. It’s a no-win situation. 

Edited by harkinmr
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, not-enough-cruising said:

The fact that only vaccinated individuals were allowed on the ships had nothing to do with the CDC, and everything to do with the fact that St Lucia and Barbados would only accept vaccinated individuals.

 

The headline posted is VERY misleading. If you read the entire US Embassy memo to their staff it had one line referring to the CDC concerns of LEISURE cruise ship travel, then went into great detail of how one should secure their spot on the ship.

Show me where they specify leisure.  Their warning is a blanket statement about travel on cruise ships.

 

(In case the image doesn't load above)

EzJZjxRUUAAENsP?format=jpg&name=large

 

Edited by Beardface
added direct link to image
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Beardface said:

Show me where they specify leisure.  Their warning is a blanket statement about travel on cruise ships.

 

(In case the image doesn't load above)

EzJZjxRUUAAENsP?format=jpg&name=large

 

Cruise ships are by definition “leisure” travel. The US Embassy put out the warning and included the CDC guidance as part of that. Again, the original contention that the CDC advised that evacuees avoid the cruise ship notwithstanding a dire emergency was completely false and absolutely disingenuous. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Beardface said:

Show me where they specify leisure.  Their warning is a blanket statement about travel on cruise ships.

 

(In case the image doesn't load above)

EzJZjxRUUAAENsP?format=jpg&name=large

 

It isn't a blanket statement, it talks about "TRAVEL" not "EVACUATION" it is clearly a statement about leisure travel, otherwise why would the rest of the memo be directions to get on the ship.

 

Nothing nefarious or out of line here, just a group of people trying to fabricate an agenda where none exist.

Edited by not-enough-cruising
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

No kidding!  CDC’s primary focus right now is this virus. That’s their mandate as a public institution.  Lockdowns were never the CDC’s call. That was state and local governments.  The CDC has made no statement yet regarding metrics for normal life because there are currently no “absolute” determinants. They can only make predictions based on current information.  So let’s see. They come out and say tomorrow “Everything’s back to 100% normal on July 1st. Everybody enjoy!”.  Then that date arrives and turns out they were wrong. People would be slamming them for that. It’s a no-win situation. 

They don't have to give a date but they should have a metric that we can meet to get back to normal.  A certain percentage of people vaccinated, or a certain number of people in ICU, not just moving the goal posts as we go along.  The lockdowns were not their call but they pushed for them.  They are guiding what government officials (at least some of them) are doing.  They use maybe, could, what if a lot plus the "feeling of impending doom."  When Hurricane Sally came through our area people in danger were encouraged to go to shelters because it was more important to save their lives then it was to worry about covid.  They can't say July 1st anyway because someone else said we could have small, outdoor celebrations on the 4th if we were good boys and girls. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Keksie said:

They don't have to give a date but they should have a metric that we can meet to get back to normal.  A certain percentage of people vaccinated, or a certain number of people in ICU, not just moving the goal posts as we go along.  The lockdowns were not their call but they pushed for them.  They are guiding what government officials (at least some of them) are doing.  They use maybe, could, what if a lot plus the "feeling of impending doom."  When Hurricane Sally came through our area people in danger were encouraged to go to shelters because it was more important to save their lives then it was to worry about covid.  They can't say July 1st anyway because someone else said we could have small, outdoor celebrations on the 4th if we were good boys and girls. 

There have been some metrics given.  I have seen 75-85 % of US adults being fully vaccinated. We’re not there yet. I have seen a barometer of less than 10,000 cases per day for at least 14 days. We’re not there yet either. What no one can account for right now are variants and their impact.  I have seen a number of well-substantiated estimates of full return to normalcy by October.  Will that make people happy? This incessant need that Americans have for immediate satisfaction is a large part of why our country has struggled with this pandemic. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Beardface said:

Show me where they specify leisure.  Their warning is a blanket statement about travel on cruise ships.

 

(In case the image doesn't load above)

EzJZjxRUUAAENsP?format=jpg&name=large

 

 

Pretty straight forward, thanks. Always appreciate when a member backs up their post with links, data, etc.

 

IMO, and not really a big deal, the Embassy should not have included that CDC recommendation (1) as it's almost a brief ferry ride in length and (2) everyone is required to be vaccinated; in such case, the CDC policy "has not been updated for vaccinations."  

 

For others, not all CruiseCritic threads have to turn into panicdemic post circuses carried over from numerous other threads.  Some degrees of behavior should be applied IMO.  It's just an interesting side note from the evacuation from St. Vincent by cruise ships.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, harkinmr said:

  Lockdowns were never the CDC’s call. 

No it's not "their call", but the CDC Director made it clear this week she feels Michigan should shut things down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, harkinmr said:

  This incessant need that Americans have for immediate satisfaction is a large part of why our country has struggled with this pandemic. 

Instant gratification more then a year later?  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, harkinmr said:

There have been some metrics given.  I have seen 75-85 % of US adults being fully vaccinated. We’re not there yet. I have seen a barometer of less than 10,000 cases per day for at least 14 days. We’re not there yet either. What no one can account for right now are variants and their impact.  I have seen a number of well-substantiated estimates of full return to normalcy by October.  Will that make people happy? This incessant need that Americans have for immediate satisfaction is a large part of why our country has struggled with this pandemic. 

 

The metrics have been changed multiple times. Not based on new science, but based on public opinion. Fauci openly admitted this. Any decision made based on public opinion is a political one, not a scientific one.

The science says being on cruise ships is safer than being on land right now. It's weird how many people have a problem with others demanding that the CDC start making decisions based on science, not on public relations. And bringing up variants is just a ridiculous attempt to justify nonsense. We still can't fully account for the variants of influenza and their impact. If that's the concern, we should have been under lock the entire last 100 years.

 

The CDC is trying  to change the standard of what is an acceptable  level of "safe" on cruise ships. From being "as safe or safer than you are on land" to being "safe even in worst case scenarios." This is a political decision, not a scientific one.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bouhunter said:

No it's not "their call", but the CDC Director made it clear this week she feels Michigan should shut things down.

Yes, guidance, just as has occurred routinely with various states over the last year.  Guidance that has been ignored.  Michigan for very good reason, but which will be ignored.  We know how well state residents have reacted to lockdowns the before...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Tolkmit said:

 

The metrics have been changed multiple times. Not based on new science, but based on public opinion. Fauci openly admitted this. Any decision made based on public opinion is a political one, not a scientific one.

The science says being on cruise ships is safer than being on land right now. It's weird how many people have a problem with others demanding that the CDC start making decisions based on science, not on public relations. And bringing up variants is just a ridiculous attempt to justify nonsense. We still can't fully account for the variants of influenza and their impact. If that's the concern, we should have been under lock the entire last 100 years.

 

The CDC is trying  to change the standard of what is an acceptable  level of "safe" on cruise ships. From being "as safe or safer than you are on land" to being "safe even in worst case scenarios." This is a political decision, not a scientific one.

Absolutely wrong.  And on so many levels.  Metrics, protocols and guidance on going to change always based on science.  These things SHOULD NOT change based on public opinion.  THAT is what Fauci has tried to impress upon people, but to no avail.  CDC's mandate on cruising is driven by actions and protocols to prevent the introduction of infection back into the US and to prevent an adverse effect on resources in the US.  Period.  Not political at all no matter how much others would like to claim.  What is political is disregarding science and guidance for nothing other public opinion and support.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Several airlines cancelled flights to many Caribbean islands in the area due to ash.  Barbados has one of the larger airports in the region and it has closed at times due to ash.  

 

So the only option really per the CDC is don't evacuate on a ship and start swimming.  Whatever you don't get on a cruise ship, but if airlines do start flying again, follow these guidelines for airplanes and international travel as of today:

 

1421165602_CDCTravelGuideance.thumb.jpg.5bdbe77817da41ba56870f32c3d26d55.jpg

 

So if you are evacuating St Vincent and would like to fly to the US, assuming the ash subsides and planes start flying again, you'll need to get tested before boarding the flight, assuming you can, then wait for the results.  Whatever you don't board a cruise ship to evacuate, just hope not to die on St. Vincent while waiting for your test results and for planes to fly again.

 

Got it.

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, twangster said:

Several airlines cancelled flights to many Caribbean islands in the area due to ash.  Barbados has one of the larger airports in the region and it has closed at times due to ash.  

 

So the only option really per the CDC is don't evacuate on a ship and start swimming.  Whatever you don't get on a cruise ship, but if airlines do start flying again, follow these guidelines for airplanes and international travel as of today:

 

1421165602_CDCTravelGuideance.thumb.jpg.5bdbe77817da41ba56870f32c3d26d55.jpg

 

So if you are evacuating St Vincent and would like to fly to the US, assuming the ash subsides and planes start flying again, you'll need to get tested before boarding the flight, assuming you can, then wait for the results.  Whatever you don't board a cruise ship to evacuate, just hope not to die on St. Vincent while waiting for your test results and for planes to fly again.

 

Got it.

 

 

Yes, because testing is required to get back to the states.  That will be required whether flying back from St. Vincent or any of the nearby islands accepting evacuees.  The cruise ships are also requiring that evacuees boarding the vessel be tested for COVID.  Presumably, those testing positive will be isolated.  Makes perfect sense.  Again, the CDC did NOT advise against securing an evacuation spot on any cruise ship.  The CDC guidance, which has existed for months, was included in the Embassy's announcement because it was necessary for full disclosure.  No other reason.  Good grief!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, twangster said:

Several airlines cancelled flights to many Caribbean islands in the area due to ash.  Barbados has one of the larger airports in the region and it has closed at times due to ash.  

 

So the only option really per the CDC is don't evacuate on a ship and start swimming.  Whatever you don't get on a cruise ship, but if airlines do start flying again, follow these guidelines for airplanes and international travel as of today:

 

1421165602_CDCTravelGuideance.thumb.jpg.5bdbe77817da41ba56870f32c3d26d55.jpg

 

So if you are evacuating St Vincent and would like to fly to the US, assuming the ash subsides and planes start flying again, you'll need to get tested before boarding the flight, assuming you can, then wait for the results.  Whatever you don't board a cruise ship to evacuate, just hope not to die on St. Vincent while waiting for your test results and for planes to fly again.

 

Got it.

 

 

 

🤣  Well said and done.  LOL enjoyment to boot.   This thread was hopefully to be "lighter."  Thanks.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

Yes, because testing is required to get back to the states.  That will be required whether flying back from St. Vincent or any of the nearby islands accepting evacuees.  

 

Great, unless your testing site is wiped out by a pyroclastic flow, then not so great.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

Yes, because testing is required to get back to the states.  That will be required whether flying back from St. Vincent or any of the nearby islands accepting evacuees.  The cruise ships are also requiring that evacuees boarding the vessel be tested for COVID.  Presumably, those testing positive will be isolated.  Makes perfect sense.  Again, the CDC did NOT advise against securing an evacuation spot on any cruise ship.  The CDC guidance, which has existed for months, was included in the Embassy's announcement because it was necessary for full disclosure.  No other reason.  Good grief!!

 

Well, disagreement is totally OK with me. 

 

IMO, the CDC guidance regarding cruise ships is and has been based on the terrible attack on the Diamond Princess at the outset of 'somewhere in Asia virus where no one on the planet knew what the heck it was.

 

It's been a long time since the Diamond Princess.

 

The CDC hasn't acknowledged any information in the year since.  Ignores Asian and Italian cruises continuing successfully.  Ignores NCL's proposal for 100% vaccinated crew and passengers from the US.

 

And, IMO, the CDC's warning about cruise ships were for "cruises." 

 

WHO would expect such a year later to govern a rescue ferry ride for 16,000 refugees that are vaccinated from escaping from molten lava.  🙄

 

It was a mistake, IMO, to put that warning in there.  Also, I think it was funny.  Everyone seems to be so bat-s.... crazy.  Wonder why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, twangster said:

 

Great, unless your testing site is wiped out by a pyroclastic flow, then not so great.  

No kidding.  Wasn't commenting on whether to leave the island or not.  Have to evacuate somewhere, but testing still comes into play no matter where you are returning to the US from.  There will be testing available on the islands of Barbados and St. Lucia, the two closest islands for evacuees.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, At Sea At Peace said:

 

Well, disagreement is totally OK with me. 

 

IMO, the CDC guidance regarding cruise ships is and has been based on the terrible attack on the Diamond Princess at the outset of 'somewhere in Asia virus where no one on the planet knew what the heck it was.

 

It's been a long time since the Diamond Princess.

 

The CDC hasn't acknowledged any information in the year since.  Ignores Asian and Italian cruises continuing successfully.  Ignores NCL's proposal for 100% vaccinated crew and passengers from the US.

 

And, IMO, the CDC's warning about cruise ships were for "cruises." 

 

WHO would expect such a year later to govern a rescue ferry ride for 16,000 refugees that are vaccinated from escaping from molten lava.  🙄

 

It was a mistake, IMO, to put that warning in there.  Also, I think it was funny.  Everyone seems to be so bat-s.... crazy.  Wonder why?

There certainly aren't 16,000 American tourists on St. Vincent.  You're convoluting that with the number of locals that are being evacuated.  CDC has nothing to do with locals being evacuated, nor are they governing their transport.  But the islands they are going to certainly are.  They are requiring that evacuees be vaccinated.  That's a challenge.  Already well aware of your opinion on the CDC and it matters not to me.  You implied in your original post that the CDC had commented directly to American tourists that they shouldn't get on the cruise ship and should instead stay and take their chances with the volcano.  Utterly ridiculous to even insinuate that.

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
      • Holiday Exchange - Jingle and Mingle 2021
      • ANNOUNCEMENT: Enjoy the Gift of Travel with Regent Seven Seas Cruises
      • ICYMI Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Q&A with Silversea Cruises
      • 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...