cscurlock

I think the problem with this story is that it tells you absolutely nothing about the person other than their age and the state they came from.  Nothing about actual vaccination status, comorbidities, what vaccine they took.  There is not enough information there to make a judgement.  

They just need to make the vaccine mandatory for now and remove the tests and the masks.  That's about the only way we are going to get to as close to normal as possible.  If you get it and your vaccinated the effects should be minimal.

32 minutes ago, BermudaBound2014 said:

 

Actually, I don't believe this is accurate. If we use a current rolling average for Florida of 20,000 cases a day (it's actually less than that) x 7 day cruise gives us 140,000 cases in a 7 day period. There are 21.48 million people in Florida which makes the percentage .6 (nearly identical).

 

If my numbers are correct (and I hope someone will point out any errors), the odds of contracting covid on a ship are about the same as the odds of living in Florida. Not trying to be argumentative, just keeping data accurate.

 

The part about this I find interesting is that this ship was 100% vaccinated, which does not bode well for cruise ship stats. I'm not at all suggesting you should change plans. I am willing to take a .6% risk, my only point is that it does not appear anyone is "MUCH safer on a cruise.". 

Yeah not quite the same comparison of a state to a ship.  I think at the end of the day its as safe as we are going to get.  If everyone is vaccinated and it prevents or lowers infection risk to the point its not an issue then they should just make the ship mask less and go with it.  That way we can get as close to normal as possible on the ships.  It would also give the countries being visited some peace of mind.

The FDA will probably fully approve the Pfizer vaccine this month.  I wouldn't sweat it.  As soon as they do just get the kids vaccinated.  Then its a non issue.  

They are not concerned about verifying as much before the trip.  If you end up testing positive they will probably ask you verify the card through your state or government.  If you don't they will probably ban you on any affiliated lines. 

2 minutes ago, idiebabe said:

HAL is requiring all Passengers on AK to be Vaccinated and still requiring a PCR or Antigen Test for Boarding.  They are also selling their Carib Cruises as "Vaccinated" so that should be interesting when they are Sailing from Florida.  

 

I agree that the Hybrid Model would be best.  For us, we rather get it done at home at our local CVS and have Test Results in hand to show along with VAX Card, Passport, Boarding Pass, etc.  For some that cannot get it at home or want the convenience of Testing at the Pier it would be great if HAL provided it for them.

 

 

I think that is overkill personally, but I chalk the decision up to the bean counters to try and filter as many bad apples as possible before the cruise.  I can understand the virus mutates and all but if its nothing worse than the flu with the vaccination they should just let it ride and confine people to their quarters if they get it.  We knew covid would be around for a while and we would live with it once we had a good vaccine.  We have that now and people who have it should be able to not have to jump though hurdles to go on a vacation.  

1 hour ago, atexsix said:

Wow.  I never thought this thread would be 5 pages long.  I read over a lot of the responses and I respect everybody's feedback and opinion, it's helped us a lot, even if I don't always agree. 

 

Now that the dust has settled I still don't think HAL made the right move here.  After several days of discussion on the matter I feel a hybrid approach would have been in there best interest.  Offer an incentive to people that can test on their own, and have something available at the pier for those that can't.  But they didn't even try!  Contrary to what some of you stated, they do have the infrastructure to support a testing operation, they turn around ships with thousands of people on them every day, they feed thousands of people every day, so they lose major credibility if this were to form the basis of their argument.  To those of you that feel it shouldn't be the cruise lines responsibility citing airlines as your main example, I disagree, an airline can put you on another flight fairly easily, that's a little harder for a cruise line to do, "here's a refund, now go home" is not going to win you repeat customers in a travel market the size of the U.S., there are simply too many other enticing alternatives.

 

We were able to find several testing options for ourselves, but we have two things going for us that most people don't.  One, we live in a major metro area and have a lot of places to choose from.  And two, we are 25 miles from Pier 91, and have the full 3 days available to us. 

 

As to whether or not we are going to cruise, we're on the fence, I'd like to see if they go back to orange or green over the next couple of sailings.

 

 

The hybrid model would be best.  Some people would get tested in advance to speed up their boarding process.  Others would just wait and do it at the pier for convenience.  At the end of the day the cruise line bean counters have determined it's in the cruise lines best interest(bottom line) to make the passengers do this on their own.  I am personally hoping they just remove the testing once they can sail 100% vaccinated and if someone gets sick just quarantine them to their room till the next port or the cruise is over.  If everyone is vaccinated on the ship there is very little chance of anyone becoming seriously ill in the first place.  That was the main reason to get vaccinated in the first place.

4 minutes ago, bigdaddyyo said:

I mean at this point Royal is basically showcasing the fact that they will fly you home.  Not sure if that is just to give some folks a peace of mind that they will be taken care of OR if Royal really plans on doing this all the time.  I don't see them being able to afford to fly them home every time.  I think if that is what they want to happen to get the person off the boat, then they will start requiring everyone to have travel insurance so they fly home on their own dime and not Royal's.

They can afford it if the ship is full and they can control the amount of infected people.  I am sure the bean counters at these cruise lines have calculated the actual number and what steps need to be taken to keep that number as low as possible.  It always comes down to the money.  That is probably why they have mandated why everyone has to have a covid test now that is not on their dime.  Increases control without adding to the bottom line.  

18 hours ago, drsel said:

EU is likely to reintroduce an entry ban on US again. 3 different reliable sources--

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-review-safe-travel-list-could-reconsider-us-status-source-2021-08-06/

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-06/eu-expected-to-discuss-reimposing-travel-restrictions-on-u-s

 

https://www.schengenvisainfo.com/news/eu-most-likely-to-reintroduce-entry-ban-on-us-next-week-sources-claim/

 

I would almost say this is a guarantee.  We are way above the limit they set on infections per 100000 to be allowed.  

I think Carnival thought that if they had the 95% threshold they could let the rules slide with regards to the virus.  If it was the original virus that is probably true.   But as it mutates it becomes a more effective killer and the safeguards you thought were going to work before will not work in the future.  With this variant we are seeing that. 

I am still stunned at this point since we are pretty far into this pandemic that they haven't come up with a fast 5 min PCR test.  That would solve a lot of these issues.  Then the timing thing would be irrelevant since they could just do it quickly at the port.

6 minutes ago, DCPIV said:

 

You pretty much nailed it.  It appears that COVID isn't detectable by PCR test until around 1-3 days prior to symptoms appearing, and it seems to take around 5-6 days after contracting for symptoms to show up (although it can be longer).  It's during that period when viral load is at it's highest.

 

Antigen ("rapid") tests have even less sensitivity because they require a higher viral load to return a positive result.  That's why they are less reliable in asymptomatic cases.

 

All that is why some cases slip through.  The good news is that, as it seems, very few cases slip through.  The better news is that vaccination also appears to keep those isolated cases from infecting the whole ship.

It also doesn't help that the D variant has about 1000 times more load than the original version of the virus.  Apparently its as easy as getting chickenpox now. 

I thought that to even take an international flight to Europe you needed to be vaccinated.  If that is the case what is the point of the mask?  I mean, isn't that the goal of getting the vaccine in the first place, to put yourself in a position to return to normal.  Seems like the mask thing is overkill is that is the case if Rob-Rob is vaccinated.   

I think NCLs goals are 2 fold.  

1) Go with 100% vaccinated and run 100% capacity so everything on the ship is the same as before.

2) Challenge Florida's law that the state can interfere with their business on their ships.

If #2 is successful in court then any follow up laws will be ruled unconstitutional.  

1 minute ago, TNcruising02 said:

The cruise lines contracted with hotels in case a person shows up for a cruise and tests positive and can't fly home. That person can go to the contracted hotel to quarantine.  Therefore, it seems logical that when the cruise ship returns to the home port with positive cases that have been quarantined on the ship, those cases will go to the hotel before flying home or drive home.  Same as when people fly to an all inclusive and have to take a covid test to return home.   They simply quarantine in a specified location until they can fly home.

 

This is not March 2020 where people were afraid of covid crossing the ocean.  People quarantine and then move on with their lives.  Ships that cruise out of ports in other states will no doubt return with some positive cases too.  They will have a hotel for these people to go to.

While technically that may be true now.  When the CSO goes away then I think they won't need to do this since the CSO made the requirement I believe.  

19 minutes ago, BroadwayGirl said:

This is what I’ve been thinking about today. So cruise lines must present their health manifest and illness records to clear when returning back to the US to get permission to dock and let us all off. I’m wondering if there is an outbreak or even covid cases on board returning to Florida is DeSantis turning the ship away or allowing them to dock and let passengers off?  Does he even have authority over that as the decision referenced the coast guard or border patrol I think.   I know part of the CSO were medical agreements in each port...was that unreasonable? 
Weren’t cruise ships denied porting in Florida right before the shutdown? 

If there is a threat to the state the state can take action just like last year.  But I think the more likely scenario would be the CDC would not allow the ship to dock until all the passengers and crew are tested.

Just now, harkinmr said:

As well, I am not at all familiar with Canadian constitutional law. 

 

This case was not brought on grounds that it violated protections provided under the Florida Constitution.  It was brought as a challenge to federal law and a claim that the agency exceeded its statutory authority under the US Constitution and its legal mandate.  So the question becomes did the CDC exceed its authority under federal law.  If so, the CSO may be null and void.  I'm not sure I entirely understand the judge's logic because if he believes that the CSO is in fact illegal and if the CDC does not have the authority they claim, why leave the order in place for any period of time?  If it is illegal, then declare it unenforceable now.  Not later depending upon whatever else the CDC might come up with.

You are correct the CSO invalidated in federal court means its invalidated in the whole US.  I also believe the ATRA is also invalidated since the ships can't get a CSO certificate now. 

Just now, ebeluga said:

Every judge or person interprets the exact terms or language differently.  I say take it to Appeals and let another set of heads dice it or splice it.

This is the basic inevitability.  There is no reason to mediate based on the judges stance.  Because anything mediated on would be non-binding since the judge basically said the CDC can only make recommendations.  The judge just wants a settlement so it won't be appealed.  The CDC will just wait and go to appeal and ask the appeals court to hold the CSO until the appeals court rules. 

12 minutes ago, K12Guy said:

That's my expectation, as well. But, I know nothing about anything and sometimes less than that!

If the ATRA requires a CSO certificate and no one can give them a certificate because of this ruling the whole bill is dead.  Congress will have to pass a new law and hopefully ratify the CDC authority more explicitly this time so judges don't get confused.  

5 minutes ago, dandeck said:

Wife & I are regular cruisers.  Over 500 nights between us.  We have 8 scheduled between November and February.  There is absolutely no way we will board any ship that doesn't require passengers & crew to be vaccinated.  Anyone who has ANY cruise experience knows for certain how risky it would be.  It would be industry suicide for any line to not require.  The industry is on the brink.  An outbreak, refusals for docking, haven forbid a resulting death... would be the death nail.  There is simply no way the industry can accept the risk of unvaccinated people aboard.  Regulars, like ourselves, are wary.  Watching closely.  Instances like the 2 positive cases aboard Celebrity recently, which required vaccines, are encouraging.  It was contained to only those two.  Proof of the vaccines ability to prevent spread.  Two positives on an unvaccinated ship would have been a disaster!  If you aren't vaccinated, for everyone's sake, stay off cruise ships.  At least for now.

Its going to be a long haul on this one.  We won't know the actual results of all this probably till after or near November.  The appeals court will probably hold up the CSO while it decides the case from July 18th on and even then it will most likely go to the supreme court.  

31 minutes ago, SRQbeachgirl said:

 

I read it as Florida proved that the rules were arbitrary and capricious and the CDC provided nothing to counter Florida's arguments except 1.5-year old data. The judge is giving the CDC an opportunity to rectify that, but considering he already asked for it twice I have serious doubts the CDC will be able to provide it. 

Since the judge says the rules will be non binding.  What are you going to mediate on?  The only reason he wants mediation is a settlement so it doesn't go to appeals.  But the CDC is just going straight to the appeals court on July 18th.  They will go to mediation but will not negotiate on anything.  Why would they do that when its all non binding anyways?  Appeals is the only way forward.  Its silly that the judge is even trying to get a settlement when he said what they were doing was unconstitutional.  If he believes that, he could have killed the CSO now and the CDC would have appealed right away.  I suspect they will need to pass a new ATRA bill and in that bill they can lay out the authority the judge is looking for since the last bill was destroyed by this ruling.

Well I guess they will have to add language to expressly ratify the CDC CSO when they pass a new ATRA bill now that the old one is dead.  Then this ruling can just go away or the Alaska season can go away.  

The scary part of that waiver is the close contact and being denied boarding at a port.  So theoretically if you are on a excursion with a passenger that test positive after an excursion you could be handed the same fate.  

5 minutes ago, harkinmr said:

I'm not sure mediation will work this time, just as it did not the last time.  If the CDC decides not to appeal immediately and proceeds with crafting a CSO more acceptable to the judge then it may end it right there.  But there is an open question as to what, if anything, will be acceptable.  The judge has once again kicked the can down the road and thrown the restart into somewhat of a tailspin.  I expect an appeal and a lot of flux until that is resolved.

They will probably have to wait till July 18th to make the appeal.  Lets hope a 3 judge appeals panel will have better jurisprudence when looking at the data and constitutionality.  

1 minute ago, harkinmr said:

I'm not sure it would sail through (pun intended) as it did the last time.  Query whether the President would be reluctant to sign it if passed without some final resolution as to the constitutional authority question raised by the lower court.

I agree, they would probably be forced to really lay out the CSO as constitutional in the next bill instead of just mentioning the certificate.  That won't pass easily.