Protocols for Opening Up Cruising - Physicians' Perspective

[wolfie11]

27 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

I believe that is YOUR opinion, not fact.  If I am wrong, please point me to the documentation that states that.

Well, here's an article from the Lancet...

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

 This is the Yahoo story about the above article...

https://news.yahoo.com/wearing-face-masks-social-distancing-230800063.html

Here is the CDC analysis with numbers on asympomatic carriers

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html

And here is an article from Healthline on the efficacy of temperature checks

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/temperature-checks-not-effective-preventive-measure-against-covid-19

Edited June 2, 2020 by wolfie11

[Butterbean1000]

11 minutes ago, wolfie11 said:

Well, here's an article from the Lancet...

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

 This is the Yahoo story about the above article...

https://news.yahoo.com/wearing-face-masks-social-distancing-230800063.html

Here is the CDC analysis with numbers on asympomatic carriers

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html

 

This is a very technical and informative piece.  But nowhere does it state that cruising cannot start without a test that shows immediate results. So that is your opinion. 

 

[jimbo5544]

13 minutes ago, wolfie11 said:

Well, here's an article from the Lancet...

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

 This is the Yahoo story about the above article...

https://news.yahoo.com/wearing-face-masks-social-distancing-230800063.html

Here is the CDC analysis with numbers on asympomatic carriers

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html

 

I was not debating whether that WOULD be better, but it is one view of how to proceed, not official from any standpoint.  It is almost 100% untenable from an embarkation perspective.  If the CDC really wants to HELP the cruise industry (and I seriously doubt that is their intent), then they should do so.  To date they have mandated directives, very late in the game which were unattainable.  This was either done purposely, or off the cuff at the last minute.  I have read nothing, needs to be repeated, nothing that they have done to assist the industry.  

[wolfie11]

5 minutes ago, Butterbean1000 said:

This is a very technical and informative piece.  But nowhere does it state that cruising cannot start without a test that shows immediate results. So that is your opinion. 

 

You're absolutely right.  It is my opinion that if 35% of passengers boarding a cruise ship could be asymptomatic for Covid-19 and would not register a fever on the temperature checks, then in order to safely cruise, these passengers would need to be identified by either a rapid virus test or all passengers would have to social distance and wear masks. 

[Chief93]

13 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

To date they have mandated directives,   

 

I would like to address this common misconception.  The CDC does not have the authority to issue mandates.  The CDC only has the authority to enforce rules voted on and approved by Congress.  That being said, they are in a position to issue recommendations, which can then be enforced by your elected government, at the city, county, state or federal level.

 

The cruise industry does not need the CDC's permission to cruise.  They need permission from the elected regulatory governmental agency with oversight.  Which may be different depending on what state from which the cruise originates.

Edited June 2, 2020 by Chief93
Correction

[jimbo5544]

31 minutes ago, Chief93 said:

 

I would like to address this common misconception.  The CDC does not have the authority to issue mandates.  The CDC only has the authority to enforce rules voted on and approved by Congress.  That being said, they are in a position to issue recommendations, which can then be enforced by your elected government, at the city, county, state or federal level.

 

The cruise industry does not need the CDC's permission to cruise.  They need permission from the elected regulatory governmental agency with oversight.  Which may be different depending on what state from which the cruise originates.

I do not want to get into a briar patch on the topic, perhaps mandate is not the right word, but this looks like one to me.  There are many others.....

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2020/s0409-modifications-extension-no-sail-ships.html

[Chief93]

23 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

I do not want to get into a briar patch on the topic

 I understand, and I'm not trying to stir up anything.  It's important to me that we all remember, that as a republic, only our elected officials are allowed to limit or regulate our conduct.

 

The no sail order is not new, it is a modification of previously approved legislation entered into the Federal Register as 85  FR 16628. a modification of sections 361 & 365 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C 264 and 268) and 42 Code of Federal Regulations Part 70  and 71

Edited June 2, 2020 by Chief93
Correction

[jimbo5544]

5 minutes ago, Chief93 said:

 I understand, and I'm not trying to stir up anything.  It's important to me that we all remember, that as a republic, only our elected officials are allowed to limit or regulate our conduct.

 

The no sail order is not new, it is a modification of previously approved legislation entered into the Federal Register as 85  FR 16628. a modification of sections 361 & 365 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C 264 and 268) and 42 Code of Federal Regulations Part 70  and 71

I understand your point.  I was not questioning the way it works, just the reality of where cruising is at.  

[boatseller]

On 6/1/2020 at 10:59 AM, harkinmr said:

"Our current focus is helping crew members safely return home to their families and ensuring cruise lines are providing a safe environment for crew members to work and to disembark.”

All they've done is strand more crew onboard by issuing unnecessarily complicated procedures.

[harkinmr]

1 hour ago, boatseller said:

All they've done is strand more crew onboard by issuing unnecessarily complicated procedures.

The procedures weren't complicated, just expensive.  The cruise lines didn't want to do the right thing and expend the money.  It would seem they were the ones that put crew in a bad spot.

Edited June 2, 2020 by harkinmr

[devinc]

2 hours ago, wolfie11 said:

You're absolutely right.  It is my opinion that if 35% of passengers boarding a cruise ship could be asymptomatic for Covid-19 and would not register a fever on the temperature checks, then in order to safely cruise, these passengers would need to be identified by either a rapid virus test or all passengers would have to social distance and wear masks. 

 

Its almost as if you can run but you cant hide from the C19.

[ontheweb]

4 hours ago, harkinmr said:

Thank you.  My bad.  Apologies.

No need to apologize. Misunderstanding is one thing that can easily happen in a forum like this as opposed to face to face communication where one can see one another and also immediately take care of any misunderstanding.

[TooManyWakeUpsTilWeSail]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

face to face communication where one can see one another and also immediately take care of any misunderstanding.

I can see your mask easily face to face.  Misunderstanding often lies layers underneath. 

[broberts]

20 hours ago, roguebandit said:

I saw on the CDC website that the Diamond Princess that had the coronavirus outbreak had an infection rate of 1.6% , with the current  US infection rate at .3%. Those are very low infection rates to stop or shut down an entire industry, or even a County for that matter.

 

According to https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6912e3.htm, the Diamond princess had an infection rate of 19.2%, not 1.6%.

[Radiioman46]

The CDC is so out of touch with reality that they are saying the schools have to have 6 foot separation between the students. You just can't make this stuff up. LOL!

 

And, we're depending on these folks to tell us when we can go cruising again? 

Edited June 2, 2020 by Radiioman46

[jimbo5544]

42 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

According to https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6912e3.htm, the Diamond princess had an infection rate of 19.2%, not 1.6%.

How long were passengers kept on the ship?

[jimbo5544]

30 minutes ago, Radiioman46 said:

The CDC is so out of touch with reality that they are saying the schools have to have 6 foot separation between the students. You just can't make this stuff up. LOL!

 

And, we're depending on these folks to tell us when we can go cruising again? 

You do not have to depend on it, they will do it either way, probably right before sail dates.....again. 

[BlerkOne]

41 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

According to https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6912e3.htm, the Diamond princess had an infection rate of 19.2%, not 1.6%.

 

In the same paragraph, a death rate of 1.3% - as opposed to what, a 5.75% death rate in the US?

[broberts]

35 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

How long were passengers kept on the ship?

 

What difference does that make? But certainly for a far shorter time than the ~1.7 million sufferers have lived in the US

 

33 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

 

In the same paragraph, a death rate of 1.3% - as opposed to what, a 5.75% death rate in the US?

 

Since everyone on the Diamond Princess was tested I suspect its numbers are significantly more accurate. Likely US death rate would be much lower if adequate testing was done.

 

1 hour ago, Radiioman46 said:

The CDC is so out of touch with reality that they are saying the schools have to have 6 foot separation between the students. You just can't make this stuff up. LOL!

 

And, we're depending on these folks to tell us when we can go cruising again? 

 

The CDC is simply reporting what their understanding of the COVID-19 virus dictates. How is that removed from reality?

[jimbo5544]

9 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

What difference does that make? But certainly for a far shorter time than the ~1.7 million sufferers have lived in the US

 

 

Since everyone on the Diamond Princess was tested I suspect its numbers are significantly more accurate. Likely US death rate would be much lower if adequate testing was done.

 

 

The CDC is simply reporting what their understanding of the COVID-19 virus dictates. How is that removed from reality?

Actually makes a huge difference.  How about you and I get with 2500 people.  I will take the healthy ones and you take the sick ones, make it more clear?  Once the ship became infected, and there were no PPE’s, food was given to their cabins 3 times a day, etc etc.  Totally different because a number were sick and we have no idea when they affected everybody.  The population at large is not in close proximity with sick every day (at least the ones who have a choice).  

[Radiioman46]

12 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

The CDC is simply reporting what their understanding of the COVID-19 virus dictates. How is that removed from reality?

They have been wrong more than they have been right. The facts are coming out that Masks are not effective, lock downs were a mistake, surfaces don't effectively transmit the viruses. 

 

Basically, we're back to where we were before all this began. Sunshine (UV rays) is the best disinfectant. Swimming pool water with chlorine and other chemicals kill the virus. Social distancing is not that important, just as long as you don't make contact with everyone. Temperature checks are good and easy to implement.  

[jimbo5544]

50 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

What difference does that make? But certainly for a far shorter time than the ~1.7 million sufferers have lived in the US

 

 

Since everyone on the Diamond Princess was tested I suspect its numbers are significantly more accurate. Likely US death rate would be much lower if adequate testing was done.

 

 

The CDC is simply reporting what their understanding of the COVID-19 virus dictates. How is that removed from reality?

Actually it is amazing how their “view” has changed during this process.  They are supposed to be the experts and if their performance to date is a true indicator, they do not have a clue.  

Edited June 2, 2020 by jimbo5544

[jimbo5544]

32 minutes ago, Radiioman46 said:

They have been wrong more than they have been right. The facts are coming out that Masks are not effective, lock downs were a mistake, surfaces don't effectively transmit the viruses. 

 

Basically, we're back to where we were before all this began. Sunshine (UV rays) is the best disinfectant. Swimming pool water with chlorine and other chemicals kill the virus. Social distancing is not that important, just as long as you don't make contact with everyone. Temperature checks are good and easy to implement.  

....and isn’t that sad.

[roguebandit]

The problem is that the information (facts) changes daily if not more rapidly making it impossible to make an educated decision on your personal health and safety.

I choose to look at this from a common sense perspective, at the time of the Diamond Princess there were no protocols on how to deal with the infection on the ship and to disembark passengers. Now if their is an outbreak on board they will have a plan in place.

Masks are impractical because the first time someone mask slips from their face or pulled down to eat or drink the whole area is then infected if the person is sick. Social distancing is impossible on a ship  just walk down the hallways and stay 6 feet from someone, the hallway is about 6 feet wide. Can not make them one way because some passengers will have mobility issues like me.

It takes 6 hours to complete to covid-19 nasal swabs test, I can see everyone getting tested at embarkation and then quarantined to their cabins if positive, with temperature scans throughout the ship and medical conducting case by case evaluation after that.

It would be more plausible that the crew would be more at risk and spread the virus than the passengers because of their living conditions of dorms and shared rooms.

Life is full of risks and everyone needs to determine their risk level before cruising.

[tqc_cruiser]

On 6/1/2020 at 3:01 PM, roguebandit said:

I saw on the CDC website that the Diamond Princess that had the coronavirus outbreak had an infection rate of 1.6% , with the current  US infection rate at .3%. Those are very low infection rates to stop or shut down an entire industry, or even a County for that matter.

 

That was a snap shot in time before the disease had a chance to spread.  The problem is that on February 1st, one passenger who disembarked the Diamond Princess in Hong Kong tested positive for COVID.  The ship was quarantined in Japan on February 3rd, and over the next month, over 700 people out of 3,711 passengers and crew were infected. That's almost a 20% infection rate, (and I assume some social distancing was practiced during that month, even if it was not universally practiced especially at the beginning of the month)

  

Fortunately, many of those infected had mild or no symptoms.  So your opinion may still be valid, about not needing to shut down an entire industry.  But the infection rate was a little higher than 1.6% on the Diamond Princess.