CDC Requesting Comments From Public Regarding Cruise Ships Sailing Again

[rallydave]

17 minutes ago, Travelcat2 said:

Above quote from the RCG website.  RCG and RSSC are making sure that they get it right (and if RCG could come out with the amazing protocols for muster, they sure as her can do it for COVID-19).  They likely did not need until August 31st to do this but do not not want to miss dotting every "i" and crossing every "t".  They are working with the right people so what they submit should be approved with minimum changes.

While I have  no doubt this group is capable of writing a very good implementation document, it cannot be complete until the CDC issues the requirements document that is the subject of this thread and what the CDC is asking for comments on.

 

Sure this implementation document will be well put together however until all of the requirements are issued by the CDC there is no way to know if the implementation document covers all of the requirements and cannot be approved until the requirements are put forth by the CDC  and it is verified that the implementation document complies with the requirements document.

 

It is good that this team is getting ahead of the CDC however the full requirements need to be released and implemented  by the CDC before the CDC will even look at this NCLH/RCG document

Edited July 25, 2020 by rallydave

[greykitty]

Per this article Muster 2.0 was more than a year in the making - and it's not indicated if that included regulatory review and approval.

 

https://www.seatrade-cruise.com/news/royal-caribbean-group-replaces-mass-safety-drill-patented-individual-approach

[SusieQft]

24 minutes ago, greykitty said:

Per this article Muster 2.0 was more than a year in the making - and it's not indicated if that included regulatory review and approval.

 

https://www.seatrade-cruise.com/news/royal-caribbean-group-replaces-mass-safety-drill-patented-individual-approach

Quote from this article:  "The company has also worked with international regulators, the US Coast Guard and other maritime and government authorities to ensure it meets all safety requirements."

 

I think it sounds like a great process.  Not having sailed on Regent, I can't comment on how much of an improvement it would be.  It sounds like even on Regent, the process varies a lot from ship to ship, to experience would need to be specific to ship and not just cruise line.

Edited July 25, 2020 by SusieQft

[greykitty]

1 minute ago, SusieQft said:

Quote from this article:  "The company has also worked with international regulators, the US Coast Guard and other maritime and government authorities to ensure it meets all safety requirements."

I agree they'd have to have SOLAS et al approval before rolling it out - question is, in my mind, was the 'more than a year in the making' inclusive of submission to and approval from regulatory bodies?  Or more a year of project development and then the regulators.

 

 I believe they only applied for the patent in September 2019.  If the whole thing moved along that quickly, including approval from all the various regulators, that was light speed indeed.

 

https://www.*****.com/2020/07/24/royal-caribbean-announces-electronic-muster-drill-its-cruise-ships

[rallydave]

1 hour ago, greykitty said:

Per this article Muster 2.0 was more than a year in the making - and it's not indicated if that included regulatory review and approval.

 

https://www.seatrade-cruise.com/news/royal-caribbean-group-replaces-mass-safety-drill-patented-individual-approach

 

Remember when trying to compare this to the new CDC Requirements that are the subject of this thread that the Muster 2.0 is based on the existing SOLAS requirements and still took more than a year in the making.  These new protocols we are discussing in order for ships to sail with passengers from and to US Ports do not yet have a Requirements Document or requirements as yet.  These comments that CDC is requesting will eventually provide the requirements that the Cruise Line protocols will need to comply with.  Comparing this Muster 2.0 to the new CDC Requirements is really apples to whales.

 

As I said earlier, this collaboration of NCLH and RCG is a great start to hopefully shorten the time to reach complete agreement and allow ships to sail but, if this took over a year to develop based on SOLAS Requirements that have been known for many years, imagine how long it is going to take for the completion of this COVID protocol and for CDC to allow any ships to sail.

 

Really believe we will have several approved vaccines before the No Sail order is removed and sailing this year from or to the US in 2020 simply won't occur..

Edited July 25, 2020 by rallydave

[flossie009]

2 hours ago, rallydave said:

In this case we are dealing with the US Government and like most governments including the UK they have to dot all the i's and cross all the t's while following all of the bureaucratic things in all of the requirements. 

UK Government statement from July 12 includes the paragraph: "The Foreign & Commonwealth Office continues to support the Department for Transport’s work with industry for the resumption of international cruise travel".

CLIA(UK) said last week "Clia is continuing its constructive dialogue with the Department for Transport and Public Health England to finalise the road map to resumption of international cruise travel".

The EU has already published its  initial interim advice (prepared in consultation with cruise companies) for resumption of cruising. 

It will be up to the cruise-lines to put in place the relevant protocols and for individual European countries to determine whether their ports will accept the ships and their passengers.

 

2 hours ago, rallydave said:

This will not be an easy or quick process.

................... but probably could be made easier and more productive if there was the resolve from all parties.

Edited July 25, 2020 by flossie009

[rallydave]

10 minutes ago, flossie009 said:

UK Government statement from July 12 includes the paragraph: "The Foreign & Commonwealth Office continues to support the Department for Transport’s work with industry for the resumption of international cruise travel".

CLIA(UK) said last week "Clia is continuing its constructive dialogue with the Department for Transport and Public Health England to finalise the road map to resumption of international cruise travel".

The EU has already published its  initial interim advice (prepared in consultation with cruise companies) for resumption of cruising. 

It will be up to the cruise-lines to put in place the relevant protocols and for individual European countries to determine whether their ports will accept the ships and their passengers.

 

................... but probably could be made easier and more productive if there was the resolve from all parties.

Agree with you Susan and what would really help and speed the process would be for all the various requirements agencies is to get together and develop an international set if requirements such that the cruise lines would only need a single set of implementation protocols. Would save everyone time and money. 
 

a pipe dream I know but still wish it could happen here and many other places world wide. 

[labonnevie]

I apologize in advance if this has been posted previously or elsewhere.

If you have time (plenty of time) you can access the comments that have come into the CDC on the "Request for Information Related to Cruise Ship Planning and Infrastructure, Resumption of Passenger Operations, and Summary Questions" by going to this link:

https://www.regulations.gov/docketBrowser?rpp=25&so=DESC&sb=commentDueDate&po=0&dct=PS&D=CDC-2020-0087

Yesterday I read all of the comments that were posted (22 at that time).

Today there are 489 posted comments! And no, I have not read all of them.

One can only imagine how many comments there will be by September 21st.

Many have little real content, but some do. Almost all want cruising to return sooner rather than later.

A sizeable number make comparisons of cruise ships to hotels, planes, trains etc. even protests that have not been shut down. I find it difficult to imagine that the vast majority of these comments will in any way influence the CDC. A point by point submission from the CLIA or cruise line CEO would, however, be very intersting to read, if you could ever find it.

Anyway, read away!

 

[labonnevie]

Comments are now up to 582, up from 532 yesterday, it appears they batch them daily. It is frustrating that they don't seem, however, to be in chronological order so that you can pick up where you left reading earlier.

Many are the same type of input as given before (see my post above). 

However, I did take note of the extensive input provided by a Disney crew member.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=CDC-2020-0087-0420

The 10 page attachment, while long, did make interesting reading for me. While I hope the writer"s conclusion is not shared by the CDC, the content provides a lot of food for thought.

[fizzy]

57 minutes ago, labonnevie said:

Comments are now up to 582, up from 532 yesterday, it appears they batch them daily. It is frustrating that they don't seem, however, to be in chronological order so that you can pick up where you left reading earlier.

Many are the same type of input as given before (see my post above). 

However, I did take note of the extensive input provided by a Disney crew member.

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=CDC-2020-0087-0420

The 10 page attachment, while long, did make interesting reading for me. While I hope the writer"s conclusion is not shared by the CDC, the content provides a lot of food for thought.

I read  the very long document from start to finish and the idea that passenger cruising could resume safely any time soon is now completely out of the question for us. I hope that everyone takes the time to read it. I'm glad to see it from a crew member standpoint.  Thank you for providing this.

[Travelcat2]

On 7/25/2020 at 7:12 AM, Pcardad said:

 

I think non-US ports can be divided into 2 groups. Countries who will allow access for cash/business and countries whose governments are not bureaucratic nightmares awash in red-tape like ours. I think it is possible that the cruise lines could find a number of ports in countries who would be very interested in the increased business. I think cruise lines will run cruises on modified itineraries ASAP in order to generate cash. A cruise to nowhere is better than no cruise at all.

 

I don't think the cruise lines care about the US Ports. I wouldn't if I were them...the US already made it pretty clear that they didn't care about the cruise lines. Business is business. If 90% of the population is willing to let 10% of the population die, why would something less matter?

 

Just my 2 cents...I am not particularly impressed with man's compassion for each other these days.

 

I seem to have missed your posts on this thread but truly hope that what you predict comes to fruition.  There are countries out there suffering from lack of tourism.  On the other hand, no one wants Covid brought to their doorstep so cruise lines would need to follow “suggested” protocols.  As mentioned in the webinar yesterday, Regent is working with tour operators to insure that safety does not end when you walk off of the ship but continues when you are on tour.

 

So many people are waiting for a vaccine but I am not sure that cruise lines can wait that long (predictions go from late 2020 to mid-2021).  I read that Israel is developing an instant read, accurate, test for Covid-19.  If it could detect the virus within hours of it entering your body, wouldn’t it be a great thing?

[rallydave]

On 7/25/2020 at 9:12 AM, Pcardad said:

If 90% of the population is willing to let 10% of the population die, why would something less matter?

Wondering where you got that complete misleading number of 10% of the population dying of Covid 19??

 

In fact of today just for the State of Texas the death rate is is approx 6500 deaths or  .02% of the population of approx 29M  Not even in the same solar system with your 10% bogus number. Your 10% would be 2.9 M is Texas alone.

[Pcardad]

3 minutes ago, rallydave said:

Wondering where you got that complete misleading number of 10% of the population dying of Covid 19??

 

In fact of today just for the State of Texas the death rate is is approx 6500 deaths or  .02% of the population of approx 29M  Not even in the same solar system with your 10% bogus number. Your 10% would be 2.9 M is Texas alone.

 

If you read my posts, you would see that I was postulating that 90% of the population would be willing to sacrifice 10% of the population to put this behind us. I think something along these lines is in our future....

 

I have no idea what number of people will die....but I think if everyone just gave up the numbers would shoot through the roof. 

 

Context is your friend.

[Pcardad]

30 minutes ago, Travelcat2 said:

 

I seem to have missed your posts on this thread but truly hope that what you predict comes to fruition.  There are countries out there suffering from lack of tourism.  On the other hand, no one wants Covid brought to their doorstep so cruise lines would need to follow “suggested” protocols.  As mentioned in the webinar yesterday, Regent is working with tour operators to insure that safety does not end when you walk off of the ship but continues when you are on tour.

 

So many people are waiting for a vaccine but I am not sure that cruise lines can wait that long (predictions go from late 2020 to mid-2021).  I read that Israel is developing an instant read, accurate, test for Covid-19.  If it could detect the virus within hours of it entering your body, wouldn’t it be a great thing?

 

It would, but I still don't think we will see a cruise for another 6 months from a port in the USA.

[cwn]

47 minutes ago, Pcardad said:

 

It would, but I still don't think we will see a cruise for another 6 months from a port in the USA.

You are probably right....with getting rules for the cruise lines set from the CDC to getting the cruise lines proposals to meet these rules approved by the CDC then getting the ships in top shape, and in place for what ever itinerary the ships first sail and lastly but not least getting the crew back in place, there is a lot that has to happen before they load the first passengers. Since Regent didn’t talk about any cruise before May, it is definitely looking like spring for the first cruise from a US port.

 

Guess I better start looking at future cruises since want to sail from a US port. Sigh

Edited July 29, 2020 by cwn

[Travelcat2]

1 hour ago, Pcardad said:

 

If you read my posts, you would see that I was postulating that 90% of the population would be willing to sacrifice 10% of the population to put this behind us. I think something along these lines is in our future....

 

I have no idea what number of people will die....but I think if everyone just gave up the numbers would shoot through the roof. 

 

Context is your friend.

 

Agree with you!

[CruiserFromMaine]

23 hours ago, Pcardad said:

I was postulating that 90% of the population would be willing to sacrifice 10% of the population to put this behind us.

 

I postulate that you’re too pessimistic on the 90%. I’m sure there are some but the 90% is too high by a lot. 

 

 

23 hours ago, Pcardad said:

but I think if everyone just gave up the numbers would shoot through the roof. 

 

Well, that’s probably very true.

[Travelcat2]

The number of people that do not care about how many are dying on a daily basis is obviously growing.  

 

Just heard on the news (within the hour) that the vaccine in the U.S. is expected to have a 90% effectiveness rate.  They hope to start inoculating the most at risk people in December/January (this also, according to the news, includes the elderly and those with underlying conditions).  The hope is that all people in the U.S. will be vaccinated by mid-year 2021 but it could take as long as the end of 2021.  I am not claiming this to be fact....... is it is simply what was stated on the news.*

 

The next issue will be the predicted 30% of the country that will refuse to take the vaccine.  One can only hope that this will be a requirement for sailing on a ship.

 

*They still do not know how long the immunity will last and have not shared whether the the vaccine is a "live" virus or not.  A "live" virus would make it impossible for many people (particularly elderly) from having the vaccine.

[rallydave]

14 minutes ago, Travelcat2 said:

The number of people that do not care about how many are dying on a daily basis is obviously growing.  

 

Just heard on the news (within the hour) that the vaccine in the U.S. is expected to have a 90% effectiveness rate.  They hope to start inoculating the most at risk people in December/January (this also, according to the news, includes the elderly and those with underlying conditions).  The hope is that all people in the U.S. will be vaccinated by mid-year 2021 but it could take as long as the end of 2021.  I am not claiming this to be fact....... is it is simply what was stated on the news.*

 

The next issue will be the predicted 30% of the country that will refuse to take the vaccine.  One can only hope that this will be a requirement for sailing on a ship.

 

*They still do not know how long the immunity will last and have not shared whether the the vaccine is a "live" virus or not.  A "live" virus would make it impossible for many people (particularly elderly) from having the vaccine.

While adding at the end not claiming as fact is a good start, better it be at the beginning of your post.  Also, even posting this information is pretty much worthless at this point as none of what your unknown news has been determined.  Sure you can find hundreds of news services that will say different things as well as many scientists who will provide different predictions as your news is simply a prediction by and unknown news service since many of your data points will not be known for months as phase 3 for some vaccines where 30,000 people are studied have just begun and the studies are where the data will become known.  

 

And, many more vaccines are being developed which will probably have different statistics than the current front runners which could provide different results.  Glad this is a positive for you but, better to not post this type of information before it is actually announced after complete studies with validated data. 

[howiefrommd]

2 hours ago, Travelcat2 said:

The number of people that do not care about how many are dying on a daily basis is obviously growing.  

 

Just heard on the news (within the hour) that the vaccine in the U.S. is expected to have a 90% effectiveness rate.  They hope to start inoculating the most at risk people in December/January (this also, according to the news, includes the elderly and those with underlying conditions).  The hope is that all people in the U.S. will be vaccinated by mid-year 2021 but it could take as long as the end of 2021.  I am not claiming this to be fact....... is it is simply what was stated on the news.*

 

The next issue will be the predicted 30% of the country that will refuse to take the vaccine.  One can only hope that this will be a requirement for sailing on a ship.

 

*They still do not know how long the immunity will last and have not shared whether the the vaccine is a "live" virus or not.  A "live" virus would make it impossible for many people (particularly elderly) from having the vaccine.

The news today that many of the talking heads were reporting on was in regard to a study which tested the J &J (pre-clinical) vaccine with chimps or other primates which appears to have successfully initiated an immune/antibody response without significant side effects. So now we can move onto looking at humans with varying doses is the quick translation

 

Just to explain a little more. J and J will now begin their first trials in humans (clinical trials). Their are 3 phases (1,2,3). Seems like they are combining their phase 1 and 2 trials to speed things up. Nevertheless, they are a bit behind 3 other companies (Moderna, Pfizer, Oxford/Astea-Zeneca) who just started their phase 3 trials, which is more advanced. Our hope should be that all these trials are successful because of the amount of vaccine that will be needed. Plus, there’s no guarantee that the first three trials will be successful.

 

[Travelcat2]

5 minutes ago, howiefrommd said:

The news today that many of the talking heads were reporting on was in regard to a study which tested the J &J (pre-clinical) vaccine with chimps or other primates which appears to have successfully initiated an immune/antibody response without significant side effects. So now we can move onto looking at humans with varying doses is the quick translation

 

Just to explain a little more. J and J will now begin their first trials in humans (clinical trials). Their are 3 phases (1,2,3). Seems like they are combining their phase 1 and 2 trials to speed things up. Nevertheless, they are a bit behind 3 other companies (Moderna, Pfizer, Oxford/Astea-Zeneca) who just started their phase 3 trials, which is more advanced. Our hope should be that all these trials are successful because of the amount of vaccine that will be needed. Plus, there’s no guarantee that the first three trials will be successful.

 

 

Thank you for the explanation - I do appreciate getting information from posters like yourself.  Although I have no idea how we would access to it, I believe that the vaccine developed by Oxford/Astea-Zeneca shows the most promise.  

[SusieQft]

13 minutes ago, Travelcat2 said:

Although I have no idea how we would access to it, I believe that the vaccine developed by Oxford/Astea-Zeneca shows the most promise.  

AstraZeneca is working with a US partner and is part of Operation Warp Speed.  Assuming it is safe, effective, and approved, it should be available in the US.

 

What I wonder is if we have multiple vaccines that were fast tracked and approved, how will they decide where to distribute which ones.  Since most seem to be saying that 2 doses will be required, would the second dose need to be the same vaccine as the first one?  Or might it be even better to have two different ones instead?  I doubt we will have those answers before the vaccines are rolled out.

[JMARINER]

3 hours ago, Travelcat2 said:

Just heard on the news ...........

 

*They still do not know how long the immunity will last and have not shared whether the the vaccine is a "live" virus or not.  A "live" virus would make it impossible for many people (particularly elderly) from having the vaccine.

I don't know where your 'news" source is getting their information. Many of the most popular vaccines are "live" or correctly attenuated.

 

Currently available live attenuated viral vaccines are measles, mumps, rubella, vaccinia, varicella, zoster (which contains the same virus as varicella vaccine but in much higher amount), yellow fever, rotavirus, and influenza (intranasal). Zoster, rotavirus and flu are commonly given to elderly. There is no reason to think that a live Corvid vaccine would be any different as to efficacy .

 

J

Edited July 31, 2020 by JMARINER

[SusieQft]

30 minutes ago, JMARINER said:

There is no reason to think that a live Corvid vaccine would be any different as to efficacy .

Your list has widely varied efficacies.  The flu vaccine varies from year to year, but is usually in the neighborhood of 50-60%.  The measles vaccine is 97% effective (after 2 doses).  We really don't know yet what the efficacy of the covid vaccine(s) will be, but we can be pretty sure it will be less than 100%.  That is one of the reasons why as many people as possible need to get it.

Edited July 31, 2020 by SusieQft

[flossie009]

Yesterday's CC News article gives a good résumé of the number & type of responses made to the CDC following its request for public comments.