CDC latest

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, bigrednole said:

The CDC needs to declare publicly and specifically what will be required to cruise from US ports.

They already did, in the April 9th update to the no sail order.  This has not changed.  What has not happened is the development of "appropriate, actionable, and robust" plans to meet the requirements.  This is on the cruise lines.

[cbr663]

2 hours ago, bigrednole said:

.....

 

The CDC needs to declare publicly and specifically what will be required to cruise from US ports....

 

The CDC has done this in its No Sail Order  https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/04/15/2020-07930/no-sail-order-and-suspension-of-further-embarkation-notice-of-modification-and-extension-and-other

[cbr663]

2 hours ago, Hlitner said:

.....

 

We can learn from the results of some cruise resumption in Europe.  Those operations showed that with a lot of caution, mitigation, testing, and operating ships with only a small percentage of their capacity, there were still some cases of COVID on the ships.  While a couple of European governments seem to be willing to accept this situation it is not likely to be acceptable here in the USA.  My simple question has always been, "what will the cruise lines do when they get a single case of COVID on a ship?"  ....

 

 

 

That is the question that I am waiting for the cruise lines to answer also - how will they deal with outbreaks on ships.

 

The challenge with restrictions and mitigation is that they only reduce the risk - they do not totally eliminate it.  It is because of this that cruise ships will have outbreaks.  Low risk is not the absence of risk.

 

Here in Ontario modified restrictions recently closed gyms and dining in restaurants.  These groups have been pushing back demanding the data to support the decisions.  The data that was recently released showed for instance that 2% of cases were traced back to gyms.  Gym owners are screaming foul because it is 'only' 2%.  Yet, 2% of 900 cases a day is 18 new cases every day.  And that is only for those cases that can be traced - 35% of cases cannot be traced so no one knows whether the 2% is accurate.

 

My point is we don't know what these stats will be for cruise ships.  What if 5% of people on a cruise ship will come down with the virus?  Is that low?  Is that an acceptable level of risk?  On a cruise with 2000 people (passengers and crew) that is 100 people will become invected.  Even at a low of 1%, that is still 20 people.  Is that too many?  And how many are needed to be considered an outbreak?  In long term care homes in Ontario, 1 case is considered an outbreak. Should the same standard be applied to cruise ships?

[Hlitner]

50 minutes ago, cbr663 said:

 

That is the question that I am waiting for the cruise lines to answer also - how will they deal with outbreaks on ships.

 

The challenge with restrictions and mitigation is that they only reduce the risk - they do not totally eliminate it.  It is because of this that cruise ships will have outbreaks.  Low risk is not the absence of risk.

 

Here in Ontario modified restrictions recently closed gyms and dining in restaurants.  These groups have been pushing back demanding the data to support the decisions.  The data that was recently released showed for instance that 2% of cases were traced back to gyms.  Gym owners are screaming foul because it is 'only' 2%.  Yet, 2% of 900 cases a day is 18 new cases every day.  And that is only for those cases that can be traced - 35% of cases cannot be traced so no one knows whether the 2% is accurate.

 

My point is we don't know what these stats will be for cruise ships.  What if 5% of people on a cruise ship will come down with the virus?  Is that low?  Is that an acceptable level of risk?  On a cruise with 2000 people (passengers and crew) that is 100 people will become invected.  Even at a low of 1%, that is still 20 people.  Is that too many?  And how many are needed to be considered an outbreak?  In long term care homes in Ontario, 1 case is considered an outbreak. Should the same standard be applied to cruise ships?

Just consider if any government can justify shutting down the economy because of a 2% infection rate there may soon be no economy left to shut down.  There must be some common sense used in government decision making as the needs of the many may need to take precedence over the needs of a few.  Nobody thinks any of this COVID decision making is easy, but countries around the world are starting to realize that "lock downs" come with a lot of negative problems.

 

Hank

[Roz]

Latest from the CDC:

 

https://www.cruisecritic.com/news/5687/

[crazyank]

On 10/30/2020 at 5:57 PM, Hlitner said:

There must be some common sense used in government decision making as the needs of the many may need to take precedence over the needs of a few.

That would be a nice change,  just don't expect it to happen very soon, lol

[broberts]

On 10/30/2020 at 12:57 PM, Hlitner said:

Just consider if any government can justify shutting down the economy because of a 2% infection rate there may soon be no economy left to shut down.  There must be some common sense used in government decision making as the needs of the many may need to take precedence over the needs of a few.  Nobody thinks any of this COVID decision making is easy, but countries around the world are starting to realize that "lock downs" come with a lot of negative problems.

 

Hank

 

Negative problems, sure. But as long as even a few people are unwilling to observe the basic principals of protection, (masks, hand washing, distancing, and minimizing contacts), lock downs are here to stay.

 

Stating an infection rate without providing a timeframe is meaningless. Certainly the diagnosed number of infections to date in the US exceeds 2% by almost 50% and rapidly climbing. 

 

You may want to consider the proposition that the needs of the many are to stay alive and healthy. The few that refuse to comply with all necessary precautions are the ones killing the economy.