Jump to content

More details on the CDC mandate and return to sailing


Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, BlerkOne said:

If everyone is quarantined, who is enforcing or for that matter, driving the ship and delivering meals?

 

I don't think I said anything about crew. But on the subject of crew the article does say "all passengers and non-essential crew." I would think anyone working on the bridge and some in food service would be considered essential.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Butterbean1000 said:

Fair enough. First, sorry you've lost friends.  But addressing your other concerns, I smoked years ago. My chances of lung cancer or heart disease is higher than those who never smoked.  So now that I've had covid, you're saying I have a risk of blood clots. This is the first I've heard that. I'll have to investigate it.  But I've had a hip replacement so my chances of getting blood clots from that have also increased.  

 

I'll just leave it with this. If you feel like you're getting sick, keep your happy butt at home and quarantine.  Get tested.  And for heaven's sake, stop hoarding TP!! (Sorry,  I couldn't resist)

https://www.ucsf.edu/magazine/covid-body

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the CDC should take another look at big box stores and groceries as those seem to be the catch-alls for coronavirus oubreaks based on contact tracing.  Close the entire firm's stores in any state where one case of the virus occurs due to someone shopping at that store. And due note that most people in stores are wearing masks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jimbo5544 said:

I agree.  It would be stupid stupid stupid to put over 5,000 people on a boat in the middle of the pandemic.  Thank goodness the CDC is able to be the voice of reason during this troubling time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Saint Greg said:

 

If I get on a ship today and someone tests positive tonight we're all quarantined. That has nothing to do with other countries.

Sigh.  8 months into this, and people still don't understand jurisdiction.  If the CDC had jurisdiction over a hotel, there may or may not be different covid restrictions on hotels.  We will never know, because the CDC knows they don't have jurisdiction, so they don't waste their time thinking about hotels.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, crewsweeper said:

Maybe the CDC should take another look at big box stores and groceries as those seem to be the catch-alls for coronavirus oubreaks based on contact tracing.  Close the entire firm's stores in any state where one case of the virus occurs due to someone shopping at that store. And due note that most people in stores are wearing masks.

Sigh, another one who doesn't understand what jurisdiction means.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, FSHLOT said:

The saga continues with the CDC. They are dictators of the cruise industry. They have NO clue on how to handle this whole cruising thing. Seems like its getting worse then better. Sad

If you mean the virus outbreaks are getting worse, I wholeheartedly agree with you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jimbo5544 said:

It is not what they have or do not have.  Their job is not to look for blame but solve the problem.  Whatever cruise lines errors were early on and occurred at the same approximate time as political officials (high level officials) had just told the people of New York to continue to live their lives as normal.  If the CDC is focused on 8 months ago, we are all lost if left to them.  Utter, dismal failure.  Miscommunications, change of advice in the same day and on and on.  

8 months ago the infection rate was nothing compared to what it is now.  The hospitalization rate in NC has set a record the previous three days.  The positive rate at UNC hospital of all the tests today was 10% which is up significantly from the downward trend a few weeks prior.  The CDC is doing exactly what they should be doing by keeping people off of ships until the numbers and the vaccines are better and being administered.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed several omissions or false statements in the article.  It mixes extracts from different parts of the Conditional Framework (CF), and inserts a different context. 

 

For example, the article states :"The Framework for Conditional Sailing Order states that in case of a positive COVID-19 case, a cruise line must first notify passengers and crew, and then immediately end the future. It also may be forced to cancel future voyages as directed by the CDC. The ship also most return to the U.S. port of embarkation." [my bolded, italicized, underline] What the CF actually requires is (page 31-32) "

(a)    Based on a threshold of COVID-19 being detected in passengers or crew, as determined through CDC technical instructions or orders, a cruise ship operator must immediately take the following actions:

(1)    Conduct notifications . . .

(2)    Immediately end the restricted passenger voyage, cancel future restricted passenger voyages until directed by CDC that such voyages may resume, and return the ship to the U.S. port of embarkation. . ." [my bolded, italicized, underline]

 

I don't believe that CDC has issued any further explanation of what that threshold is going to be.  Given the title of the article, I feel that the (unnamed, no byline) author of the article is trying to establish grounds for his/her statements. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Sigh, another one who doesn't understand what jurisdiction means.

What they understand is that the draconian dictator mode that they want to impose needs to end.  Whether analogies get the point across sup for debate.  The point is that the CDC HAS that power when to comes to the return to the sea (which of course you understand what they can or cannot do.  They want to cruise and are providing what seems logical connection on how to interpret the control the CDC has over the industry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

What they understand is that the draconian dictator mode that they want to impose needs to end.  Whether analogies get the point across sup for debate.  The point is that the CDC HAS that power when to comes to the return to the sea (which of course you understand what they can or cannot do.  They want to cruise and are providing what seems logical connection on how to interpret the control the CDC has over the industry.

But my point is that while many, yourself included, consider the CDC to be draconian, there are examples of comparisons between CDC requirements and state/local requirements that show that the CDC requirements keep people safer than the state/local agencies.  The example of pool sanitation is classic, where the CDC would have shut down 80% of public pools if they'd had the jurisdiction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Sigh.  8 months into this, and people still don't understand jurisdiction.  If the CDC had jurisdiction over a hotel, there may or may not be different covid restrictions on hotels.  We will never know, because the CDC knows they don't have jurisdiction, so they don't waste their time thinking about hotels.

 

Doesn't the CDC have jurisdiction over airports? I don't understand why those are open but cruiseports are closed.

I flew to Cancun in September just to sit on the beach, didn't pretend otherwise. It was tourism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

But my point is that while many, yourself included, consider the CDC to be draconian, there are examples of comparisons between CDC requirements and state/local requirements that show that the CDC requirements keep people safer than the state/local agencies.  The example of pool sanitation is classic, where the CDC would have shut down 80% of public pools if they'd had the jurisdiction.

LOL, I got the reference the first time...but the bold does help.  I do not doubt that if we lock everything down and shoot on sight, the would help keep us safer from the virus.  I DO get why they want to do what they are doing, I just disagree with the "PLAN".

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ukbecky said:

 

Doesn't the CDC have jurisdiction over airports? I don't understand why those are open but cruiseports are closed.

I flew to Cancun in September just to sit on the beach, didn't pretend otherwise. It was tourism.

As far as I know, the only documented cases of community transmission on an airplane were on flights over 12 hours long, and there were just a handful of those.  If cruises could last less than 12 hours, they might get to reopen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jimbo5544 said:

LOL, I got the reference the first time...but the bold does help.  I do not doubt that if we lock everything down and shoot on sight, the would help keep us safer from the virus.  I DO get why they want to do what they are doing, I just disagree with the "PLAN".

So, what is your proposed "plan"?

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, IRMO12HD said:

I noticed several omissions or false statements in the article.  It mixes extracts from different parts of the Conditional Framework (CF), and inserts a different context. 

 

For example, the article states :"The Framework for Conditional Sailing Order states that in case of a positive COVID-19 case, a cruise line must first notify passengers and crew, and then immediately end the future. It also may be forced to cancel future voyages as directed by the CDC. The ship also most return to the U.S. port of embarkation." [my bolded, italicized, underline] What the CF actually requires is (page 31-32) "

(a)    Based on a threshold of COVID-19 being detected in passengers or crew, as determined through CDC technical instructions or orders, a cruise ship operator must immediately take the following actions:

(1)    Conduct notifications . . .

(2)    Immediately end the restricted passenger voyage, cancel future restricted passenger voyages until directed by CDC that such voyages may resume, and return the ship to the U.S. port of embarkation. . ." [my bolded, italicized, underline]

 

I don't believe that CDC has issued any further explanation of what that threshold is going to be.  Given the title of the article, I feel that the (unnamed, no byline) author of the article is trying to establish grounds for his/her statements. 

Quite an analysis, you def get an A.  The problem is nobody knows what the CDC wants other than compliance.  The have left THAT elephant in the room up to the cruise lines....oh wait I forgot something.  They had the hammer on whether THEY think it is enough, or will work, or will cut the mustard, or.....etc etc.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

So, what is your proposed "plan"?

Plan is a 4 letter word.  Obviously there is no easy answer.  I trust the cruise lines to do what is right.  I know that you feel differently, but I have put my heath and well being in them many many times.  I am sure the CDC can provide advice and counsel along that way and def if and when there will be an outbreak.  I have ZERO faith that is what the CDC wants.  I truly believe they feel if no ships sail, it will be much easier for them.  If they could wield that ax across all travel, and hotels and interstate travel (I know they are not the same) THEY WOULD DO SO.  If they could mandate absolute mask wearing, THEY WOULD DO SO.  That is not possible, thank the heavens, our forefathers planned well, but I 100% believe if the CDC had their way, that is the America we would have now.  

 

The way out is the vaccine, not the CDC.  The way out is effective treatment, not the CDC.  They tried, and tried their best, I do not doubt their motives, just their performance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

 

What hotels did you sleep in where you woke up in a different country?

 

In 1997 I went to sleep at the Royal Garden Hotel in Great Britain, and woke up in China. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

The way out is the vaccine, not the CDC.  The way out is effective treatment, not the CDC.  They tried, and tried their best, I do not doubt their motives, just their performance.

So, what you are saying is that without a vaccine, there should be no cruising?  And, yet, you complain that the CDC is restricting cruising while there is no vaccine?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The industry is starting to fight back, not the companies, they know not to pull on Superman's cape, but the ports are doing the lifting. 

 

Today Fox Business Channel did hourly live reports from the new terminal 3 at Port Canaveral. I must say it does look beautiful. The  el hefe for the port was interviewed several times and basically said they have had enough stalling, humming, and hawing by the CDC. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

Sigh.  8 months into this, and people still don't understand jurisdiction.  If the CDC had jurisdiction over a hotel, there may or may not be different covid restrictions on hotels.  We will never know, because the CDC knows they don't have jurisdiction, so they don't waste their time thinking about hotels.

 

I never said the CDC had jurisdiction over hotels. If the CDC thinks paying attention to what's happening at other places that have guest rooms, pools, dining, laundry, retail and fitness centers is a waste of time, that just demonstrates how dumb they are.

 

Edited by Saint Greg
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

As far as I know, the only documented cases of community transmission on an airplane were on flights over 12 hours long, and there were just a handful of those.  If cruises could last less than 12 hours, they might get to reopen.

 

Only because people get off of the plane before they find out they have covid. I don't believe for a second that nobody on a flight less than 12 hours has contracted covid on a plane.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Butterbean1000 said:

I have no idea how I contracted covid.  I did everything (while complaining) the great and all knowing CDC recommended.  My adult son that lives with us came down with it in June. Neither the hubs or I got it then.  I came down with it November 13. My husband got sick 5 days later.  Even the CDC has contradicted itself on how its transmitted.  I cannot stand all this self righteous people pointing fingers. 

Totally agree, it is easy for them to stand up on their soapboxes and ramble on.  Hope you are trending better. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • Q&A with the Quark Expeditions Team: New Ship Ultramarine
      • Register Now for Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Explore the Remote World with Hurtigruten!
      • 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...