CDC denies cruise sector's request to lift US sailing restrictions

[ArthurUSCG]

@chengkp75 that you for spelling it out better then I could.
The cruise lines are refusing to play ball with the CDC. 

[whitecap]

2 minutes ago, ArthurUSCG said:

@chengkp75 that you for spelling it out better then I could.
The cruise lines are refusing to play ball with the CDC. 

For those that believe that the cruise lines have not been working to comply with the CDC's recommendations/requirements, I would suggest you read this from the CDC web site:

www.cdc.gov: 3.webloc

If the above doesn't work, search the CDC web site for:  Crew Disembarkation Through Commercial Travel, scroll down page to Status of COVID19 Response Plans and Commercial Transport of Crew.  You will see an update (March 23d) list of ships that have complied and filed the necessary acknowledgments with the CDC.  So statements like "the cruise lines are refusing to play ball with the CDC" are bs.   

[Grego]

7 minutes ago, whitecap said:

For those that believe that the cruise lines have not been working to comply with the CDC's recommendations/requirements, I would suggest you read this from the CDC web site:

www.cdc.gov: 3.webloc 318 B · 1 download

If the above doesn't work, search the CDC web site for:  Crew Disembarkation Through Commercial Travel, scroll down page to Status of COVID19 Response Plans and Commercial Transport of Crew.  You will see an update (March 23d) list of ships that have complied and filed the necessary acknowledgments with the CDC.  So statements like "the cruise lines are refusing to play ball with the CDC" are bs.   

Thanks.  I found the site and this was helpful.

[chengkp75]

35 minutes ago, whitecap said:

For those that believe that the cruise lines have not been working to comply with the CDC's recommendations/requirements, I would suggest you read this from the CDC web site:

www.cdc.gov: 3.webloc 318 B · 3 downloads

If the above doesn't work, search the CDC web site for:  Crew Disembarkation Through Commercial Travel, scroll down page to Status of COVID19 Response Plans and Commercial Transport of Crew.  You will see an update (March 23d) list of ships that have complied and filed the necessary acknowledgments with the CDC.  So statements like "the cruise lines are refusing to play ball with the CDC" are bs.   

That status listing, has been available for cruise lines to receive "green status" since June/July, yet many, including virtually all Carnival Corp ships up until late January, did not take advantage of this and get their ships cleared.  So, it took them over 6 months to comply with "phase 1", and they know what "phase 2" entails, but they have made no headway in even preliminary work towards it.

[AF-1]

Interesting reading on this thread.  All the best to how things work out.  Have a great weekend

[whitecap]

2 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

That status listing, has been available for cruise lines to receive "green status" since June/July, yet many, including virtually all Carnival Corp ships up until late January, did not take advantage of this and get their ships cleared.  So, it took them over 6 months to comply with "phase 1", and they know what "phase 2" entails, but they have made no headway in even preliminary work towards it.

So what I hear you saying is, you were wrong by stating that the cruise lines have done nothing.  They have continued to work to meet the ever changing CDC requirements.  I think that there is something we can both agree on:  If the CDC were to come out today and give the cruise lines a list of logical common sense requirements to comply with and not change them every other day, that would allow them to return to the US ports for cruises, the cruise lines would have to either comply or sail from foreign ports.  It just wasn't fair to say that they had not made any attempt to work with the CDC.

[chengkp75]

31 minutes ago, whitecap said:

So what I hear you saying is, you were wrong by stating that the cruise lines have done nothing.  They have continued to work to meet the ever changing CDC requirements.  I think that there is something we can both agree on:  If the CDC were to come out today and give the cruise lines a list of logical common sense requirements to comply with and not change them every other day, that would allow them to return to the US ports for cruises, the cruise lines would have to either comply or sail from foreign ports.  It just wasn't fair to say that they had not made any attempt to work with the CDC.

They have done nothing since the crew repatriation requirements were issued in June/July.  They have come up with a plan to meet those requirements.  Many ships had "conditional" green status months ago, meaning that they had submitted plans and been approved (for mediation of crew health, only).  However, the CDC has not "changed their requirements every day", the requirements of the conditional sailing order are the same as the no sail order published back in April.  Nothing has changed.  The cruise lines knew what was required, and did nothing until the crew crisis reached a head, and then they waited until the CDC issued specific instructions on what was needed to allow crew changes.  Have the cruise lines come up with similar plans to meet the other requirements of the conditional sail order?  Nope, not a one.  As I've said before, probably on this thread, the next phase deals with the contracts and agreements with ports, health care, etc in each port, and those requirements, while not listing specific levels of service required, were there 11 months ago, yet no cruise line has mentioned that they have reached tentative agreements with any of the required entities.  Given their criticism of the CDC, don't you think they would shout this to the world?

 

So, if the cruise lines had complied with "phase 1" back last summer, perhaps the CDC would have moved to outline "phase 2" a little sooner?  Sorry, I see the cruise line executives sticking their heads in the sand, and first hoping the pandemic would go away, and then that vaccines would miraculously make it go away, so we don't need to do anything.

Edited March 26, 2021 by chengkp75

[whitecap]

23 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

They have done nothing since the crew repatriation requirements were issued in June/July.  They have come up with a plan to meet those requirements.  Many ships had "conditional" green status months ago, meaning that they had submitted plans and been approved (for mediation of crew health, only).  However, the CDC has not "changed their requirements every day", the requirements of the conditional sailing order are the same as the no sail order published back in April.  Nothing has changed.  The cruise lines knew what was required, and did nothing until the crew crisis reached a head, and then they waited until the CDC issued specific instructions on what was needed to allow crew changes.  Have the cruise lines come up with similar plans to meet the other requirements of the conditional sail order?  Nope, not a one.  As I've said before, probably on this thread, the next phase deals with the contracts and agreements with ports, health care, etc in each port, and those requirements, while not listing specific levels of service required, were there 11 months ago, yet no cruise line has mentioned that they have reached tentative agreements with any of the required entities.  Given their criticism of the CDC, don't you think they would shout this to the world?

 

So, if the cruise lines had complied with "phase 1" back last summer, perhaps the CDC would have moved to outline "phase 2" a little sooner?  Sorry, I see the cruise line executives sticking their heads in the sand, and first hoping the pandemic would go away, and then that vaccines would miraculously make it go away, so we don't need to do anything.

We will just have to agree to disagree.  I see it that the cruise lines are doing all they can with what they are being told, keeping in mind that the government changes everything almost daily and you see it that the government is always right and the cruise lines are simply not doing anything.  In any case, I hope your next cruise is very enjoyable and safe.

[chengkp75]

17 minutes ago, whitecap said:

the government changes everything almost daily

Please specify what the CDC has changed with regards to cruise ships since April.

[whitecap]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

Please specify what the CDC has changed with regards to cruise ships since April.

Sorry, as I said, we'll have to agree to disagree.  I question what the government says, you believe everything they say.  We are very different.  Do you remember; "no need to wear a mask", "wear a mask", "wear two mask", "once you have the vaccine, no need for a mask", "after getting the vaccine continue to wear a mask", and it goes on.  I'm very capable of using common sense and logic to care for myself and have done so since the "experts" began talking out of both sides of their mouths.  I sincerely hope you have a nice day and a great cruise, whenever it happens.  😀

[chengkp75]

Just now, whitecap said:

Sorry, as I said, we'll have to agree to disagree.  I question what the government says, you believe everything they say.  We are very different.  Do you remember; "no need to wear a mask", "wear a mask", "wear two mask", "once you have the vaccine, no need for a mask", "after getting the vaccine continue to wear a mask", and it goes on.  I'm very capable of using common sense and logic to care for myself and have done so since the "experts" began talking out of both sides of their mouths.  I sincerely hope you have a nice day and a great cruise, whenever it happens.  😀

Thank you for outlining my viewpoint on life without even knowing me.  Appreciate it.  For your information, I do not believe everything the government says.  And while you are correct that recommendations from the CDC varied over time, I am asking for specifics regarding the requirements set forth for the cruise lines to resume operations that have changed, not press releases relating to the general population.  You say that the CDC keeps moving the goalposts, I want to know what has moved.  Regardless of whether you feel their recommendations are correct or not, what has changed with regard to cruise ships?

[ontheweb]

34 minutes ago, whitecap said:

We will just have to agree to disagree.  I see it that the cruise lines are doing all they can with what they are being told, keeping in mind that the government changes everything almost daily and you see it that the government is always right and the cruise lines are simply not doing anything.  In any case, I hope your next cruise is very enjoyable and safe.

I would also like to know what they have changed ALMOST DAILY. You said "everything". Could you list some of what has changed from day to day?

[nocl]

9 hours ago, caribill said:

 

Yet a year ago the CDC said all Covid-19 sample testing had to be done at the CDC labs with no state allowed to set up their own sample testing labs.

 

Seems to me that is some direction over a state.

I believe that in those very early days at that time the CDC was the only source of the test kits.  So basically they did not have enough and limited processing to those labs trained on them.

 

Legally they could not stop a state from getting tests from another source and setting up labs.  Unfortunately there were no other approved test and no other source.

 

Once the FDA approved other tests, the states were able to make their own decisions about setting up test labs and did.

[nocl]

43 minutes ago, whitecap said:

Sorry, as I said, we'll have to agree to disagree.  I question what the government says, you believe everything they say.  We are very different.  Do you remember; "no need to wear a mask", "wear a mask", "wear two mask", "once you have the vaccine, no need for a mask", "after getting the vaccine continue to wear a mask", and it goes on.  I'm very capable of using common sense and logic to care for myself and have done so since the "experts" began talking out of both sides of their mouths.  I sincerely hope you have a nice day and a great cruise, whenever it happens.  😀

You do understand that the amount of knowledge related to COVID has changed over time since it was identified a little over a year ago and that those recommendations have changed based upon the status of the epidemic, as well as when our understanding of the virus has changed.

 

In the early days it was thought to be like the flu and SARS in that it transmitted mostly by droplets and  that one was only infectious after symptoms developed, the initial recommendations were based upon that under standing.  Once it became clear that people are infectious while asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic, the recommendations changed.  As the infection became wide spread, they changed. Once it became clear that most of the spread was air borne and not surface contact, they changed.  Once it became clear that transmission was by aerosols more than droplets they changed again.

 

The chances occurred as more was learned.  That is what happens when information is gained. 

[stevenr597]

4 minutes ago, nocl said:

You do understand that the amount of knowledge related to COVID has changed over time since it was identified a little over a year ago and that those recommendations have changed based upon the status of the epidemic, as well as when our understanding of the virus has changed.

 

In the early days it was thought to be like the flu and SARS in that it transmitted mostly by droplets and  that one was only infectious after symptoms developed, the initial recommendations were based upon that under standing.  Once it became clear that people are infectious while asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic, the recommendations changed.  As the infection became wide spread, they changed. Once it became clear that most of the spread was air borne and not surface contact, they changed.  Once it became clear that transmission was by aerosols more than droplets they changed again.

 

The chances occurred as more was learned.  That is what happens when information is gained. 

That is a good talking point, but it is not really based on any facts.

In medicine when one is faced with an unknown, one usually deal with it by trying to rule out the most severe consequences.  There were numerous reports of an unknown virus coming out of China, starting in the Fall, in addition to China taking efforts to suppress this information.  China, in addition, refused permission of our CDC to investigate.

This should have immediately been a cause for concern, and the CDC should have taken measures to isolate the potential for this new infection to migrate to our continent from China.  Instead the CDC and related organizations such as the World Health Organization and Dr. Fauci did their best to downplay the possible significance of events in China.

In respect to wearing of face coverings Fauci should have advised to do so, until it became clear that the virus (which facts suggested otherwise) was not transmitted by an airborne vector.  

In addition, instead of pushing for a quick and rapid test to detect the presence of this virus (which was almost immediately identified as a variant of the Coronavirus, he, the CDC, and the FDA held us with the belief that testing would only need to be limited.  Again they decided to believe in the best case, instead of the worst case scenario. 

We must not forget that this was not a new virus in the sense that we had already experienced several years previously both SARS and MERS, and in fact the World Health Organization in a study several years ago had predicted that we could be hit by a Pandemic from a variant of either Influenza or Coronavirus.

Then why did our CDC and Dr. Fauci error.  Nobody could doubt that these organizations are well trained and that Fauci is a brilliant investigator.  

But...Fauci also became a Washington Bureaucrat.   In a sense he forgot that he was a physician, and started to make decisions on his relationships and the political winds.  Fauci did not wish to call out WHO who clearly was having a symbiotic relationship with China, and he did not wish to go against politicians who said that there was nothing to worry about. 

In this case our leaders and scientists have failed us. 

 

[nocl]

2 hours ago, whitecap said:

So what I hear you saying is, you were wrong by stating that the cruise lines have done nothing.  They have continued to work to meet the ever changing CDC requirements.  I think that there is something we can both agree on:  If the CDC were to come out today and give the cruise lines a list of logical common sense requirements to comply with and not change them every other day, that would allow them to return to the US ports for cruises, the cruise lines would have to either comply or sail from foreign ports.  It just wasn't fair to say that they had not made any attempt to work with the CDC.

When the CDC first came up with the rules for illness reporting  the cruise lines took their ships out of US water rather than comply. 

 

When the CDC required that they meet certain requirements and use charter flights for repatriation of their crews through the US. They told their crews that the CDC was preventing them from transferring through the US, while they were refusing the sign the documents certify the crew status allowing transfer.  They said that charter flights were too expensive, yet at the same time RCL and Celebrity were sailing to Barbados where they off loaded crew and set them home through the closed airport, on Charter flights.  Main difference not have to reports cases of COVID to the CDC.

 

While the ban was in effect the CDC developed the rules and requirements for offloading crew in the US and allowing them to travel via commercial flights.  The cruise lines still kept their ships mostly out of US waters.  It was only after the CDC changed from the ban order to the sail certification order than the cruise lines started to bring ships back to US waters and took the effort to qualify for the crew transfer orders so that they could transfer crew via US airport.

 

However, they have done nothing to move beyond that step.  They have not drafted any proposals for the CDC to review.  They have not developed and submitted operational plans to either meet the CDC framework, or to propose alternatives methods to provide safe cruising.  They have only presented the very general report from the safe sail panel.  Not detailed plans or proposals.

 

Then the CLIA submits a letter asking CDC to drop the order, not change it, not reduce specific items or steps but just to drop the entire thing.

 

 

[stevenr597]

23 minutes ago, nocl said:

I believe that in those very early days at that time the CDC was the only source of the test kits.  So basically they did not have enough and limited processing to those labs trained on them.

 

Legally they could not stop a state from getting tests from another source and setting up labs.  Unfortunately there were no other approved test and no other source.

 

Once the FDA approved other tests, the states were able to make their own decisions about setting up test labs and did.

Actually the CDC and the FDA delayed the introduction of rapid test kits, deciding that testing was only necessary on a limited based and depending on the overly complex PCR assay.  The result that the delayed testing for well over one month, probably longer, which permitted the virus to infect the population of New York with disastrous results. 

[voljeep]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

  As I've said before, probably on this thread, the next phase deals with the contracts and agreements with ports, health care, etc in each port, and those requirements, while not listing specific levels of service required, were there 11 months ago, yet no cruise line has mentioned that they have reached tentative agreements with any of the required entities.

How many ports do the Carnival Corporation ships visit ? - Does a Carnival Corp 'contract/agreement/whatever with each individual port cover all  Carnival / Princess / Hal ships or does each individual brand have to have their own set of contracts, etc

[nocl]

1 minute ago, stevenr597 said:

That is a good talking point, but it is not really based on any facts.

In medicine when one is faced with an unknown, one usually deal with it by trying to rule out the most severe consequences.  There were numerous reports of an unknown virus coming out of China, starting in the Fall, in addition to China taking efforts to suppress this information.  China, in addition, refused permission of our CDC to investigate.

This should have immediately been a cause for concern, and the CDC should have taken measures to isolate the potential for this new infection to migrate to our continent from China.  Instead the CDC and related organizations such as the World Health Organization and Dr. Fauci did their best to downplay the possible significance of events in China.

In respect to wearing of face coverings Fauci should have advised to do so, until it became clear that the virus (which facts suggested otherwise) was not transmitted by an airborne vector.  

In addition, instead of pushing for a quick and rapid test to detect the presence of this virus (which was almost immediately identified as a variant of the Coronavirus, he, the CDC, and the FDA held us with the belief that testing would only need to be limited.  Again they decided to believe in the best case, instead of the worst case scenario. 

We must not forget that this was not a new virus in the sense that we had already experienced several years previously both SARS and MERS, and in fact the World Health Organization in a study several years ago had predicted that we could be hit by a Pandemic from a variant of either Influenza or Coronavirus.

Then why did our CDC and Dr. Fauci error.  Nobody could doubt that these organizations are well trained and that Fauci is a brilliant investigator.  

But...Fauci also became a Washington Bureaucrat.   In a sense he forgot that he was a physician, and started to make decisions on his relationships and the political winds.  Fauci did not wish to call out WHO who clearly was having a symbiotic relationship with China, and he did not wish to go against politicians who said that there was nothing to worry about. 

In this case our leaders and scientists have failed us. 

 

Actually if you look at the medical literature and the recommendations from the CDC you will find that they track fairly well with the CDC recommendations changing after the medical literature.

 

If you would like I can put together a time line for you with the examples of the literature and the CDC recommendations.

 

I would agree that there was a lack of clarity during last year when there were other elements of the federal government, including the Office of the Secretary of HHS and other portions of the executive branch applying pressure to block the CDC communications and in some cases directly attacking the CDC.

[nocl]

6 minutes ago, stevenr597 said:

Actually the CDC and the FDA delayed the introduction of rapid test kits, deciding that testing was only necessary on a limited based and depending on the overly complex PCR assay.  The result that the delayed testing for well over one month, probably longer, which permitted the virus to infect the population of New York with disastrous results. 

 

Two different things - caribill was using the CDC requiring the initial samples to be sent directly to them as an example of the CDC yielding enforcement power within a state.  When what it really was the CDC not sending out test kits (at that time they were the only source) when they were having problems with reagents and the reliability of the tests.  Once that was resolved they did start sending out tests to the states. 

 

It was not the CDC that delayed the introduction of rapid test kits, since that authority resides strictly with the FDA.  CDC has no authority to approve drugs or diagnostics within the US.

[voljeep]

I want to know specifically what is going to happen if a 'rona positive is confirmed on a ship

 

1) that there are designated places on the ship - not that persons cabin - that the person(s) will be confined with trained health care and equipment provided on board

 

2) that the entire ship is NOT put into quarantine

 

3) even if a cruise is cut short - that the ship will be allowed to dock at the intended port of disembarkation, and passengers allowed off the ship and NOT quarantined 

 

I believe most, if not all, of the above is included in the CDC return to sailing. 

 

again if Princess and other individual cruise lines have to negotiate specifics with every single port - well, cruising when restarted will be much more limited than pre-covid

[nocl]

11 minutes ago, voljeep said:

How many ports do the Carnival Corporation ships visit ? - Does a Carnival Corp 'contract/agreement/whatever with each individual port cover all  Carnival / Princess / Hal ships or does each individual brand have to have their own set of contracts, etc

How its constructed would seem to be up to the cruise line, the CDC only established the requirement for them.

[voljeep]

4 minutes ago, nocl said:

the CDC only established the requirement for them.

because the CDC doesn't have the expertise ... gotcha

[chengkp75]

19 minutes ago, voljeep said:

How many ports do the Carnival Corporation ships visit ? - Does a Carnival Corp 'contract/agreement/whatever with each individual port cover all  Carnival / Princess / Hal ships or does each individual brand have to have their own set of contracts, etc

That would depend.  If the agreement was for all Carnival Corp ships that were to call at that port, the level of service would be stated based on the number of port calls per month or year, depending on how the contract payment terms are decided.  If they signed an agreement for each brand, then the level of service for each brand would be less, it's pretty simple.

Edited March 26, 2021 by chengkp75

[nocl]

It is my belief that the major reason why the cruise lines have not moved forward with the CDC is because when this is over they want to return to operating exactly like they did before the COVID out break.  That they do not have to meet any reporting, inspection, or review of operations than they did before.

 

As a result they have avoided providing CDC with health reports when ever possible by removing the ships from US waters. They have delayed meeting any new conditions imposed by CD  as long as they could with the crew transfer process.

 

In short they do not want to establish any precedent with either the US or with any of their cruise ports that would that might result with additional requirements after the end of the pandemic and complicate their return to the days of as long as they can get a problem off of the ship it is no longer their problem, instead of having to incur costs and responsibility for something that occurs on a ship continuing after the passengers are off ship.