Will Viking ever end daily Covid testing?

[Vineyard View]

What I keep reading here seems to be about what is perceived as Viking’s choice on what will happen if you test positive. All that I have read is that Viking, in several documented situations, has been a fierce fighter for their passengers who do test positive in countries that DEMAND the passenger disembark and quarantine in said country. It seems to me that regardless of which cruise line you sail on, if you have Covid, and this happens in one of these countries, you will be disembarked. Personally, I would rather be on a Viking cruise, who will advocate for me, rather than another line that may not do so? I have also read in many threads, that Viking has cabins designated for Covid positive passengers when there is not a demand from the country to disembark. I am not sure how much more Viking can do, or any other boxes can be checked, to take care of their passengers. 
If the real argument here is that people would just prefer to sail on a line that doesn’t test, or no longer has testing protocols in place, so that you can just cruise without knowing how many people you may have been Covid exposed to, then I believe there are opportunities to do so. I sincerely believe that without judgement. It could be that there is a continued high demand for Viking cruises because people would rather enjoy the safety of the protocols.
Based on several itineraries we are looking at, Viking continues to be doing the right thing for their customer base as the ships are well booked. 
We have been looking at four different lines for a cruise next year. A big piece of our choosing Viking again (along with all the wonderful experiences we have had on prior V cruises) is the knowledge that they take safety to a level others do not. 

[Let Me Travel!]

On 4/13/2022 at 9:51 AM, longterm said:

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough; here is what I was trying to say: 

Even with the daily saliva test requirement, Viking doesn't appear to have any trouble finding passengers for their cruises. I don't think they're at capacity (and doubt any other cruise lines are either, other than the budget cruises, perhaps), but they seem to have enough guests to at least make their cruises profitable for them. 
 

We all know that cruise ships have had disease outbreaks from time to time--thankfully, not that often--but I applaud Viking for doing what they can to stay functional, while still being cautious while the pandemic  is still stubbornly lingering. 

Again, my opinion; we had 1 cruise postponed twice and finally went in December, albeit with a bit of trepidation; we decided to go because we knew that a) Viking had a strict mask policy while on-board and while on excursion buses, and b) we knew that everyone on board was vaccinated, and c) we knew that if someone did test positive, Viking would take steps to deal with it.

I just looked at an article by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) on this topic; you can read the article here: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2788067

As this article states, "The overall rate of false-positive results among the total rapid antigen test screens for SARS-CoV-2 was very low, consistent with other, smaller studies."

Here's the thing: when I go on an expensive trip, I can decide to worry about falling and breaking a leg, or having a flight canceled on me, or getting sick, or any number of possible calamities. I can choose to perseverate about whether I might get a false-positive Covid reading; or, I can go on the trip and have a wonderful time, which is what my wife and I did. We were tested 31 times--12 on the 1st trip, 19 on the 2nd--and came home happy and healthy.

 

You are awesome!

[Let Me Travel!]

On 4/12/2022 at 9:27 PM, jtwind said:

This contact tracing will make me want to wear a mask on Viking excursions later this month, whether required or not.  First, I'm used to it.  Second, I'm unattractive.  Third, if I get pinged, hopefully Viking will not consider me a close contact.  (CDC wouldn't.)

LOL!  me too! Unattractive people need masks!

[rizello]

I have a question.  If a cruise begins and ends in the US (such as Alaska, Great Lakes, or Puerto Rico), is there a reason to test at all since there is no requirement to provide a test to return from the cruise? 

 

I'm in favor of eliminating daily testing, but can see them continuing to do so as long as the US requires negative Covid test to re-enter US from international. So, what about the domestic cruises?  I can't see any reason to do any testing at all.

 

 

[CCWineLover]

3 minutes ago, rizello said:

I have a question.  If a cruise begins and ends in the US (such as Alaska, Great Lakes, or Puerto Rico), is there a reason to test at all since there is no requirement to provide a test to return from the cruise? 

 

I'm in favor of eliminating daily testing, but can see them continuing to do so as long as the US requires negative Covid test to re-enter US from international. So, what about the domestic cruises?  I can't see any reason to do any testing at all.

 

 

I asked this exact question on our recent FLL-LAX Panama Canal cruise.  Viking told me that yes, one of the reasons is because we went to some international ports and the USA is still requiring 24 hour tests before re-entry.  I then asked what if we didn't go international - like Mississippi ?   They said Viking would still require testing because that is their policy and they didn't see that would change soon.  The reasoning is the same we've heard before:  testing before flying helps people not have to fly if they are positive.  Testing on board helps the more vulnerable stay safe every day by quarantining those who test positive during the cruise - regardless of whether it is international.

 

I sort of got the idea that regardless of whether it makes sense or not, the current policy will continue into the indefinite future.   Someone posted on another thread that they though it may have to do with getting a big break on insurance and that until the current policy is up, things will not change.  Sounds plausible, but who knows.

[SJD117]

6 minutes ago, CCWineLover said:

I asked this exact question on our recent FLL-LAX Panama Canal cruise.  Viking told me that yes, one of the reasons is because we went to some international ports and the USA is still requiring 24 hour tests before re-entry.  I then asked what if we didn't go international - like Mississippi ?   They said Viking would still require testing because that is their policy and they didn't see that would change soon.  The reasoning is the same we've heard before:  testing before flying helps people not have to fly if they are positive.  Testing on board helps the more vulnerable stay safe every day by quarantining those who test positive during the cruise - regardless of whether it is international.

 

I sort of got the idea that regardless of whether it makes sense or not, the current policy will continue into the indefinite future.   Someone posted on another thread that they though it may have to do with getting a big break on insurance and that until the current policy is up, things will not change.  Sounds plausible, but who knows.

My theory: The 24-hour testing requirement before reentry into the U.S. gives Viking both political and medical cover to continue daily testing. (Remember that Americans comprise the vast majority of Viking passengers.) If the U.S. drops the 24-hour requirement, then Viking will drop daily testing. If the requirement stays in place, then daily testing will continue. 

[Jim Avery]

My theory started when I first heard of them putting the labs onboard.  Once there, they will never stop using them....

[njhorseman]

34 minutes ago, CCWineLover said:

I asked this exact question on our recent FLL-LAX Panama Canal cruise.  Viking told me that yes, one of the reasons is because we went to some international ports and the USA is still requiring 24 hour tests before re-entry.

Viking's wrong. The USA only requires a test for passengers arriving from international destinations by air. Those arriving by land or sea do not have to be tested.

[njhorseman]

25 minutes ago, SJD117 said:

My theory: The 24-hour testing requirement before reentry into the U.S. gives Viking both political and medical cover to continue daily testing. (Remember that Americans comprise the vast majority of Viking passengers.) If the U.S. drops the 24-hour requirement, then Viking will drop daily testing. If the requirement stays in place, then daily testing will continue. 

Sorry, but there are other cruise lines that provide a pre disembarkation antigen test for those passengers who need them in order to fly home, which includes those who fly home to the USA. Those cruise lines are not doing routine daily PCR testing of every passenger on their ships.

[SJD117]

9 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

Sorry, but there are other cruise lines that provide a pre disembarkation antigen test for those passengers who need them in order to fly home, which includes those who fly home to the USA. Those cruise lines are not doing routine daily PCR testing of every passenger on their ships.

Why are you sorry? My theory is just a theory -- no more, no less. You can disagree with it as you wish, and I won't be offended.

[SailorPaulH]

Apologies if this has been asked in another thread, but I couldn't find it. If you test Covid +ve 10-90 days out and therefore have documented proof of recovery under the accepted guidelines, does that eliminate the need for the onboard daily testing along with the other test(s) required en route? Logically it should (as false +ve would be a major issue), but the Viking paperwork does not state this specifically.

[zalusky]

1 hour ago, SailorPaulH said:

Apologies if this has been asked in another thread, but I couldn't find it. If you test Covid +ve 10-90 days out and therefore have documented proof of recovery under the accepted guidelines, does that eliminate the need for the onboard daily testing along with the other test(s) required en route? Logically it should (as false +ve would be a major issue), but the Viking paperwork does not state this specifically.

People have been known to catch Covid twice so I would think no!

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-60913637

[SailorPaulH]

53 minutes ago, zalusky said:

People have been known to catch Covid twice so I would think no!

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-60913637

Albeit it rare, I agree it is possible to catch Covid twice - my concern is that the 10-90 day window was created to acknowledge that the PCR test cannot distinguish between a re-infection and dead virus fragments from that window of time: 

 

"Because the PCR test is so sensitive, it can detect very small amounts of virus material. This means that the test can continue to detect fragments of SARS-CoV-2 virus even after you’ve recovered from COVID-19 and are no longer contagious. So you may continue to test positive if you've had COVID-19 in the distant past, even though you can’t spread the SARS-CoV-2 virus to others."

 

https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diagnostics/21462-covid-19-and-pcr-testing

 

If the pre-travel tests (and return tests) can be declared unnecessary because of the 10-90 day rule, then the daily tests should also be rendered useless as they employ the same PCR testing system - that seems to be where Viking's cruise instructions are not clear.

 

 

[CurlerRob]

3 hours ago, SailorPaulH said:

If the pre-travel tests (and return tests) can be declared unnecessary because of the 10-90 day rule, then the daily tests should also be rendered useless as they employ the same PCR testing system - that seems to be where Viking's cruise instructions are not clear.

Your question is a good one, for more reasons than you mention.

 

FWIW, I have not seen anything written that states that pre, return or daily tests are "unnecessary" or waived - rather, my understanding is  that a  'certificate of recovery' will be a 'get out of jail' card if you test positive due to the sensitivity of the PCR test. I may be wrong and recently infected pax may not be tested, but that's not showing in Viking's FAQs.

 

As well, Viking 'batches' pax tests (apparently in fours) - so a positive from a recently recovered person might impact 3 others, requiring separate reruns and more elapsed time, etc., so I would hope they have thought this through or have dealt with it previously.

 

I'd suggest that this one is an excellent question for tellus@viking.com or for follow-up by your TA. 🍺🥌

[zalusky]

2 hours ago, CurlerRob said:

Your question is a good one, for more reasons than you mention.

 

FWIW, I have not seen anything written that states that pre, return or daily tests are "unnecessary" or waived - rather, my understanding is  that a  'certificate of recovery' will be a 'get out of jail' card if you test positive due to the sensitivity of the PCR test. I may be wrong and recently infected pax may not be tested, but that's not showing in Viking's FAQs.

 

As well, Viking 'batches' pax tests (apparently in fours) - so a positive from a recently recovered person might impact 3 others, requiring separate reruns and more elapsed time, etc., so I would hope they have thought this through or have dealt with it previously.

 

I'd suggest that this one is an excellent question for tellus@viking.com or for follow-up by your TA. 🍺🥌

Fair enough.  Do we have examples of this happening on Viking beyond the theoretical!

[Twitchly]

8 hours ago, SailorPaulH said:

Apologies if this has been asked in another thread, but I couldn't find it. If you test Covid +ve 10-90 days out and therefore have documented proof of recovery under the accepted guidelines, does that eliminate the need for the onboard daily testing along with the other test(s) required en route? Logically it should (as false +ve would be a major issue), but the Viking paperwork does not state this specifically.

Over on the site that must not be named, one poster said she had recovered recently from Covid and brought a letter from her doctor to that effect, as well as her test results. She told Viking at the beginning of the cruise about her situation and gave them a copy of the letter. She was tested daily. She initially tested negative on the cruise but then tested positive. Viking sent a copy of the letter to Basel (she was on a River cruise), and authorities in Basel said she didn’t need to quarantine. After that, she tested negative again. So there’s one person’s story.

Edited April 20, 2022 by Twitchly

[OnTheJourney]

I'm trying to glean whatever logic may exist in declaring masking optional but yet doing daily testing  🤔  Like the robot used to say in "Lost in Space"....'that does not compute'....

Edited April 22, 2022 by AnyWayIsGood

[Mich3554]

18 minutes ago, AnyWayIsGood said:

I'm trying to glean whatever logic may exist in declaring masking optional but yet doing daily testing  🤔  Like the robot used to say in "Lost in Space"....'that does not compute'....

Masks are no longer optional.  Received for the cruise we are getting on tomorrow.
 

• Face masks are required for all guests and crew members when moving around the ship and while ashore – whether that is exploring independently or enjoying a Viking shore excursion. Viking will provide complimentary approved masks in your stateroom upon arrival.
 

[SJD117]

1 hour ago, Mich3554 said:

Masks are no longer optional.  Received for the cruise we are getting on tomorrow.
 

• Face masks are required for all guests and crew members when moving around the ship and while ashore – whether that is exploring independently or enjoying a Viking shore excursion. Viking will provide complimentary approved masks in your stateroom upon arrival.
 

Where is your cruise and what is the ship?

[CILCIANRQTS]

1 hour ago, Mich3554 said:

Masks are no longer optional.  Received for the cruise we are getting on tomorrow.
 

• Face masks are required for all guests and crew members when moving around the ship and while ashore – whether that is exploring independently or enjoying a Viking shore excursion. Viking will provide complimentary approved masks in your stateroom upon arrival.
 

I suspect this is old language that never got updated.

When we boarded our cruise 2 weeks ago, even the room steward said “Fuggedabout it!”. Many never wore masks.

[Mich3554]

41 minutes ago, CILCIANRQTS said:

I suspect this is old language that never got updated.

When we boarded our cruise 2 weeks ago, even the room steward said “Fuggedabout it!”. Many never wore masks.

I just received an email that specifically said masks were required.  We get on tomorrow, will definitely find out then.  

[Mich3554]

1 hour ago, SJD117 said:

Where is your cruise and what is the ship?

GE, Bragi.  We board tomorrow.

[millybess]

10 minutes ago, Mich3554 said:

I just received an email that specifically said masks were required.  We get on tomorrow, will definitely find out then.  

We're very interested in this.  We got an email yesterday about the requirements for our early May cruise and masking wasn't one of them.  Maybe that email is yet to arrive.

[LindaS272]

23 minutes ago, Mich3554 said:

GE, Bragi.  We board tomorrow.

Grand European, River cruise. That explains it. As far as I know the masking has only resurfaced on river cruises. Thus the confusion here—because we’re on the oceans forum.

[duquephart]

9 minutes ago, LindaS272 said:

Grand European, River cruise. That explains it. As far as I know the masking has only resurfaced on river cruises. Thus the confusion here—because we’re on the oceans forum.

 

Still a bad sign.