nate91

Apparently CDC Director Robert Redfield and Richard Fain are in the conference. Oh to be a fly on the wall (or Pence's head) in that meeting as they go head to head. From what I've heard Redfield is very against cruises starting back up in the foreseeable future.

Apparently CDC Director Robert Redfield and Richard Fain are in the conference. Oh to be a fly on the wall (or Pence's head) in that meeting as they go head to head. From what I've heard Redfield is very against cruises starting back up in the foreseeable future.

Apparently CDC Director Robert Redfield and Richard Fain are in the conference. Oh to be a fly on the wall (or Pence's head) in that meeting as they go head to head. From what I've heard Redfield is very against cruises starting back up in the foreseeable future.

Apparently CDC Director Robert Redfield and Richard Fain are in the conference. Oh to be a fly on the wall (or Pence's head) in that meeting as they go head to head. From what I've heard Redfield is very against cruises starting back up in the foreseeable future.

Looks like it starts in about ten minutes. Finally something to give us hope!

Sure hope this gets thrown out of court. That's the stock market for crying out loud! If you can't afford the risk find a less risky investment or diversify. 

Hopefully the fly drone has been recharged and it can land in the room somewhere to listen in.   

Sounds like there's not much to do at the port, you'll really have to take an excursion. Looks like normally a Carnival port, but I'm sure COVID has changed many things around. Found some good info here:
https://www.caribeez.com/dominican-republic/article/la-romana-cruise-port
Not decided yet if this is a "stay on the ship" port or not. I have decided that I'm very sad about St. Lucia.

Allow the cruise industry to restart or keep it shuttered ........ a political decision? I think this is more likely to involve two different viewpoints both of them with supporting data behind them. One of them seriously flawed.
The CDC believes congregate settings, such as those present on cruise ships have a high enough risk of promoting viral spread and endangering the Public Health to be curtailed. The data is unambiguous. Congregate settings do promote viral spread. The administration believes that with mitigation measures present, such as those proposed by the Sail-Safe Panel, the risk is sufficiently lowered that the economic benefits of green-lighting the cruise industry outweigh the Public Health risks.  The economic harm to the cruise industry including every facet of supporting operations being rendered by the CDC's no sail order is also unambiguous. It is significant. I'd call it catastrophic when the entire supply chain for the cruise industry is considered. 
Two sides both with fair points. The CDC has been wrong before in matters involving SARS-CoV-2. They are wrong again extending the no-sail order for the cruise industry
My personal view is that the CDC has, from the beginning of the pandemic in the US, over-stated the public health risks. That is not to say, by any means, that SARS-CoV-2 is harmless. It is not. It has the capacity to produce significant morbidity and mortality but the degree of it is highly age stratified allowing for targeted, specific containment measures instead of mass lock-downs. Moreover, and as our knowledge of the virus has increased, we have learned that simple mitigation measures that are layered are effective in controlling viral spread short of shuttering the economy and immobilizing citizens. Meanwhile, the protection of vulnerable populations has improved along with improved patient management when this cohort does become infected and requires hospitalization.
During the entire pandemic, it is only now, 6 months down the road, that governments at the national level and local levels are realizing that the continued curtailment of social and economic activity is not sustainable. Cost/Risk/Benefit analysis is taking shape globally. Countries are recognizing that lock-down were counterproductive at the start and now continue to be more useless in controlling viral spread. Not only is this approach not sustainable but it also has already created previously unfathomable social and economic hardships that having nothing to do with the health related issues involving COVID-19.
To sum it up, the damage done implementing many aspects of the CDC's approach to disease control has been enormous with little benefit to the public health. Keeping the cruise industry shuttered is just another example of bad policy with huge objectifiable downsides and few objectifiable benefits.
 

Agreed. Plan B for me was booking Majesty of the Seas...for a sailing in May 2020. "Cruising will definitely be back by May," I said!
 

It's fair that the forum rules don't support political discussions and I can easily adhere to those rules but to think that this whole shut down is not at least as much political as it is health based would not pass the smell test.  The emerging stories, Royal hiring a Government Relations expert, the different port authorities making their comments heard, CLIA weighing in, even some other line's CEO's speaking out, it's all too much.  The writing is on the wall with what's actually happening and we can safely say that without weighing in on the actual politics of it.   

I know it doesn't change the fact we are all not sailing but it is a different type of frustration compared to just waiting for the health factors to be sorted out.  

 

Trying to leave politics out of it, but simply by comparison, restricting cruises now, and especially until February, makes no sense. I think Vegas is the closest land based approximation of a cruise. 
- Trying to keep people in a small bubble (the Strip)
- Casinos, fine dining, hotel rooms
- Visiting different destinations during the day but returning to home base at night
- Live shows (currently closed in Vegas due to COVID, but scheduled to return in November.)
 
Vegas is open (with restrictions like social distancing and masks). I see no reason that is not politically motivated for either 
A. It's not dangerous. Cruises can reopen like Vegas, Walt Disney World, etc.
B. It's too dangerous. Cruises should stay closed, and Vegas, Disney World, theme parks, need to close down as well.
Having said that, my trust that the CDC is doing this out of goodwill for our safety is very low. 

And they remained open, and are now having their lowest deaths since June. My point is that the CDC is essentially playing favorites while saying they are protecting us, but it's pretty hard to believe them right now.

And they remained open, and are now having their lowest deaths since June. My point is that the CDC is essentially playing favorites while saying they are protecting us, but it's pretty hard to believe them right now.

Trying to leave politics out of it, but simply by comparison, restricting cruises now, and especially until February, makes no sense. I think Vegas is the closest land based approximation of a cruise. 
- Trying to keep people in a small bubble (the Strip)
- Casinos, fine dining, hotel rooms
- Visiting different destinations during the day but returning to home base at night
- Live shows (currently closed in Vegas due to COVID, but scheduled to return in November.)
 
Vegas is open (with restrictions like social distancing and masks). I see no reason that is not politically motivated for either 
A. It's not dangerous. Cruises can reopen like Vegas, Walt Disney World, etc.
B. It's too dangerous. Cruises should stay closed, and Vegas, Disney World, theme parks, need to close down as well.
Having said that, my trust that the CDC is doing this out of goodwill for our safety is very low. 

There is ONE important thing you are constantly avoiding to see which is that cruise lines are NOT governed in any by the United States, but have different standards and requirements outlined below:
Ships from the main cruise lines all will have at least one doctor and two nurses onboard. Many larger ships sail with two doctors and three or four nurses. Ships must have medical staff on call 24 hours. Medical personnel (both physicians and registered nurses) must have at least three (3) years of postgraduate experience in general and emergency medicine or board certification in emergency medicine, family medicine or internal medicine.
To get an idea of the staff's credentials, most cruise lines requires that its physicians be registered in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, South Africa, a European Union country or any other country approved by the fleet medical director. Medical personnel must also have completed the required number of years of training in a recognized school of medicine.
Staff must be able to perform advanced life support practices, emergency cardiovascular care and minor surgical procedures. They are expected to stabilize seriously ill patients, perform reasonable diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, and help evacuate seriously sick or injured patients. Doctors and nurses also are required to be fluent in the predominant language of the ship.
Cruise ship medical facilities must adhere to the standards set by the American College of Emergency Physicians. The ACEP guidelines dictate that the infirmary must contain the proper equipment to handle a range of treatments and diagnostics. Among its equipment, the facility should have wheelchairs, a stretcher, back board for spine immobilization, lab capabilities for tests, oxygen, EKG capability, two defibrillators, cardiac monitors and other equipment to gauge vital signs.
The Cruise Line International Association, the world's largest cruise industry trade organization, also sets standards of care for its member cruise lines.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says ship infirmary capabilities vary depending on size, length of sailing and passenger demographics. The CDC compares shipboard facilities to ambulatory care centers.
As it stands now, their are stories floating around of what really was done. In my 30+ years in the Medical Malpractice field, I've seen and heard alot of stories and I've learned not to jump to conclusions as we have not seen the videos, transcripts, meds, etc. in order to come to a FINAL conclusion as to who is at fault, but, what I've seen so far is that this child had meningitis before boarding the cruise and RCG did the best it could. No doubt this is a child who will have a rough road ahead of them. My prayers will remain with the family who is going through this whole ordeal. Let's all keep calm and be rational thinkers as we cannot be put in the same shoes as this family or this child.

Advanced care is certainly not the equivalent of "world class and world leading" (as would be Mayo).  You can beat me up all you want with this, but it's not the same.  And  you're believing the lawyer's version of this story.  That's one side, and everyone lies.

Every story has two sides and when it comes down to money vs the truth, the truth doesn't always win out. Even when it should. 

And it turns out all false positives.
Somehow I don't see all the same clickbait articles extoling the virtues of cruises that are indeed safe!

In the case of Casino Royale, it's such a steal of a deal and there will be others where the came from.  So ride it out until you cant knowing there will be other deals down the road.

I will say that I finally got moved, and had something funny happen to me: I went on Liberty of the Seas in 2018, Independence's sister. Well of all the luck, I was assigned the EXACT same cabin that I had on Liberty on Independence! Now I'm wondering if it was indeed random or if someone went back to see what cabin I had on Liberty. If it was random that seems like a very low percentage chance with the hundreds of balcony cabins on the ship. Not like I had a GS or anything, haha!

I will say that I finally got moved, and had something funny happen to me: I went on Liberty of the Seas in 2018, Independence's sister. Well of all the luck, I was assigned the EXACT same cabin that I had on Liberty on Independence! Now I'm wondering if it was indeed random or if someone went back to see what cabin I had on Liberty. If it was random that seems like a very low percentage chance with the hundreds of balcony cabins on the ship. Not like I had a GS or anything, haha!

I will say that I finally got moved, and had something funny happen to me: I went on Liberty of the Seas in 2018, Independence's sister. Well of all the luck, I was assigned the EXACT same cabin that I had on Liberty on Independence! Now I'm wondering if it was indeed random or if someone went back to see what cabin I had on Liberty. If it was random that seems like a very low percentage chance with the hundreds of balcony cabins on the ship. Not like I had a GS or anything, haha!

Regarding cruising from Port Everglades in Fort Lauderdale........FL's Governor Desantis has long been an advocate of re-opening with sensible mitigation measures in place based on local data. Just speaking for Broward Co. where Port Everglades is, positivity rates have been under 5% for the last 14d straight. All other metrics designed to contextualize data points such as deaths and new case numbers using ED visits for Influenza and COVID like symptoms, hospital admissions, hospital ICU bed spaces occupied, ventilators used are all downward trending. 
To be clear, Desantis' announcement last Friday changed nothing with respect to masks and distancing. He had previously closed all bars (establishments relying on > 50% of revenue from alcohol sales) in the state. He cancelled that order allowing such drinking establishments across the state to open on Saturday. Other things like parks with playgrounds can re-open. Proprietors of both bars and restaurants must still limit capacity to 50% indoors, newly to 100% outdoors given the remaining requirement to space tables 6' apart or baring that have plastic barriers between booths. Patrons must still mask entering, exiting or moving around in a restaurant or bar. The biggest difference for both patrons and proprietors is that local officials cannot impose/collect fines for failing to comply with an existing order defining a mitigation measure. Officials and proprietors can point out violations and educate. Patrons are asked to act responsibly given the new freedoms...... mask and social distance where it is appropriate to do so.
For now, Fort Lauderdale has achieved control of the virus if the data points I mentioned above are indicators of that. Besides advocating for re-opening, resuming social and economic activity to save jobs and boost FL's economy, he has also been an advocate of avoiding government over-reach with respect to both mitigation orders and enforcement. He has opposed from the start fining individuals and businesses, but leaving that up to local officials, for failure to comply with emergency orders instead promoting freedom from the threat of government over-reach and at the same time pointing out that with freedom comes responsibility to act in the best interests of community public health. My observation is that vulnerable cohorts have been nearly 100% compliant. Younger folks have been probably 60-70% complaint and that is the basic level of compliance required to limit viral spread (along with other measures being applied in a layered way).
My bet is the stage is set for the CDC not to extend the No-Sail Order and it will expire possibly without comment on Wednesday. That will allow a restart of cruising out of Fort Lauderdale. If you've been paying attention, you will know exactly what that will mean and what the first cruises departing from Port Everglades will look like. I think it is going to take 4-5 weeks before non-employee passengers will sail. If all goes well, November 1st is the target date. First operations will involve test runs of 2-3 days with full crew and employees acting as PAX...... the entire dance is going to be very precise, choreographed and closely controlled. It's a proof of concept and the press will be unrelenting if anything goes wrong. RCCL and Celebrity will make sure nothing does go wrong and information will be strictly controlled while marketing transparency.
 

Their lawyer is rumoured to be considering a case against the virus since it diminished his potential income from this and the many other cases he claims to have against Royal.