Jump to content

US cruises could restart soon with 'passenger voyages by mid-July,' CDC says


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, CGTLH said:

Ships can bypass the required simulated test voyages carrying volunteers and jump to sailings with paying passengers if 98% of crew and 95% of passengers are fully vaccinated.

Going a bit farfetched on this change. It could show what the volunteer group would have done, just using paying passengers. Not sure if it was ever mentioned how many simulated voyages would have needed to be completed with the volunteers.

Then once satisfied with the "non-simulated voyages" outcome the vaccination required relaxed for passengers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, karl_nj said:

I believe Pfizer completed trials for 12-15 and has submitted them to the CDC for approval. 

They submitted at the beginning of April, and no word on when the necessary panels will convene to discuss approval. Contrast that with meetings announced within 72 hours for the first round of EUA's. Reads to me like the relevant parties are doing the requisite nemawashi and coming up short, so no meeting has been scheduled. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, karl_nj said:

I thought that was the NY Post, not USA Today.

 

 

Hmm, you may well be right about that. In which case I do apologize for the error.

But I still don’t trust USA Today as a news source for the reason mentioned by @twangster. Good to see the WSJ is also reporting it without the “as reported in USA Today” part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, LizzyBee23 said:

They submitted at the beginning of April, and no word on when the necessary panels will convene to discuss approval. Contrast that with meetings announced within 72 hours for the first round of EUA's. Reads to me like the relevant parties are doing the requisite nemawashi and coming up short, so no meeting has been scheduled. 

 

Dealing with the J&J stuff has probably also been taking up everyone's time.

Plus, until now, there has been enough demand for the vaccine from those 16+.  Only recently has demand slowed down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, JLMoran said:

Hmm, you may well be right about that. In which case I do apologize for the error.

But I still don’t trust USA Today as a news source for the reason mentioned by @twangster. Good to see the WSJ is also reporting it without the “as reported in USA Today” part.

 

I was never really a big fan of USA Today.  The only redeeming quality they had was that they employed Gene Sloan, who did a good job covering the cruise industry.  After they laid him off for cost cutting, their cruise reporting has been terrible (matching the rest of their reporting).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, karl_nj said:

 

Dealing with the J&J stuff has probably also been taking up everyone's time.

Plus, until now, there has been enough demand for the vaccine from those 16+.  Only recently has demand slowed down.

I listened to the entire VRBPAC meeting for the Pfizer EUA... I'm a huge nerd, had some free time back then, and was part of the Pfizer trial so had a vested interest in what they were discussing re: unblinding. There were pediatricians on the panel who voted against approval because of the language including 16 year olds, citing their belief that there is no pediatric emergency which could justify authorizing a vaccine under EUA for children.

EDIT: And to add, this was in the Nov-Dec timeframe of last year, when cases were climbing as fast as they ever have to the tragic peak we all remember.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, wordell1 said:

I know that the there are vaccine trials underway for under 16 but I don't know if it will include all, or just certain ages.  The CDC may have knowledge that one will get approval shortly.

Pfizer completed a small trial of 12-15 yr olds, but it remains to be seen if that's enough to get EUA, especially as cases nationwide wane.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bayley suggested there are two pathways to a restart.

One when vaccination requirements are met.

One when vaccination requirements are not met.

It's not that simple and they have questions submitted to the CDC for clarification but on first glimpse and highly simplified that's the gist of it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

Pfizer completed a small trial of 12-15 yr olds, but it remains to be seen if that's enough to get EUA, especially as cases nationwide wane.
 

Even if approved, that leaves a lot of unvaccinated children that are probably already booked on Summer cruises.  The anti vax crowd will not be happy and there may be issues with Florida ports. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, LizzyBee23 said:

I listened to the entire VRBPAC meeting for the Pfizer EUA... I'm a huge nerd, had some free time back then, and was part of the Pfizer trial so had a vested interest in what they were discussing re: unblinding. There were pediatricians on the panel who voted against approval because of the language including 16 year olds, citing their belief that there is no pediatric emergency which could justify authorizing a vaccine under EUA for children.

And they may have a point.  According to The Economist a 15 year old male who tests positive for COVID-19 has under a .01% chance of death and a .6% chance of hospitalization.  

See how age and illnesses change the risk of dying from covid-19 | The Economist

 

But I don't want to drag this into covid politics, so I won't comment further.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, karl_nj said:

And they may have a point.  According to The Economist a 15 year old male who tests positive for COVID-19 has under a .01% chance of death and a .6% chance of hospitalization.  

See how age and illnesses change the risk of dying from covid-19 | The Economist

 

But I don't want to drag this into covid politics, so I won't comment further.

 

 

 

I agree completely, and do think they have a point. The analysis that I think is relevant here wrt to kids cruising again is that you have two very risk-averse organizations coming to a head over this issue: FDA doesn't want to approve a vaccine for kids under EUA, and CDC is pushing for population vaccination levels that aren't achievable (especially without pediatric vaccines) to mitigate risk to their satisfaction (I think we can all agree that's an order of magnitude lower than what we find acceptable - signed someone who thinks it's criminal to cook a steak above med-rare).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.royalcaribbeanblog.com/2021/04/29/royal-caribbean-talks-about-cdc-letter-and-what-it-means-kids

 

Both he and Mr. Fain cautioned the letter is new, and there are follow up questions to determine, but Bayley felt kids are not out of the question, "We really do have to sit, study and and discuss with the CDC and understand all of these these different nuances."

Mr. Bayley believes the age restriction for kids, which now stands at 16, will be lowered shortly, "We've been told that in the coming weeks and months that that age limit will likely drop to 12. And and we're encouraged by that."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what about kids below 11?

Mr. Bayley said that age range is not enormous, "obviously we carry a lot of kids 11 and under, but relatively speaking, as a percentage of our total guest counts, it's quite a small number. So we're not overly concerned with that."

 

What does that mean? Not concerned with the numbers of under 11 affecting the 95% threshold? Or not concerned if they have to ban those kids?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

So what about kids below 11?

Mr. Bayley said that age range is not enormous, "obviously we carry a lot of kids 11 and under, but relatively speaking, as a percentage of our total guest counts, it's quite a small number. So we're not overly concerned with that."

 

What does that mean? Not concerned with the numbers of under 11 affecting the 95% threshold? Or not concerned if they have to ban those kids?

I read it as they won't push it over the threshold, which seems true. I imagine the guidelines will be something like require everyone who can be to be vaccinated, otherwise they must show up with a doctor's note saying that they 1.) can't be vaccinated and 2.) are fit to sail. I can tell you that the number of doctors willing to write such a note will be infinitesimally small. That would reserve the remaining 5% for those that legitimately need an exception but are otherwise healthy and kids under 12. I don't share Mr. Bayley's or Mr. Fain's optimism that a vaccine will be approved for children under 16 in time for the summer, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

So what about kids below 11?

Mr. Bayley said that age range is not enormous, "obviously we carry a lot of kids 11 and under, but relatively speaking, as a percentage of our total guest counts, it's quite a small number. So we're not overly concerned with that."

 

What does that mean? Not concerned with the numbers of under 11 affecting the 95% threshold? Or not concerned if they have to ban those kids?

From an investor's perspective (since this was an investor call) it should have negligible impact on company financials.  

There will be some that take the comments out of context but it's important to remember the question and answers were with large investment firms seeking to understand how to advise investors about the potential of the company's financial performance.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, twangster said:

 

If they cancel a Florida cruise because not enough guests were vaccinated does that put them at odds with the Florida Governor DeSantis EO that says they can't require guests to be vaccinated?  Are they violating the Governor's EO simply by asking if a guest is vaccinated?

So many questions.

I live in Florida and I support Gov. DeSantis, but with him putting out that EO of businesses in Florida cant require guests, customers to show proof of vaccinations drives me crazy. With one breath he wants cruising to start, but with the other he is putting a road block in the way. 

I personally feel that cruise lines should not fall under that mandate and the Governor needs to make a clarification in that EO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cruise ship operators will also be allowed to enter into agreements with multiple ports instead of just one single port, as long as all local health authorities and all ports sign off.

 

I think this is a good idea and that it would actually speed up the process of getting sailing again. One agreement, multiple ports. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One possible outcome is to follow the NCL model.  100% vaccines, no kids if not vaccinated by then, through the extent of the CSO, currently until Nov. 1.

The CDC gives them a place to point the finger when guests object.  

I do believe more kids will become eligible for a vaccine at some point.  Until then, the CDC made us do it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comments on the CDC's "letter to the cruise lines."

Up thread a poster commented on the huge legal and liability issues attendant to this so called "letter."  I get the need for and the apparent occurrence of this "twice weekly" dialogue between the CDC and the cruise lines that produced a letter and a news report of it.

Having said that, cruise lines are going to want something in writing from the Feds. I don't know about you, but having the CDC put anything in writing is a pretty scary undertaking. Have you looked at their web-page that contains supposed COVID Public Health guidance? It is simply not possible to understand it with any clarity and it's been like that since February of 2020.

The news (and this "letter") is obviously good news. I still hold that the impending hearing of FL's law suit on May 12th is a factor, among several others, in the CDC's apparent relaxing portions of the CSO or redefining what has to happen before cruises can restart.

Still, I'm baffled by the CDC's apparent need to keep tight control of a restart in the current circumstance. It is blindingly obvious that vaccines are safe and effective in reducing the disease burden of COVID and preventing transmission of it.

The CDC could make things really simple by recommending that cruise lines vaccinate crew members and passengers to the levels they've now established before restarting cruise operations from US ports - a one liner eliminates all of the confusion that the CDC has created with the garbage that is the CSO and, now, their obvious wish to retain tight control over a business operation of which, lawfully, they should have no control.

I'm still holding out for the Judge hearing FL's law suit on May 12th to stick it to the CDC and impose an injunction that prevents enforcement of the CDC's CSO ..... that's the simplest way to make things simple. Applying the law to a given circumstance is usually like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, JeffB said:

I'm still holding out for the Judge hearing FL's law suit on May 12th to stick it to the CDC and impose an injunction that prevents enforcement of the CDC's CSO ..... that's the simplest way to make things simple. 

That's likely a worse case scenario for the cruise lines.

It puts them in a position of operating with no vaccine requirement which will lead to a case of COVID-19 at some point, or the illusion of a case and the media goes hysteric.  Even thought that alleged case will likely be mild and most likely not involve death, that doesn't matter.  The fact that the case can't actually be traced to the cruise won't matter.

The CDC imposed vaccination requirement gives them a cleaner and safer (from media hysterics) path forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, CGTLH said:

 

  • CDC will update its testing and quarantine requirements for passengers and crew on sailings with paying passengers to align with the CDC's guidance for fully vaccinated people. So, for example, instead of taking a PCR lab test ahead of boarding vaccinated passengers can take a rapid antigen test upon embarkation.

I understand that the testing and quarantine requirements will better align with CDC's guidance for fully vaccinated people, but I am interested to see the mask mandates onboard. This week the CDC announced that fully vaccinated people do not have to wear a mask outdoors, unless in a large crowd. For instance, will the cruise lines allow people to sit by the pool without a mask on? Definitely a lot of things to figure out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, twangster said:

That's likely a worse case scenario for the cruise lines.

It puts them in a position of operating with no vaccine requirement which will lead to a case of COVID-19 at some point, or the illusion of a case and the media goes hysteric.  Even thought that alleged case will likely be mild and most likely not involve death, that doesn't matter.  The fact that the case can't actually be traced to the cruise won't matter.

The CDC imposed vaccination requirement gives them a cleaner and safer (from media hysterics) path forward.

We need to stop making room for the media to do this... There should be no expectation that cruising is any safer than any other vacation. The truth is there will be COVID cases on cruise ships, vaccine requirement or not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, twangster said:

From an investor's perspective (since this was an investor call) it should have negligible impact on company financials.  

There will be some that take the comments out of context but it's important to remember the question and answers were with large investment firms seeking to understand how to advise investors about the potential of the company's financial performance.  

From a big picture, business stand point....I completely understand and agree with them. 

From a personal, parent of a 9 and 5 year old stand point.....Im not sailing without my kids. I sure hope they make considerations for parents with smaller and smaller windows of opportunity to use our FCC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, SteveinSC said:

From a big picture, business stand point....I completely understand and agree with them. 

From a personal, parent of a 9 and 5 year old stand point.....Im not sailing without my kids. I sure hope they make considerations for parents with smaller and smaller windows of opportunity to use our FCC. 

I completely appreciate your perspective and understand your choice. If my kids were still kids I would be right there with you.

Cruise lines are dealing with the cards that are being dealt to them.  They want a royal flush but the best hand they have to play is a pair of deuces.  Staring at that pair of twos and wishing they were other cards isn't going to change the cards in their hand.

So they are going back to the dealer, in this case the CDC, and making sure they understand all the rules in the game to see if there is anyway to make it work.  

The outcome is not inevitable.  We need to wait until the CDC clarifies the rules of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, 12thman said:

If any cruise line said passengers would need proof of vaccination that really doesn't mean anything, there are fake vaccine cards one can get. How would cruise lines enforce such a requirement?

They couldn't.

But I really don't think you'll see it (fake vaccine cards) too much on cruises.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

They couldn't.

But I really don't think you'll see it (fake vaccine cards) too much on cruises.

It only takes one person to have covid-19 and the cruise comes to an end in Singapore right now. Wouldn't be happy if paying thousands of dollars for my cruise and someone uses a fake vaccine card to get on then comes down with covid. You know the CDC will be all over that and shut down cruises as the media will be all over it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the potential issues that I have not seen addressed is whether the vaccinated population and the Cruise taking demographic overlap enough to fill ships if they are permitted to sail. Overall statistics show about 30% of the US is vaccinated, and demand for the vaccine is plummeting. It may not be the case everywhere, but locally, vaccine sites are now walk-in for all, but there are virtually no takers. If that becomes a steady state, then the Cruise industry will only be able to accept reservations from a small percentage of the population if a vaccine requirement is in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 12thman said:

It only takes one person to have covid-19 and the cruise comes to an end in Singapore right now. Wouldn't be happy if paying thousands of dollars for my cruise and someone uses a fake vaccine card to get on then comes down with covid. You know the CDC will be all over that and shut down cruises as the media will be all over it. 

So long as virus is circulating on shore, there will be infections on cruise ships. Just like there are breakthrough infections now in nursing homes and elsewhere. The plurality of breakthroughs occurred in people over 60, and they still required hospitalization at about the same rate as non-vaccinated cases of COVID (meaning if you come down with symptomatic COVID post-vaccine, you have about a 6% chance of needing to be hospitalized if you are over 60 regardless of whether or not you've been vaccinated. The vaccine reduces your chances of being infected by 90%, which drops the overall risk factor by the same percentage).

I say all of that because your hypothetical news headline is coming anyway "BREAKTHROUGH INFECTION ON FULLY VACCINATED CRUISE SHIP!!!! SHOULD WE SINK ALL THE BOATS NOW OR LATER?". We can't change the media's appetite for hyperbole, and it shouldn't stop us from making appropriate decisions based on our own comfort with risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, LizzyBee23 said:

I say all of that because your hypothetical news headline is coming anyway "BREAKTHROUGH INFECTION ON FULLY VACCINATED CRUISE SHIP!!!! SHOULD WE SINK ALL THE BOATS NOW OR LATER?". We can't change the media's appetite for hyperbole, and it shouldn't stop us from making appropriate decisions based on our own comfort with risk.

I'm guessing your okay with fake vaccine cards and people coming on board carrying the virus? Did I say sink all the boats? NO ALL I SAID WAS I WOULDN'T BE HAPPY TO HAVE MY CRUISE END THAT WAY!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 12thman said:

I'm guessing your okay with fake vaccine cards and people coming on board carrying the virus? Did I say sink all the boats? NO ALL I SAID WAS I WOULDN'T BE HAPPY TO HAVE MY CRUISE END THAT WAY!!

No? In a perfect world, there would be no virus. But so long as virus is circulating in people in any measurable degree, it will find its way on a cruise ship. A vaccine mandate and testing may mediate it to some degree, but given the level of virus circulating here in the US today it truly is an inevitability. I'm saying it's a mistake to set the victory conditions at "zero COVID" on board because the headlines are coming anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...