Jump to content

Royal Caribbean opts into CDC highly vax program


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, Vancity Cruiser said:

 I don’t know how Royal could fall under the threshold of 95%. They require all eligible passengers to provide proof of vaccination so where would the 5% unvaxxed even come from?


In the 5 to 11 age group if there were a large number unvaccinated and sailing  ….. as of right now and even with the changes coming on March 1, that age group is not required to be vaccinated to sail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Vancity Cruiser said:

I think that ever since vaccines were approved for 5-17 year olds Carnival has not had to employ the ‘lottery ststem’.

Under this new program where children under 5 are not included in the 95% I don’t know how Royal could fall under the threshold of 95%. They require all eligible passengers to provide proof of vaccination so where would the 5% unvaxxed even come from?

They don't require 5-11 to be vaccinated even though they are eligible for the vaccine.  

They do require 12+ to be vaccinated.

The 5% unvax are the 5-11 unvaccinated and any other eligible unvaccinated 12+.  Yes, Royal does have a system to allow very specific exemptions for 12+.  It's been very hard to get but it does exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, BowTieBrigade said:

This very much upsets me. I can only imagine walking around unmasked with my kids in tow asking why they have to wear theirs. I really hope this changes before my next (July) sailing…

You can continue to wear your mask (for social reasons) or get your kids the shots (I assume your kids are old enough since they are walking around). I like the mask optional - should have always been that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, danv3 said:

  

Does the CDC actually require pre-cruise testing of all passengers? Admittedly, their program is about as clear as you'd expect from a government agency, but as far as I can tell, the new CDC voluntary program only requires embarkation tests for crew, with pax only required to test in the case of close contact or when experiencing symptoms.

https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/cruise/management/technical-instructions-for-cruise-ships.html

I just went through the link above and saw nothing concerning pre-cruise testing of passengers. Hmmmm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Swar said:

You can continue to wear your mask (for social reasons) or get your kids the shots (I assume your kids are old enough since they are walking around). I like the mask optional - should have always been that way.

 There’s no need to be snipey, she misunderstood and thought that her vaccinated kids would have to wear masks at all times if they were going to go to Adventure Ocean at all. …. And not all kids who can “walk around” can currently get vaccinated, I’m assuming you know that kids under 5 can also “walk around”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Swar said:

Anybody else notice (in the manual) that CDC wants people to wear proximity bands that will notify a person if they are too close to someone else or to track/record your movements for easier contact tracing? I read 1984 recently, sounds familiar... 

You can be tracked all the time regardless of being on a cruise ship or on land, the 1984 analogy is quite unnecessary.  The "tracelet" contact tracing bands were used early on (mostly on the Singapore embarkations as I recall", on board cameras and facial recognition were used on many other ships as a means of contact tracing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, JasonOasis said:

Are there any ships sailing now higher than 60% capacity? The reason I'm asking is heading into spring and summer as Royal increases capacity could that increase capacity result in them employing a Carnival style lottery system to insure they hit 95% vaccination rate

I think the opposite will happen with increased capacity.  

Increased capacity will help them, not hurt them, as they seek 95%.  Everyone over 11 has to be vaccinated.  That's the vast majority of cruisers. 

As capacity climbs so does the number of vaccinated disproportionately over unvax because of the 11+ vax required combined with those that have vaxxed their 5+.   

The most common cabin on all ship has capacity for two guests maximum.  As they increase capacity that helps them get to and stay above 95%.  There are typically fewer cabins that hold 3 or 4 or more guests which is why they sell out faster and have a higher premium.  These are the cabins that are more likely to have an unvax child and there are many fewer of these cabins on most ships compared to the quintessential double cabin.

It's not like unvaccinated children are booking cruises and sailing by themselves.  

If you were to look at a bell curve for the distribution of vax passengers by age group the 95% would be well to the left of the peak since nearly everyone is vax.  Growing capacity doesn't hurt them with reference to the vax rates on board.

Royal has already offered that in December they were reaching in the high 90s, above 95% on most sailings.  

Royal agreed to opt-in because they know they can continue to offer a family cruise experience without doing the disgraceful NCL and Carnival stuff those cruise lines did to families under the original CSO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

I think you'll see a good number of parents of under 12 kids get their kids vaccinated solely to maximize their onboard experience

I'd tend to think that parents would make the decision based on a risk benefit analysis versus their kids getting different treatment on a cruise vacation. Maybe I'm too optimistic about people's mindset and what you stated is correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Swar said:

You can continue to wear your mask (for social reasons) or get your kids the shots (I assume your kids are old enough since they are walking around). I like the mask optional - should have always been that way.

I agree it should have always been mask-optional, but I’m more referring to the logic of the thing. It’s been accepted that early claims that the vaccine prevented people from catching and spreading covid were incorrect. So the vaccines are really for self-protection more than the protection of others. Treating unvaccinated kids differently from vaccinated adults, then, doesn’t really make sense, especially considering that everyone has to test negative before getting onboard and, I would be willing to bet, kids are less likely to go on shore excursions and leave the controlled environment during the trip. I only hope that the protocols continue to open up quickly and steadily. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Pooch said:

Curious why you’d think kids are less likely to go on excursions?  I don’t think it’s that common that parents leave the kids on board & go ashore without them.  If we’re on a family vacation, we go places as a family.

I think it's less likely parents go on excursions if their only options are the often overpriced RC excursions. But I agree, I can't imagine that many go on excursions and leave kids (pre-teen) on the ship. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Pooch said:

Curious why you’d think kids are less likely to go on excursions?  I don’t think it’s that common that parents leave the kids on board & go ashore without them.  If we’re on a family vacation, we go places as a family.

Because kids can’t go themselves. Either parents and kids go together or adults go by themselves. There is no scenario where kids go by themselves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Pooch said:

So they’re not less likely just not more likely?  Doesn’t really make a difference, just thought it was an odd comment.

Right, my point was there is no reason to believe that kids are exposed to an uncontrolled environment (e.g. stepping off a fully tested ship) at a rate higher than the adults, such that it would justify an increased need to prevent them, specifically, from exposing others. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Pooch said:

Ok but the kids are more likely to be unvaxxed.  I think that may be the point 🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️

 

10 hours ago, BowTieBrigade said:

It’s been accepted that early claims that the vaccine prevented people from catching and spreading covid were incorrect. So the vaccines are really for self-protection more than the protection of others. Treating unvaccinated kids differently from vaccinated adults, then, doesn’t really make sense, especially considering that everyone has to test negative before getting onboard

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, EmptyNestTravels said:

I found this updated guidance for cruise passengers on CDC website (updated on Feb 15, 2022).

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/travelers/cruise-travel-during-covid19.html#before-you-board-testing

1462067798_ScreenShot2022-02-20at21_36_51.thumb.png.b0e49c243ae31951e1b69816a2aa1e6d.png

This is actually outdated with the Feb 17 guidance. Up to date gives you 3 days for your test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if any cruise lines opted in under the ‘not highly vaccinated’ category. It would definitely open up a marketing opportunity to those who are not comfortable taking vaccines but looking to get back to cruising.

 

Edit: Just had a look at the dashboard. It appears MSC has 3 ships listed as ‘not highly vaccinated’. Every other ship is ‘highly vaccinated’ and interesting not a single ship has opted for ‘vaccination standard of excellence’.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Templecruiser said:

Isn't 3 days if your fully vaxed and boosted, but still 2 days if fully vaccinated?

 

12 minutes ago, Pooch said:

Can anyone confirm (or not) that testing for vaxxed & boosted is now 3 days instead of 2?  I see that the CDC now recommends that but cannot find anywhere stating Royal has made that change.


I’m just going to do it within 2 days anyway to avoid problems …… I’d hate to get to the terminal and then get refused boarding just because I tested at 3 days ahead instead of 2 lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As it appears that the pandemic is easing in North America and pretty much globally and as we get back to cruising, I thought it important to bring to the attention of cruisers here the tools the CDC has recently provided for you to assess your own risks of traveling for any kind of vacation be it cruising or something else. They've been mentioned in this thread but, below I'll provide the links that can use to:

  • Find out what the COVID risk level in the state and county your are traveling to or from, e.g., Port Everglades is in Broward Co., FL. The country risk of transmission is medium (based on cases/100k population and 10% of hospital admissions are for COVID), viral prevalence is below 5% (controlled).
  • Based on your personal health and vaccination status, then finding a county's risk level, you can find what mitigation measures are recommended for you personally.
  • Using the Cruise Ship Color Status link, you can see what the vaccination status of guests is and a rough guide to onboard viral prevalence. This might be useful for last minute cancellations where you're just not comfortable about this.

For at least a year, I've been railing about the CDC's inability to provide objective based guidance that recommends how we should protect ourselves, or not, in the pandemic. I object to being told by government what I should do and how I should behave. I've also railed about the inaccuracy of using case counts as a risk assessment tool without context.

Well, the recently released guidance is here now and you can make your own decisions on when and where you feel it's safe to go given your health and vaccination status and how you might want to protect yourself if and when you do go. IOW, for the most part, you decide, not government.**

** To this statement I want to be clear. Federal regulations for masking in certain places under federal jurisdiction, e.g., airports, airplanes, cruise terminals, are still in place. They are set to expire on March 19th. Not sure they will be renewed and if they aren't it is further evidence that government paternalism is giving way to self determination - this is a very good thing, IMO.

Also, nothing has changed with respect to a private business stipulating things like no shirt, no shoes, no service. IOW, RCL can skip a port, tell you not to go ashore on your own or tell you to mask onboard. An order like that is based on RCL's own assessment of health risks to guests and crew. There are also still some regulatory requirements issued by the CDC that have legal standing as long as a ship opts in to the Voluntary Program. An example is masking and testing requirements on board a cruise ship sailing in US waters when viral prevalence is high enough (red status as defined by the CDC) to warrant these measures. Still, we're getting there.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/community-levels.html

https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/cruise/cruise-ship-color-status.html 

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...