@qwerty6, I find your point of view really interesting. Do you think that some or all of these measures are not effective? Do you think that some or all are effective, but that the cruise folks don’t really care about effectiveness?
On a side note, we had an early birthday party outside for DS last weekend. (Bday is in Dec, when an outdoor party would not be very comfortable!) Because it’s very hard to consistently maintain 6+ feet at a party, especially for kids, we wore masks outside. Perhaps I’m miscalculating risks, but I felt comfortable with DD and nephew sharing a saucer swing (one standing, the other sitting) when they were both masked. Had they not been wearing masks, I would have spent the party following kids around and reminding them to give everyone enough space.
Masks greatly reduce the spread. But if someone is positive, unless someone is wearing a mask perfectly, it can’t fully stop them from spreading. So trying to catch those who are positive, as much as possible, further reduces the chances.
Not everyone is (necessarily) negative…they merely TESTED negative. And the mask is the best tool for protection we have at the moment. But I do tend to agree with the temps bit. I think that becomes kind of pointless. If someone is feverish, most likely they would have tested positive…and who, when they are feverish, feels good enough to travel anyhow? So yet…temp checks are mostly for show.
Exactly. And if you know this, I’m not sure why you are so down on all this? Or are you down on the idea of opening up the ships to begin with? (It wasn’t clear to me.)
It is like when you give margins of error. You know. Something is 30%, plus or minus 5%. Something is 100, plus or minus 25. The plus or minus ranges in the case of coronavirus can be reduced dramatically with various measures in place.
Personally, I think opening up the ships is extremely iffy. Tight quarters, narrow hallways, etc. So the question is how well the ventilation systems work in those things. That would be my BIGGEST concern.
Of all the “non-essential” things to come back, I figured cruises would be last. It’s too hard to distance without diminishing the experience, there’s not much financial incentive to operate them at much lower capacities, and the demand might take longer to come back compared to other activities. For me, a cruise would be something I’d have to wait for until there are no restrictions. For the crazy prices, I want a full care-free experience and to be pampered without thinking about covid.
With false negative rates anywhere from 2-29% according to some studies, chances are some positive cases are getting on the ship, and that concern becomes a factor for me much more so than being on land and more in control of my environment. I have a Disney Cruise placeholder on the books, but I’ll most likely let it expire. I don’t see things being back to where I want them in time.
@Beth33
From the start, my goal has never been “avoid getting the virus at any cost.” The initial deal was “15 days to stop the spread” and to avoid overwhelming health care systems. I’m not getting anywhere with searching the forum, but by Easter I was definitely the outlier on these pages. I fully believe we have done irreparable damage to many individuals (nursing homes, otherwise isolated, people who went two months without elective surgery, businesses still not open and livelihoods lost) all because somewhere along the way many changed the goal to NO NEW CASES EVER!!!
But - now that I have ruminated on it a bit I’m thinking more about the cruise ships… @ryan1 my point is that if any one of those tests were actually able to rule out people with coronavirus there wouldn’t be the … and… and… and. It’s like a sieve or something.
Cruise ships could very easily run out of ability to provide medical care. Perhaps they should not open. Certainly risk-averse people should not travel, nor the known high risk people. I more wonder about the ability to preserve crew health. Many of those who work on the ships are from underserved areas and may likely accept more risk in the name of earnings.
Cruising actually affords us one of the best ROI.
OH - yes - crazy prices.
You mean 2019. Me too.
I have until Feb to cancel my cruise. Masking in some places wouldn’t be a deal breaker, but no buffet would. I wouldn’t want a mask on everywhere.
Yes, I made the mistake of choosing Disney for our first (and only to this point) cruise. Ironically, my daughters are willing to do another one with another company, but my wife and I are worried about not having the Disney touch.
My first cruise was in 2001 and DCL with my family of 3. Based on the assumption that nothing else would ever be as good, I stupidly waited until 2014 when I could manage another one with my now family of 8. It was stellar. Then the question was, could we enjoy cruising without the mouse? We did an NCL Getaway in 2016 and had a blast. The fam didn’t get to cruise again til last year (2019) and we (gasp) did an old Carnival ship. It was awesome. I’ve also done two Princess cruises with friends. Those were also wonderful.
Well said. This is how I feel also. This side of it is underrepresented, and I think for many the calculus has changed due to the ever rising death total. I am saddened by that death total, but I have a myriad of factors that I’m thinking about and weighing against each other, and that is just one of them. I can’t fault those who are alarmed by the death totals and positive rates and want to protect all people equally at all costs while employing one single risk level for all situations out of convenience, but yes there is less focus on the collateral damage, and it is not as obvious to quantify at this point. This is just a very difficult situation, and we are seeing it is not just the US that is struggling to contain this. Everything being politicized (both sides are guilty) is not helpful either.
I totally agree with you on that moving target. that’s why, in part, CA is where it is. We are unwilling to make the needed adjustments to live WITH the virus safely. It may not be 2019 again for awhile.
Only 137 votes so far on the Royal Caribbean poll. But 64 of these diehard cruisers say they are less likely or not at all likely to cruise with the safety recommendations. Throughout the comments many believe the restrictions are too light, while many believe the restrictions are too miserable. But close to 50% of the people who are responding aren’t buying into it. And keep in mind these are avid cruisers.
If this is a decent representation, it does not bode well for the industry.
ETA: it is possible that the forum is just plain less active these days as cruising is at a standstill. I wonder how that plays into the data.
That is one of them, but decreased capacity in general and in theaters, etc., is raising concerns about the experience.
A lot of people also expressed dissatisfaction at needing to do excursions within the bubble. People who like to get off in Cozumel and just shop and bar hop.
Me too.