September, 21 2020, 12:00am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Virginia Cleaveland, Stand.earth, media@stand.earth
Aisha Dukule, Friends of the Earth, adukule@foe.org
50,000+ People Tell CDC to Extend No-Sail Order for Cruise Ships
Stand.earth, Friends of the Earth US submit petition during U.S. federal agency’s comment period.
WASHINGTON
More than 50,000 people have signed a petition led by environmental advocacy organizations Stand.earth and Friends of the Earth US calling for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to extend its no-sail order for cruise ships, due to the risk that resumed operations would pose to public health and the environment. The organizations submitted the petition signed by just over 28,400 supporters from Stand.earth and 23,400 from Friends of the Earth US to the CDC on Monday, September 21, 2020, which is the closing date for the federal agency's comment period on whether cruise lines can safely operate in the COVID-19 era.
Over the weekend, the cruise industry caught wind of the organizing efforts by advocacy organizations and community groups, with Royal Caribbean CEO Michael Bayley posting on his Facebook page urging cruise fans to submit comments after an "anti-cruise group has lobbied their supporters to comment."
"For decades, the foreign-owned cruise industry has put its bottom line before the health of people and the planet. Its recent failure to cease operations when it was clear that its vessels posed a serious risk to public health contributed to the spread of the COVID-19 virus around the world, and placed an enormous burden on the CDC and the Coast Guard to respond to onboard outbreaks. As recent outbreaks on board Norwegian Cruise Line vessels demonstrate, there is no such thing as safe cruising during a pandemic," said Kendra Ulrich, Shipping Campaigns Director at Stand.earth.
"The cruise industry has known for years that viruses spread easily on board their ships, just as they know how much pollution they generate. As long as the cruise industry refuses to implement changes needed to protect its passengers, our environment, and local communities, the industry should not restart cruising," said Marcie Keever, Oceans & Vessels Program Director at Friends of the Earth US.
A cohort of environmental nonprofits and community organizations also submitted a 12-page technical letter to the CDC outlining multiple concerns regarding cruise ships and COVID-19. Read the letter here.
The letter is signed by advocacy organizations and community groups Stand.earth, Friends of the Earth US, Pacific Environment, International Cruise Victims, Global Cruise Activist Network, reEarth (Bahamas), Seattle Cruise Control (Washington), Alliance for Responsible Tourism (Maine), Charleston Communities for Cruise Control (South Carolina), and Protect our Future (Cayman Islands). Their concerns include:
- The COVID-19 pandemic is not the first event in which cruise ships have been a vector of disease, with dozens of norovirus and other outbreaks documented over the past two decades.
- Cruise ships are conduits for pandemic due to the confined spaces on board, high population densities, and unsanitary environments. Multiple studies have also shown that on-board air conditioning systems played a role in the spread of COVID-19.
- Cruise ships burn dirty fuel that contributes to air pollution, which in addition to the climate implications, is now even more salient given that studies have shown that exposure to air pollution increases the risk of severe respiratory illness.
- Cruise companies' irresponsible choice to continue to sail during the pandemic, which played an active role in the global spread COVID-19, is just the latest example in a long history of refusing to take the actions necessary to protect public health.
- Cruise companies have shown they do not have effective protocols in place to repatriate crew members, which would subject cruise staff to further risks if another COVID-19 outbreak occurs.
- On-board infections can spread COVID-19 to port communities and overwhelm local health infrastructure in port cities.
- Cruise companies flag vessels in foreign countries in order to take advantage of weak public health, environment, and labor laws. The sector's global lobbying efforts to reopen during the COVID-19 pandemic is just another example of their goal to continue operating in a regulatory environment with minimal oversight.
- Cruise companies have a track record of breaking environmental laws even when held to higher standards, as demonstrated by Carnival Corporation's multiple felony convictions.
- Cruise companies have historically been highly profitable worldwide, and the industry's business model demonstrates that irresponsible corporate actors maximize profit over public health.
In addition to submitting the technical letter and petition, Stand.earth also organized 2,039 of its supporters to submit comments to the CDC encouraging an extension of the no-sail order.
"Our small town of Hoonah, Alaska, has no respirators, and is only a small clinic, staffed with elders, mothers with infants, and grandmothers. If an emergency arises and we are in need of a hospital or critical care, we have to take a helicopter or an emergency plane ride out of the village, IF the weather allows. ... If a cruise ship came into our town and potentially had COVID-19, our town of 800 would suffer just like our Alaska Native people did when westward expansion reached Alaska, dying of diseases and illnesses in which they had no cure, and were never exposed to because of the remoteness. I demand that the CDC extends its no sail order until after this pandemic because cruise ships are a vector for disease, not only COVID-19, but many other illnesses," wrote Rebekah Sawers, an Alaskan Native Yupik living with her family in Hoonah, Alaska.
Hoonah is a largely Tlingit community located near Glacier Bay National Park, where in 2018 Carnival Corporation's Holland America Line committed a felony when it illegally dumped untreated greywater and failed to report it to the Coast Guard.
"Until the pandemic is actually under control, traveling via cruise ship will be extremely hazardous. The people on the ship -- staff and customers alike -- will be at severe risk. ... As a retired Public Health Nurse, I am encouraging the strictest measures to protect us all rather than encourage the spread of this virus," wrote another commenter.
"Cruise ships are already hazardous to the environment and need tighter regulations. They pollute everywhere they sail. Sailing in the midst of a pandemic is not responsible behavior. It is the behavior of greedy people who worship money," wrote another commenter.
"Dead people make lousy customers," wrote another commenter.
As of 12:00 p.m. PT Monday, September 21, only 3,584 of the 10,539 comments submitted were approved and posted on the CDC's comment portal. There appears to be a lag between when the CDC receives and posts comments -- in some cases up to two weeks -- so it is unknown how many additional comments the CDC will publish after the deadline.
Stand.earth (formerly ForestEthics) is an international nonprofit environmental organization with offices in Canada and the United States that is known for its groundbreaking research and successful corporate and citizens engagement campaigns to create new policies and industry standards in protecting forests, advocating the rights of indigenous peoples, and protecting the climate. Visit us at
LATEST NEWS
Nancy Pelosi 'Making Calls' to Undermine AOC's Bid for Top Oversight Role
"It is so infantilizing to the House leadership to have a B team of octagenarians scheming behind their backs and aiming directly at their most promising young talent," said one progressive journalist.
Dec 13, 2024
Progressives on Thursday were frustrated by reports that former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is using her considerable influence on Capitol Hill to undermine Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's bid to become the top Democrat on the powerful committee that could launch investigations into the Trump White House in the coming years.
As Common Dreamsreported last week, Pelosi (D-Calif.) has publicly indicated that she is supporting Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) to succeed Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) as ranking member on the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability when the 119th Congress begins in January.
But Punchbowl Newsreported that Pelosi—well-known for her relentless and often successful efforts to whip votes within the Democratic caucus—is also "making calls" to other Democratic lawmakers on behalf of Connolly.
The outlet reported that the former House speaker is "actively working to tank" the candidacy of Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), with whom she has had a rocky relationship at times as the progressive Democrat has pushed the party to embrace far-reaching reforms on climate, immigration, and other issues.
Both Connolly and Ocasio-Cortez believe they have the votes to win the ranking member position. Ocasio-Cortez is a close ally of Raskin, who named her vice ranking member in the current Congress, but the Maryland lawmaker, who is expected to succeed Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) as ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, has not publicly endorsed either candidate.
The Democratic Steering and Policy Committee, which has close ties to Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), is expected to make a recommendation for the ranking member role, after which the entire Democratic caucus will vote.
The centrist New Democrat Coalition endorsed Connolly on Friday, while a House Democrat told Axios that Ocasio-Cortez "has pretty much the entire [Oversight] Committee with her."
The Congressional Progressive Caucus announced its endorsement of Ocasio-Cortez on Friday, with Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Chair-elect Greg Casar (D-Texas) arguing the congresswoman's "fearless advocacy leading the Oversight Committee will help ensure Democrats retake the House in 2026."
"Throughout her tenure on Oversight, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez has been a powerful voice for working people," said Jayapal and Casar. "She has wielded her seat on this committee to hold CEOs, Wall Street, and mega-corporations accountable to the American people. Her investigations that pressured Big Pharma to bring down the price of PrEP and other critical medications are just one example of her influential leadership and commitment to everyday people."
As Axios reported, several older longtime members are facing challenges for leadership roles from the party's younger generation. Ocasio-Cortez, 35, was the youngest woman ever elected to Congress when she won her election in 2018, and is an outspoken member of the progressive "Squad" which advocates for policies such as Medicare for All and has reportedly angered Pelosi in the past with its embrace of calls to "abolish" Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
"Many members are concerned about [the] precedent these races are setting," a senior House Democrat told Axios regarding the progressive contests with members like Connolly, who is 74.
Ryan Grim of Drop Site News said Pelosi's lobbying against Ocasio-Cortez "reeks of pettiness."
David Dayen, executive editor of The American Prospect, said the new reporting shows Pelosi attempting to act as a "puppet master."
"It is so infantilizing to the House leadership to have a B team of octagenarians scheming behind their backs and aiming directly at their most promising young talent," said Dayen.
Ocasio-Cortez wrote to colleagues last week to announce her bid for the ranking member position, highlighting her involvement in derailing Republican efforts to "weaponize the committee's investigatory power for partisan purposes" and pledging to balance the Oversight Committee's focus on President-elect Donald Trump's actions with fighting to better the lives of working Americans.
If Democrats win back control of the House in 2026, the committee would be empowered to launch investigations into the incoming Trump administration and would have subpoena power.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Warning of 'Unprecedented Risks,' Scientists Say Mirror Bacteria 'Should Not Be Created'
"Our analysis suggests that mirror bacteria could broadly evade many immune defenses of humans, animals, and plants," according to a group of 38 scientists, including multiple Nobel Prize winners.
Dec 13, 2024
Dozens of scientists are calling in no uncertain terms for a halt on research to create "mirror life," particularly "mirror bacteria" that could "pose ecological risks" and possibly cause "pervasive lethal infections in a substantial fraction of the plant and animal species, including humans."
The group of 38 scientists, who include Nobel laureates and other experts, addressed research into "mirror life"—mirror-image biological molecules—in a piece of commentary published in the journal Science published Friday, which accompanied a technical report that was released earlier in December.
One of the scientists, synthetic biologist Kate Adamala at the University of Minnesota, was working on creating a mirror cell but "changed track last year" after studying the risks, according to the Guardian.
"We should not be making mirror life," she told the outlet. "We have time for the conversation. And that's what we were trying to do with this paper, to start a global conversation."
To that end, the authors of the commentary plan to convene discussions on the risks of mirror life and related topics in 2025, with the hope that "society at large will take a responsible approach to managing a technology that might pose unprecedented risks."
The ability to create mirror life is likely over a decade away and would require sizable investment and technical progress, meaning the world has the opportunity to "preempt risks before they are realized," according to the scientists.
When broken down into simple terms, mirror life sounds like something out of science fiction. All the biomolecules that constitute life have a "handedness" to them—"right-handed" nucleotides make up DNA and RNA, and proteins are formed from "left-handed" amino acids.
"So when we're talking about mirror-image life, it's kind of like a 'what if' experiment: What if we constructed life with right-handed proteins instead of left-handed proteins? Something that would be very, very similar to natural life, but doesn't exist in nature. We call this mirror-image life or mirror life," explained to Michael Kay, a professor of biochemistry at University of Utah's medical school.
Some scientists like Kay are interested in the medical possibilities of mirror-image therapeutics—which Kay says holds potential for treating chronic illness in a more cost-effective way—but both he and the authors of the recently published commentary are concerned about the potential threats posed by mirror bacteria.
"Our analysis suggests that mirror bacteria could broadly evade many immune defenses of humans, animals, and plants. Chiral interactions, which are central to immune recognition and activation in multicellular organisms, would be impaired with mirror bacteria," according to the scientists.
Essentially, as Kay puts it, it’s unlikely that mirror bacteria would be subject to the same constraints as regular bacteria, such as the human immune system or antibiotics.
The scientists warn that further developing this research could open a Pandora's box: "Unless compelling evidence emerges that mirror life would not pose extraordinary dangers, we believe that mirror bacteria and other mirror organisms, even those with engineered biocontainment measures, should not be created."
The authors argue that scientific research with the goal of creating mirror bacteria should not be allowed, and that potential funders should not support work related to mirror bacteria.
Keep ReadingShow Less
In Wake of Killing, UnitedHealth CEO Admits 'No One Would Design a System Like the One We Have'
One critic said UnitedHealth Group chief executive Andrew Witty should "resign and then dedicate every dollar he has to dismantling the current system brick by brick and building one based on public health in its stead."
Dec 13, 2024
UnitedHealth Group CEO Andrew Witty wrote in a New York Times op-ed Friday that the for-profit U.S. healthcare system "does not work as well as it should" and that "no one would design a system like the one we have," admissions that came as his industry faced a torrent of public anger following the murder of UnitedHealthcare's chief executive.
Witty declared that his firm, the parent company of UnitedHealthcare and the nation's largest private insurer, is "willing to partner with anyone, as we always have—healthcare providers, employers, patients, pharmaceutical companies, governments, and others—to find ways to deliver high-quality care and lower costs."
But critics didn't buy Witty's expressed commitment to reforming an industry that his company has helped shape and profited from massively. Witty was the highest-paid healthcare executive in the U.S. last year, and 40% of the private insurance industry's total profit since the passage of the Affordable Care Act has flowed to UnitedHealth Group.
"It is (barely) true that UnitedHealth didn't design the U.S. system of corporate insurance, which kills tens of thousands of people a year through denial of care," Alex Lawson, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Social Security Works, told Common Dreams. "But they certainly have perfected it and turned it into a medical murder apparatus at industrial scale. They not only block all attempts to change the system in the direction of public health, they bribe and bully with their billions in blood money to make it even crueler."
"Andrew Witty is the high priest of the temple to Moloch and Mammon, murder and money," Lawson added. "And there is no way for him to wash his hands of it, except perhaps to resign and then dedicate every dollar he has to dismantling the current system brick by brick and building one based on public health in its stead."
"Medicare for All is the only proposal on the table capable of delivering universal, continuous coverage for everyone, while also securing the efficiency and savings only possible through the elimination of private insurance."
While publicly pledging to cooperate with reform efforts, Witty has defended his company's care denials in private and urged his employees not to engage with media outlets in the aftermath of Thompson's murder.
Contrary to Witty's depiction of his company in his Times op-ed, UnitedHealth has historically been an aggressive opponent of reform efforts aimed at mitigating the harms of for-profit insurance and building public alternatives. The Leverreported in 2021 that UnitedHealth Group "held a webinar to pressure its rank-and-file employees to mobilize against efforts in Connecticut to create a state-level public health insurance option."
At the national level, UnitedHealth has spent over $5.8 million this year lobbying the federal government, according to OpenSecrets.
Witty, who was born in a country with a public healthcare system, did not detail the kinds of reforms he would support in his op-ed Friday, but it's clear he would oppose a transition to a single-payer system such as Medicare for All, which would effectively abolish private health insurance and provide coverage to all Americans for free at the point of service—and at a lower total cost than the status quo.
In a column for The Nation on Friday, writer Natalie Shure argued that "the appalling amount of resources and energy we put into maintaining the existence of health insurance is wasted on an industry with no social value whatsoever."
"You could eliminate every one of these corporations tomorrow and build a system without them that works better, for less money, and with less hassle," Shure wrote. "Other countries already have systems like this. Medicare for All is the only proposal on the table capable of delivering universal, continuous coverage for everyone, while also securing the efficiency and savings only possible through the elimination of private insurance."
"None of that means that murder is justified or useful," Shure added. "But anger can be. Some politicians, from Bernie Sanders, to Elizabeth Warren, to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, have begun to make public statements ascribing the reaction to Brian Thompson's murder to widespread fury over the health insurance industry. The next step is to harness it, and to build something new."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular