So about that cruise we said we were taking . . .

In the end, common sense won out.

Mrs. Brad and I were scheduled to depart Saturday on a seven-day cruise to Mexico. Even as the coronavirus scare gained steam, we planned to go – in fact, I wrote about it four weeks ago in this space, including this paragraph: "Ultimately, fear won't stop us from having fun. We saved up for this and want to go. We want to relax on the sunny decks, eat when we want and watch a second-rate comedian make us laugh."

There was no reason to fear. The boat would be clean. We wouldn't give into hysteria. This was like the flu, maybe a bit worse. We would take our trip.

After that column appeared, friends asked if we were still going. Of course we were, I said. We don't scare easily. We're just as much at risk in the Bay Area as on a boat in the Pacific Ocean.

Then the news got a little worse.

People were trapped in a cruise ship off Japan. We didn't worry. We were taking a round-trip cruise from Los Angeles. We'd be fine.

When the Grand Princess cruise was held offshore in the San Francisco Bay, things got a little worse. Our cruise was a Princess cruise . . . but not from San Francisco.

The cruise line sent an email detailing how it would assure safety: No one would be allowed on board if they'd traveled to Asia in the past month or if they had a fever. Extra precautions would be taken to make sure everything was sanitized.

Our enthusiasm waned, but we still planned to go. It's not as if coronavirus is a death sentence.

We could even handle a worst-case scenario of a quarantine. We'd bring our laptops and work remotely if necessary. But what were the odds we'd be quarantined? There's no safer time to take a cruise than right after a virus outbreak, right?

Then last weekend arrived.

The Grand Princess stayed anchored offshore, with thousands aboard. The cruise scheduled to leave the same port as ours for the same destination, seven days earlier – was delayed, then cancelled, without explanation.

We still planned to go. It would be figured out.

Sunday came and the U.S. State Department issued an advisory that "U.S. citizens, particularly travelers with underlying health conditions, should not travel by cruise ship."

Monday came and the Center for Disease Control issued a warning: "travelers, particularly those with underlying health issues, defer all cruise ship travel worldwide. . . . Older adults and travelers with underlying health issues should avoid situations that put them at increased risk for more severe disease."

OK. Time to re-evaluate. While I often joke about it, I'm in a high-risk population: I'm a Type 1 diabetic.

We're not 60 – their definition of "older" – but we're close. When the CDC and the State Department both warn you not to go, it seems crazy to go.

So we talked it over. We changed our plans.

We can take a cruise later (the cruise line won't refund the money, it will just give you a credit to use it later) and will instead take an alternative, local vacation this week.

Of course by the end of the week, it was a moot point. Cruises are cancelled. Sports are cancelled. Schools are cancelled. Disneyland is closed.

I realize that of all the problems associated with the coronavirus outbreak, ours is a mild inconvenience. We're not sick. We're not quarantined. We just had a vacation postponed.

Someone will read this and think, "so what? You're an older couple who has enough money to take a cruise. I don't feel bad for you."

They're right. It's only an inconvenience.

Reach Brad Stanhope at bradstanhope@hotmail.com.