Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[mmascari]

Vermont looks bad now compared to Vermont earlier in the pandemic without any vaccinations. That's the point. Looking at Vermont or Israel (76.1% of the population fully vaccinated, 82.6% one shot, all Pfizer), there is no evidence that high vaccination rates lead to low levels of community transmission. Yet that is the justification being used to force people to get vaccinated, to protect others.

Except, VT didn't look bad in that earlier time. Clearly, VT took enough other mitigation measures during the earlier time so that they never looked bad. They only look as "bad" now because the same group of people that didn't take those earlier measures serious are also the ones not taking them serious now and not getting vaccinated. So, yes, for the group of people that don't want to do anything it's as bad now as it was before. For the rest, not so much. The low raw totals because they did so well earlier are making the shape look like it's as bad. That's a poor reading, because it's never been bad in VT at all.

Let me introduce you to Vermont's COVID dashboard, which is very easy to navigate and shows you almost all the data you might want:

COVID-19 Data | Vermont Department of Health

Find up-to-date information on the statewide community level, hospitalizations, emergency visits, wastewater monitoring, case counts, outbreaks, vaccination rates, and more. Data and reports are updated on Wednesdays.

www.healthvermont.gov

You can easily flip back and forth between the disease activity and vaccination screens. What you will see is an almost exact inverse correlation between which age brackets have the lowest vaccination rates and the highest case loads, mainly the 20-29 year old demographic, with a vaccination rate stubbornly stuck in the 60% range. Note that the completely unvaccinated 0-9 age group has far lower numbers than even some of the adult groups. The difference for them? Well, some are too young to really have any significant interactions outside the house, but for those in school, most (if not all) schools maintain strong mitigation strategies, like mandatory masking and distancing. Hmm, how about that, maybe mitigation strategies can actually have the desired result? Nah, screw that, let's just give up, learn to live with COVID, since doing hard but necessary things these days has become un-'Merican... or worse, SOCIALIST!!!!

If you also look under the "COVID-19 Data Summary" tab, it allows you to download a periodic update of even more data not readily apparent on the dashboard. According to the latest report from 10 September, of fully vaccinated Vermonters, only 0.4% have suffered a breakthrough infection, and of this 0.4%, only 2.7% have required hospitalization and 0.9% have died. So, in Vermont, if fully vaccinated, you have only a 0.01% chance of hospitalization, and a 0.004% chance of dying from COVID-19. I'll take those odds and policies that move people towards those odds.

So, imagine that, vaccination does to something. The "as bad as before" is the unvaccinated people. We're still not at enough vaccinated to have a population level cure.

The VT CDC graph is NOT proof that vaccination doesn't do anything, it's proof that VT took COVID seriously and it's population handled it well earlier in the pandemic. Combined with it's overall lack of population allowing the part that's not handling it well to have an over representation in the shape.

 

[DisneyCane]

Glad you cleared that up for us. So (currently at least) you’re not arguing the supposed faults and imperfections of COVID vaccinations, just expressing adamant fear, outrage and disgust that “someone” is chomping at the bit to gleefully “force” people to be injected?

The word “force” is used, presumably, to conjure up evil totalitarian images.

But guess what? That’s complete hogwash. A bogeyman argument.

No one is “forcing” anyone to do anything. And no one will.

Even the “mandates” some choose to wail against aren’t really “mandates” at all. There are clear options available for those who inexplicably do not want the vaccine.

And when it comes to schoolchildren, no one will be “forcing” them to get the vaccine either. In many places government isn’t even encouraging them.

Yes, vaccine requirements to attend public schools are pretty much settled public policy— and have been for decades.

But no one is “forcing them to be injected.”

It’s just another nonsense, fear mongering argument. Without reason and without any sort of positive outcome in mind.

While people aren't being forced in the sense that the choice is either get injected or get sent to a gulag, they are being forced to either be vaccinated or lose their job. Not all have clear options. My friend is in HR for a large government contractor. They are instituting a policy of either get vaccinated or be terminated. There is no option for testing in lieu of vaccination. Does the Disney policy have a testing option? I don't think so but I could be wrong.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

Interesting map shared by our governor. Vivid spread is relatively low in my home state of Maryland (which is a testament to vaccines working because 75% of 12+ of our population is vaccinated, higher in some age groups). I'm surprised Florida isn't in the severe risk category.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

They are instituting a policy of either get vaccinated or be terminated. There is no option for testing in lieu of vaccination. Does the Disney policy have a testing option? I don't think so but I could be wrong.

They legally have to make exceptions for medical reasons or deeply held religious beliefs. The testing would be the way around it. But that's going to be a very small portion of the population.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

Yep, more evidence that masks help reduce spread...

" Masks reduced viral RNA by 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3 to 72%) in fine and by 77% (95% CI, 51 to 89%) in coarse aerosols; cloth and surgical masks were not significantly different. "

18 months later we are still going back and forth on whether masks work. Or whether we need to wear them “ forever”. Probably thousands upon thousands of studies done by every major medical schools and universities, scientists and all overseas studies say the same thing. They work. They work even better with social distancing but they work and help by themselves. Can we please delete every post from now on saying they don’t? Please mods?

 

[lazyboy97o]

You are assuming that once we get enough people vaccinated we won’t see a difference but we have no way of knowing of that happens. It’s a what If.

It’s not really a what if as there is math behind the concept. Even with these spikes we’re not seeing numbers that represent the entirety of the unvaccinated population. There’s also the issue of the unvaccinated associating with each other providing ample opportunity for spread which is exactly what we see with things like measles outbreaks, they flare up because the unvaccinated tend to associate with each other.

 

[mmascari]

 

[DisneyDebRob]

People accuse me of cherry picking:

"Conclusion
SARS-CoV-2 is evolving toward more efficient aerosol generation and loose-fitting masks provide significant but only modest source control. Therefore, until vaccination rates are very high, continued layered controls and tight-fitting masks and respirators will be necessary."

That tells me that even loose fitting or masks not worn correctly will help. See how one sentence can be used anyway the reader wants? Isn’t modest better then none?

 

[lazyboy97o]

They legally have to make exceptions for medical reasons or deeply held religious beliefs. The testing would be the way around it. But that's going to be a very small portion of the population.

I’m not sure they have to provide religious exemptions. There are states that do not allow religious exemptions from school required vaccinations.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Read carefully. 87.4% of the ELIGIBLE population (i.e. 12+). The point is that their current spike is getting to be worse than any prior time during the whole pandemic before vaccines were available.

See above on the percentages vaccinated. VT may be the lowest per capita currently but all but one county is classified as having high community transmission and the one has substantial community transmission. The cases per 100k for the last seven days is 208.5 (for comparison, FL is 295.7). That works out to 29.79 per 100k per day which is almost three times the threshold set by the "northeast alliance" last year to avoid quarantine upon arrival and WAY above what many consider to be the limit to remove mitigations.

Even with all kinds of mandates, how much higher vaccine uptake will there possibly be than what Vermont has? Some percentage are medically unable to get vaccinated.

Nobody wants to admit that the vaccines are not doing one of the things that it was said they would do which is to suppress transmission and lead to herd immunity once "enough" people were vaccinated.

There's no question they significantly reduce the rate of hospitalization and death but if extremely low community transmission is the "goal" to remove all other mitigation, it does not appear that high vaccination rates will achieve that goal.

It's obvious that "enough" people haven't been vaccinated to adequately suppress transmission. Even still, Vermont should be an example of things not being as bad as they could be. Your own numbers show that they have a 7-day aver per 100k that is approximately 29.5% better than Florida (and a 7-day average daily death count of 2). Also, from what I can tell, Vermont removed the last of its COVID-19 restrictions around July 4, so - if anything - you're showing that their worst peak to date is coinciding with the removal of restrictions and are making a strong case for implementing them again.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

I’m not sure they have to provide religious exemptions. There are states that do not allow religious exemptions from school required vaccinations.

Schools are different from workplaces.

This is from Alison Green, HR professional and author of the "Ask a Manager" blog"

In the case of medical exemptions, federal law allows employers to request medical information from the person requesting the exemption, and then requires them to engage in “an interactive process” to determine reasonable accommodations. Importantly, the employer doesn’t need to accept the specific accommodation the employee is requesting; they can come up with alternate accommodations that meet the goal — including things like masking at work, keeping the employee isolated from others, changing their shift to minimize contact with others, or even having them take an unpaid leave of absence (as at least one airline is doing).

With requests for religious exceptions, an employer can legally question or contest a stated religious belief if that employer has an objective basis for believing the employee is being dishonest or that the objection isn’t actually based on religion. However, religious claims can be tough to disprove (in part because the law doesn’t limit its definition of a religious belief to those associated with an actual religion), and there can be legal risk to pushing back on them. But as with medical exemptions, the employer only has to offer a reasonable accommodation, not necessarily the one the employee prefers.

How Will the Vaccine Mandate for Employers Work, Exactly?

What we know so far, from reporting a workplace that isn’t enforcing the new rules to fielding sketchy medical and religious exemption claims.

www.thecut.com

 

[Chip Chipperson]

You have completely made up the point at which herd immunity starts to kick in. As has been explained to you, other diseases like measles have required maintaining >90% immunization. That’s a level of immunization that is also not unique to just the MMR vaccine. The measles outbreak at Disneyland even included people who had been vaccinated, also showing how breakthrough cases are not a false promise. You’re also ignoring the rise in pediatric cases.

Indeed he is. In the case of horrible, terrible, no-good Vermont, cases in children too young to get the vaccine are rising dramatically and account for approximately 23% of the current cases - above the national average. Oddly enough (meaning not odd at all), their current rate of infection among adults is better than most states. Funny how that works. High vaccination rate = lower infection rate among the group eligible for the vaccine???? Crazy talk.

But Vermont has the third-highest vaccination rate in the nation and was first in the nation for its vaccinations until a few weeks ago. Since vaccinated people, mostly adults, are less at risk of contracting Covid-19, Vermont has a lower rate of adult infections than most states — meaning that more of the cases that do happen are in children.

Vermont is reporting spikes in Covid-19 among children but few cases of severe illness

Even as cases rise, hospitalizations are rare.

vtdigger.org

 

[MisterPenguin]

I only recall being told for the trial to wait 2 weeks. I don't recall family having to wait. Was that really a thing? I'm totally curious

Yeah, I was asked if I had another vaccine in the past 2 weeks.

But then the guidance from the CDC changed. The realization was that one's body doesn't go into super overdrive because there's more than one invader. Each system works to its capacity and no more.

Again, newborns, children entering school, service members, and those traveling abroad have often received multiple vaccinations at the same time.

Here's the current CDC policy:

​

COVID-19 vaccines may be administered without regard to timing of other vaccines. This includes simultaneous administration of COVID-19 vaccine and other vaccines on the same day. It is not known if the reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines is increased with coadministration, including with other vaccines known to be more reactogenic, such as adjuvanted vaccines. When deciding whether to administer an(other) vaccine(s) with a COVID-19 vaccine, vaccination providers should consider whether the patient is behind or at risk of becoming behind on recommended vaccines, their risk of vaccine-preventable disease (e.g., during an outbreak or occupational exposures), and the reactogenicity profile of the vaccines.​

Interim Clinical Considerations for Use of COVID-19 Vaccines | CDC

Find interim clinical considerations for the use of COVID-19 vaccines for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States.

www.cdc.gov

 

[DisneyCane]

That tells me that even loose fitting or masks not worn correctly will help. See how one sentence can be used anyway the reader wants? Isn’t modest better then none?

It depends how modest source control translates to reduction in actual transmission. It could be a lot, it could be barely any.

 

[GoofGoof]

Who needs Fauci when you can have a talking dog and a baby explain it to you so clearly.

 

[hopemax]

Nobody wants to admit that the vaccines are not doing one of the things that it was said they would do which is to suppress transmission and lead to herd immunity once "enough" people were vaccinated.

There's no question they significantly reduce the rate of hospitalization and death but if extremely low community transmission is the "goal" to remove all other mitigation, it does not appear that high vaccination rates will achieve that goal.

"They" never said that. A bunch of people in the media and regular folks saw a definition for herd immunity and thought that would be what it meant. And at the beginning, the science community warned people that what they thought would happen wouldn't work out that way in practice. But people kept screaming and believing it, to the point where the science community stopped trying to fight that battle because there were bigger battles to fight like getting people to not die and vaccinated in the first place. And some with microphones were probably hopeful that this virus was minor enough that it wouldn't take as much to control it, because at the end of the day, with a novel virus everything is just guessing. Except we got Delta. Why do you think I've been in this thread this whole time saying things like herd immunity doesn't work like people think it does, nobody has been on the backside of an pandemic before so all the optimism is premature, etc? Everyone knows there are just some battles it's not worth fighting about because no one is listening and reality will hit us all in the face eventually. So let them have their moment. Given all the crap I've gotten for being pessimistic about what the rest of this year would look like, I have certainly done it with all of you. I've said my piece, when it turns out to be worse than all the optimistic projections, you guys would see it soon enough. But Delta surprised me with how deadly it got with the group that remained unvaccinated and the high-risk people that I mentioned "would be brought back on the playing field" if community spread remained high.

This is a lot more like taking one of those bouncy balls and throwing it in a confined space, it just keeps ricocheting around. Only this is like those "futuristic" versions that show up in movies from time to time, and the bounces can take your head off. You have to wait for the ball to come to a real stop, because at any moment it could hit the right surface at the right angle and bounce right off again. Or some idiot picks up the ball and throws it again (like Han in the trash compactor shooting his weapon after Luke) We never got community spread low enough to actually allow the protections herd immunity can give to work. It doesn't mean all the things that are supposed to happen won't still happen, but it is a more distant future than people assumed.

Now we've got a bunch of people who are having their minds blown by what this has all looked like, but it's not their fault for making up all their optimistic assumptions because they wanted to get back to life as it was. What I don't get is why you can't see is that everything you have asked for at the beginning and now, is the path that maximizes the damage. It results in more people getting seriously ill, long term effects and death. It maximizes the overwhelmed feeling of our medical community, and others. I saw an essay from a professional embalmer who talked about what he's seen, and the burnout from his co-workers, the young graduates who can't handle what they are seeing. For all the concerns about "mental health" it doesn't seem to apply to the professions we will need in the future for life to get back to normal. We expect them to shoulder all of an enhanced load, rather than all of us wearing a mask and being mindful of how we gather around other people. I get the impression from your posts that if this virus was a cat 5 hurricane you wouldn't believe in the enhanced building codes, boarding up the windows, removing things that can become projectiles and evacuation, etc. Really. That's the message I'm getting from you. You can't stop the storm from inflicting heavy damage in areas, so it's not worth even taking short term and minor precautions because up against a cat 5 it won't matter. Damage is damage. You call it being realistic. I call it being defeatist. Just because this is taking longer than you thought it would, isn't a justification for suddenly nothing. No one is calling for restrictions forever, just longer than what any of us are used to dealing with. It can always be worse, and humans better figure out a way to handle those possibilities because the next one may be worse. I mentioned before about the Russian Flu if that really was the result of the emergence of one of the other known coronaviruses, there were outbreaks for 5 years. Dr. Osterholm, who you seem to listen to about masks, said this would take 3 years. We are still in an expected window of time for this to resolve. Not the best scenario, but it is still one of what was the possible scenarios.

People are going to have to start figuring out how to deal with what they kept categorizing as pessimism was a lot more like reality. We don't control the timeline. And dropping mitigations isn't a guaranteed recipe for this being resolved sooner. It may mean this particular chapter or wave, blows through faster, it may also mean a worse variant and we go through this spin cycle another time, extending the situation. Not making it shorter. Just like Delta did. Mitigation isn't about the timeline, mitigations are about how many people get irreversibly damaged in the process.

And now I've got a day at DLR.... RotR boarding group 28!

 

[Heppenheimer]

It's obvious that "enough" people haven't been vaccinated to adequately suppress transmission. Even still, Vermont should be an example of things not being as bad as they could be. Your own numbers show that they have a 7-day aver per 100k that is approximately 29.5% better than Florida (and a 7-day average daily death count of 2). Also, from what I can tell, Vermont removed the last of its COVID-19 restrictions around July 4, so - if anything - you're showing that their worst peak to date is coinciding with the removal of restrictions and are making a strong case for implementing them again.

Based on my own purely anecdotal and completely informal survey, I would say more than half of people up here, when out and about in stores or other indoor locations, have returned to wearing masks voluntarily. There was a brief period after they relaxed restrictions when very few people masked, but that ended by late August as news of the delta variant spread (if not the actual virus yet).

Technically, anyone not vaccinated is still required to wear a mask, but I notice that most people not wearing masks are young adults, who have the worst vaccination rate amongst those eligible. So, the honor system probably isn't particularly effective here either.

In my clinic, we had about a month where staff didn't need to wear masks when patients weren't in the immediate area, but we're back to universal masking except when eating or alone.

 

[mmascari]

Schools are different from workplaces.

This is from Alison Green, HR professional and author of the "Ask a Manager" blog"

How Will the Vaccine Mandate for Employers Work, Exactly?

What we know so far, from reporting a workplace that isn’t enforcing the new rules to fielding sketchy medical and religious exemption claims.

www.thecut.com

It's interesting that "take an unpaid leave of absence" is a valid accommodation. It's not technically being fired, but it's not like still working either.

On the religious belief employer pushback, there's been at least one company in the news with this. They're questioning the basis of how and why religious belief applies to the COVID vaccine. Then, having employees sign an affidavit that they do not use any other medication or product that has the same underlying condition. Presumably if you don't want the COVID vaccine because of XYZ, you should have the same reaction to every other thing that also has XYZ. I would assume they can revoke the exemption or just fire you if you break the affidavit later then, since it must not really be a strongly held belief.

 

[mattpeto]

In a matter of months, viral circulation in the United States could dwindle to levels so low we will no longer need to require masks, distancing, ventilation, asymptomatic testing or contact tracing. This has already happened in Denmark, Ireland, Chile and Britain.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/21/covid-pandemic-end/

I'm a huge Dr. Monica Gandhi fan and love her optimism. Obviously she didn't see Delta coming like it did (or none of us), but she's been a good voice of reason throughout.

 

[correcaminos]

Yeah, I was asked if I had another vaccine in the past 2 weeks.

But then the guidance from the CDC changed. The realization was that one's body doesn't go into super overdrive because there's more than one invader. Each system works to its capacity and no more.

Again, newborns, children entering school, service members, and those traveling abroad have often received multiple vaccinations at the same time.

Here's the current CDC policy:

​

COVID-19 vaccines may be administered without regard to timing of other vaccines. This includes simultaneous administration of COVID-19 vaccine and other vaccines on the same day. It is not known if the reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines is increased with coadministration, including with other vaccines known to be more reactogenic, such as adjuvanted vaccines. When deciding whether to administer an(other) vaccine(s) with a COVID-19 vaccine, vaccination providers should consider whether the patient is behind or at risk of becoming behind on recommended vaccines, their risk of vaccine-preventable disease (e.g., during an outbreak or occupational exposures), and the reactogenicity profile of the vaccines.​

Interim Clinical Considerations for Use of COVID-19 Vaccines | CDC

Find interim clinical considerations for the use of COVID-19 vaccines for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United States.

www.cdc.gov

Thanks! I must have totally blanked on that. I scheduled a ton of vaccines too. I remember the 90 day and then 2 week covid thing. You'd think I would've remembered