Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[JoeCamel]

So really it’s a testing turn around problem? Which is a problem, getting a test and the result should be much faster.

Cause, if you’re saying don’t test the sniffles, just assume it’s not COVID, even after a known exposure, wait till you’re sicker to not come in, you are pretending it doesn’t exist.

Not knowing people are spreading doesn’t mean they aren’t spreading. Just means you don’t know. If you’re positive, you’re sick, stay home. It’s not that hard.

Tonight the infectious disease director for Ballad Health on her nightly news update said "if you have any symptoms assume you have covid". Gee with hospitalizations up 90% in the last two weeks and a doubling of the vent patients I think she might be right but I will do my own research and decide in a couple of months when I can visit Disney without a mask...
Heads in the sand hoping it isn't as bad as it is.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Stay home when you feel ill and go to work or school when you feel well.

Realistically speaking, we all know that people send their kids to school sick. All. The. Time. Teachers are staying home when they are unwell - and this virus is causing it as such a rate that it is incredibly difficult for districts to keep up with subs. And bus drivers. I got a call after my daughter was supposed to be picked up today that her bus was substituted for another bus and was running 30 mins behind. Thankfully we have the ability to drive her to school (we do not live close enough to walk), or she would have missed that 30 mins of school completely (as on normal days her bus arrives not long before school starts). This has happened multiple times since school returned from winter break.

 

[Touchdown]

Let’s see half the people are all doom and gloom and half think this is over, both groups are wrong.

East of the Mississippi most states have already had their omicron peak and are on the downward slope. Things are really starting to change for the better, including Florida. The Western US for the most part is right around peak so things will improve there too. As far as “stealth omicron” while it’s slightly more contagious, it doesn’t appear to be severe and is so similar to original omicron that prior infection with one gives immunity to the other which means that as it becomes the dominant strain it will only slightly flatten downward slopes for a bit or cause a small mini wave.

Big picture wise, assuming another varient doesn’t pop up in 6-8 weeks this country is going to be back in the “moderate and low” spread levels as defined by the CDC which if you remember are levels of transmission where the cdc does not suggest vaccinated individuals need to wear masks in public indoor spaces. Between having very few immune naive people left after this omicron wave and weather getting better I think it’s highly likely we will have a relatively Covid free spring and likely summer.

Further, unless a varient emerges that can evade cellular immunity of the vaxed and recovered we are unlikely to see large spikes in hospitalizations again (there will still be spikes but spikes similar to flu then other COVIDs.)

To quote a famous Disney song, we’re almost there people.

 

[DCBaker]

"Coronavirus vaccines for children younger than 5 could be available far sooner than expected — perhaps by the end of February — under a plan that would lead to the potential authorization of a two-shot regimen in the coming weeks, people briefed on the situation said Monday.

Pfizer and its partner, BioNTech, the manufacturers of the vaccine, are expected to submit to the Food and Drug Administration as early as Tuesday a request for emergency-use authorization for the vaccine for children 6 months to 5 years old, which would make it the first vaccine available for that age group. Older children already can receive the shot.

The FDA urged the companies to submit the application so that regulators could begin reviewing the two-shot data, according to the knowledgeable individuals, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly."

Additional details below -

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/01/31/coronavirus-vaccine-children-under-5/

 

[mmascari]

Let’s see half the people are all doom and gloom and half think this is over, both groups are wrong.
...
Big picture wise, assuming another varient doesn’t pop up in 6-8 weeks this country is going to be back in the “moderate and low” spread levels as defined by the CDC which if you remember are levels of transmission where the cdc does not suggest vaccinated individuals need to wear masks in public indoor spaces.
...
To quote a famous Disney song, we’re almost there people.

I don't think there's a doom and gloom group. That's more of a characterization by the "it's over" group of everyone else.

I would say there's really 3 groups.

1. We're not there yet. Let's get there before we start acting like we are. We'll get there faster that way.
2. It's tending down and we're tired of it, down is good, call it over, we're there and done.
3. It never was a thing or you're on your own that's all that matters.

The second two call the first all doom and gloom. But, if you really want to end as fast as possible, it's the first group that gets it done. The rest just let it drag on and on slowly. The second group has called it over as every wave has trended down and they've been wrong every time so far. Here's to hoping this really is the time.

 

[correcaminos]

I don't think there's a doom and gloom group. That's more of a characterization by the "it's over" group of everyone else.

I would say there's really 3 groups.

1. We're not there yet. Let's get there before we start acting like we are. We'll get there faster that way.
2. It's tending down and we're tired of it, down is good, call it over, we're there and done.
3. It never was a thing or you're on your own that's all that matters.

The second two call the first all doom and gloom. But, if you really want to end as fast as possible, it's the first group that gets it done. The rest just let it drag on and on slowly. The second group has called it over as every wave has trended down and they've been wrong every time so far. Here's to hoping this really is the time.

There is a doom and gloom group. Not as many as the other side though. We have extremes and honestly I think most fall between. Though your first two are levels of middle I see a lot. We do have some who really only see the bad and are scared to death.

 

[Heppenheimer]

"Coronavirus vaccines for children younger than 5 could be available far sooner than expected — perhaps by the end of February — under a plan that would lead to the potential authorization of a two-shot regimen in the coming weeks, people briefed on the situation said Monday.

Pfizer and its partner, BioNTech, the manufacturers of the vaccine, are expected to submit to the Food and Drug Administration as early as Tuesday a request for emergency-use authorization for the vaccine for children 6 months to 5 years old, which would make it the first vaccine available for that age group. Older children already can receive the shot.

The FDA urged the companies to submit the application so that regulators could begin reviewing the two-shot data, according to the knowledgeable individuals, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly."

Additional details below -

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2022/01/31/coronavirus-vaccine-children-under-5/

I can't get beyond the paywall, but there was some interesting details in the NPR article:



The vaccine should be a no-brainer, done-deal for kids 6 months to 2 years old, as this group has met the trial endpoints. The question mark surrounds ages 2-5. When we last heard from Pfizer, the reduced dose, two series vaccination had not demonstrated an adequate antibody response in this group. The article isn't absolutely clear, but it suggests that Pfizer might request EUA for the two-shot series with hopes that the third dose may provide the desired efficacy in the near future. I hope that isn't the case, and that Pfizer already has robust enough data, either with a higher dose of a two shot series, or with a complete three shot series.

Either way, as a father of a 3 year old and an 8 week old, I view this as good news. We're not planning a Disney trip just yet, though.

 

[DCBaker]

I can't get beyond the paywall, but there was some interesting details in the NPR article:



The vaccine should be a no-brainer, done-deal for kids 6 months to 2 years old, as this group has met the trial endpoints. The question mark surrounds ages 2-5. When we last heard from Pfizer, the reduced dose, two series vaccination had not demonstrated an adequate antibody response in this group. The article isn't absolutely clear, but it suggests that Pfizer might request EUA for the two-shot series with hopes that the third dose may provide the desired efficacy in the near future. I hope that isn't the case, and that Pfizer already has robust enough data, either with a higher dose of a two shot series, or with a complete three shot series.

Either way, as a father of a 3 year old and an 8 week old, I view this as good news. We're not planning a Disney trip just yet, though.

You should be able to read the full WaPo article here (apologies for the paywall link!)-

archive.ph

 

[DisneyDebRob]

Pretty convenient and easy. Just go down a bit, click on whatever state and find updated information most from today, few from yesterday.

US COVID-19 map: Tracking cases and deaths

Track coronavirus outbreaks across the US and in your state with daily updated maps, total cases and deaths.

www.usatoday.com

 

[DCBaker]

 

[maui2k7]

Question…. I have no issue with promoting washing your hands as general hygeine and cleaning surfaces, but it has been proven that COVID is airborne and not transmitted through touching surfaces. Why do they still state washing hands and cleaning surfaces frequently being that COVID is not spread through surfaces? Is that a general statement or specific to COVID guidance?

Maybe I missed some updated science on this.

 

[drizgirl]

Question…. I have no issue with promoting washing your hands as general hygeine and cleaning surfaces, but it has been proven that COVID is airborne and not transmitted through touching surfaces. Why do they still state washing hands and cleaning surfaces frequently being that COVID is not spread through surfaces? Is that a general statement or specific to COVID guidance?

Maybe I missed some updated science on this.

I don't think they said it can't be transmitted by surface touching. Just that it's not the primary transmission source.

 

[hopemax]

Also, changes from the original virus to the variants. In the real world, the virus probably does not survive as long as the lab tests show, but relative to the original virus Omicron likely survives "longer." So if you're touching a lot of high-touch, plastic surfaces, don't get lax on the washing.

This article is originally from Reuters but they have a paywall, so this is a paywall free link

Omicron survives up to 8 days on plastic surfaces, new study finds

The Japanese researchers found Omicron can last up to eight days on plastic surfaces and 21 hours on skin.

www.euronews.com

"On plastic surfaces, average survival times of the original strain and the Alpha, Beta, Gamma and Delta variants were 56 hours, 191.3 hours, 156.6 hours, 59.3 hours, and 114 hours respectively. That compared to 193.5 hours - the equivalent of eight days - for Omicron, the researchers reported on bioRxiv ahead of peer review."

"On skin samples from cadavers, average virus survival times were 8.6 hours for the original version, 19.6 hours for Alpha, 19.1 hours for Beta, 11 hours Gamma, 16.8 hours for Delta and 21.1 hours for Omicron.

“This study showed that the Omicron variant also has the highest environmental stability among VOCs [variants of concern], which suggests that this high stability might also be one of the factors that have allowed the Omicron variant to replace the Delta variant and spread rapidly,” the authors wrote."

 

[danlb_2000]

Question…. I have no issue with promoting washing your hands as general hygeine and cleaning surfaces, but it has been proven that COVID is airborne and not transmitted through touching surfaces. Why do they still state washing hands and cleaning surfaces frequently being that COVID is not spread through surfaces? Is that a general statement or specific to COVID guidance?

Maybe I missed some updated science on this.

There are no absolutes in any of this. Yes, they have said COVID is mainly transmitted through the air, but that doesn't mean it can't be spread through surfaces contact. The mitigation for the, hand washing, has so little impact and has other benefits it makes sense to keep recommending it.

 

[Heppenheimer]

Question…. I have no issue with promoting washing your hands as general hygeine and cleaning surfaces, but it has been proven that COVID is airborne and not transmitted through touching surfaces. Why do they still state washing hands and cleaning surfaces frequently being that COVID is not spread through surfaces? Is that a general statement or specific to COVID guidance?

Maybe I missed some updated science on this.

Washing your hands simply eliminates one of the more important vectors. Hands can be exposed to aerosols, and people constantly touch their face and nose, and thus increase the chance of inoculating themselves. This holds for any airborne pathogen, not just for COVID.

Like everything else, washing your hands is just one part of a larger picture of risk reduction.

 

[G00fyDad]

Question…. I have no issue with promoting washing your hands as general hygeine and cleaning surfaces, but it has been proven that COVID is airborne and not transmitted through touching surfaces. Why do they still state washing hands and cleaning surfaces frequently being that COVID is not spread through surfaces? Is that a general statement or specific to COVID guidance?

Maybe I missed some updated science on this.

and then

 

[Kevin_W]

Washing your hands simply eliminates one of the more important vectors. Hands can be exposed to aerosols, and people constantly touch their face and nose, and thus increase the chance of inoculating themselves. This holds for any airborne pathogen, not just for COVID.

Like everything else, washing your hands is just one part of a larger picture of risk reduction.

I really, really hope that more common hand sanitizer stations (that are refilled!) is one of the things we keep after the pandemic. Lowering all-over germ prevalence is a good thing.

Not to pick on the original poster, but the question exemplifies a problem with data interpretation that keeps coming up - people want things (surface cleaning, masks, sanitization) to either work or not work. In almost every facet of life, there is room for nuance.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I really, really hope that more common hand sanitizer stations (that are refilled!) is one of the things we keep after the pandemic. Lowering all-over germ prevalence is a good thing.

A lot of them need to be reworked if they are to stay. Many were quickly dropped in en mass and the result is that they’re not code compliant.

 

[MisterPenguin]

View attachment 617929

View attachment 617930

View attachment 617931

View attachment 617932

View attachment 617933

Of note: Look how December's Omicron surge affected the unvaccinated v. the vaccinated. And those with boosters were 4-6 times more protected than those without boosters.

So, this goes out to all the supposed pro-vaxxers who keep posting the anti-vaxx nonsense that "but the vaccinated catch COVID/Omicron, too!!" ... They do, but what you're implying is absolutely false. There is a significant difference between being vaccinated and not. Stop trying to conflate the two with fuzzy catchphrases or with the cherry-picked data of one locale.

 

[DCBaker]