Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[Disney Glimpses]

In California (Disneyland), the policy states that masks are required to be worn by unvaccinated guests.

In Florida (Walt Disney World), the policy states that masks are expected to be worn by unvaccinated guests.

 

[maui2k7]

In California (Disneyland), the policy states that masks are required to be worn by unvaccinated guests.

In Florida (Walt Disney World), the policy states that masks are expected to be worn by unvaccinated guests.

I wonder how exactly Disneyland will enforce that requirement? Maybe just a CYA from the lawyers.

 

[ctrlaltdel]

I wonder how exactly Disneyland will enforce that requirement? Maybe just a CYA from the lawyers.

No way to reasonably enforce. Either you require masks for everyone or, in practicality, require them for no one.

 

[Disney Glimpses]

I wonder how exactly Disneyland will enforce that requirement? Maybe just a CYA from the lawyers.

They won't. It's just legally consistent with the policies for their respective states.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Funny, I don't recall ever seeing that sign in any Disneyland venue that serves alcohol.

Maybe some industries just have better lobbyists...

A lot of menus have Proposition 65 Warnings. There are also blanket Disneyland Resort warnings outside the parks.

 

[mmascari]

Listen to this guy. He's right there in your head.

It's probably crowded in there.

Do we really expect them to do so now? LOL

I do not. I assume Disney does not either. Which is what I was asking about. Not if they're good or bad or whatnot, but why have a rule that's meaningless.

Its the cousin to the warning signs on attractions about heart conditions, pregnancy etc. its intended to shift liability. Its a second cousin to the signs everywhere in California disclosing that the state of California knows everything causes cancer.

There's a difference though, and one that likely makes this not as CYA as they would hope. The heart condition, pregnancy, and cancer risks are to the individual who is following or breaking the rule. As far as masks go, the individual protection component is exactly the same. So, I would agree that someone who goes to Disney, chooses not to wear a mask (vaccinated or not) and catches COVID, they're on their own.

However, half (or more depending on your thoughts) the mask protection is as source control. In that case the person at risk isn't the one breaking the rule but someone else who was counting on others to follow the rule. (Go ahead, laugh at that. For anyone expecting unvaccinated people to wear a mask, I've got some cheap Cinderella's reservations for you, I swear. ).

So, back to the large Coke on Test Track. If it splashes out of my hand as the ride moves an hits another car. It's the people in the other car that are impacted. They're going to be super mad and complain to Disney about the unpleasantness. Someone seated in a theater with unvaccinated people not wearing a mask is likely to be mad too. Probably not as mad as the Coke incident, since see above about expectations, but mad anyway.

 

[Kevin_W]

Funny, I don't recall ever seeing that sign in any Disneyland venue that serves alcohol.

Maybe some industries just have better lobbyists...

California Prop 65 label is on the entrance to Disneyland itself.

 

[mmascari]

In California (Disneyland), the policy states that masks are required to be worn by unvaccinated guests.

In Florida (Walt Disney World), the policy states that masks are expected to be worn by unvaccinated guests.

Technically, that says of all the people there, 2, 3, and 4 year olds are required to wear a mask since they couldn't possibly be vaccinated.

Most 2 year olds can probably claim to only be 1 assuming they don't want to do something you need to be 2 to do. 23 months anyway.
Most 4 year olds can probably claim to be 5 and fully vaccinated.
So, really, the only obvious people breaking the rule for sure will be 3 year olds.

The happiest place, unless you're 3 years old.

No, I don't think anyone under 5 should be wearing a mask. Just pointing out that's technically what the policy says. One of the problems with talking about "kids" is that 3 year olds, 8 year olds, 12 year olds, and 17 year olds are all technically kids. What's totally appropriate for the 12 and 17 year old is not the same for the 3 year old. Most people probably think of the age of their own kid when they hear the term, whatever age that currently is.

 

[Heppenheimer]

California Prop 65 label is on the entrance to Disneyland itself.

View attachment 621425

Yes, I know the signs are there. But it's just interesting that they don't specifically mention the one chemical that guests are most likely to consume , or place them immediately outside of restaurants and bars that serve that particular chemical.

 

[JoeCamel]

Yes, I know the signs are there. But it's just interesting that they don't specifically mention the one chemical that guests are most likely to consume , or place them immediately outside of restaurants and bars that serve that particular chemical.

I thought ethanol killed cancer? You mean I'm drinking for nothing?

 

[DCBaker]

Canada easing some travel-related COVID-19 requirements -

As of February 28, 2022 at 12:01 a.m. EST:

• We will be easing the on-arrival testing for fully-vaccinated travellers. This means that travellers arriving to Canada from any country, who qualify as fully vaccinated, will be randomly selected for arrival testing. Travellers selected will also no longer be required to quarantine while awaiting their test result.
  • Children under 12 years old, travelling with fully vaccinated adults, will continue to be exempt from quarantine, without any prescribed conditions limiting their activities. This means, for example, they no longer need to wait 14 days before attending school, camp or daycare.
  • Unvaccinated travellers will continue to be required to test on arrival, on Day 8 and quarantine for 14 days. Unvaccinated foreign nationals will not be permitted to enter Canada unless they meet one of the few exemptions.
• Travellers will now have the option of using a COVID-19 rapid antigen test result (taken the day prior to their scheduled flight or arrival at the land border or marine port of entry) or a molecular test result (taken no more than 72 hours before their scheduled flight or arrival at the land border or marine port of entry) to meet pre-entry requirements. Taking a rapid antigen test at home is not sufficient to meet the pre-entry requirement – it must be authorized by the country in which it was purchased and must be administered by a laboratory, healthcare entity or telehealth service.
• The Government of Canada will adjust its Travel Health Notice from a Level 3 to a Level 2. This means that the Government will no longer recommend that Canadians avoid travel for non-essential purposes.
  • Travellers should understand the risks that are still associated with international travel given the high incidence of Omicron, and take necessary precautions.
  • On February 28, 2022 at 16:00 EST, Transport Canada’s Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) that restricts where international passenger flights can arrive in Canada will expire. This means that international flights carrying passengers will be permitted to land at all remaining Canadian airports that are designated by the Canada Border Services Agency to receive international passenger flights.
  
  

  Government of Canada lightens border measures as part of transition of the pandemic response - Canada.ca

  Today, the Government of Canada announced a series of adjustments to the current border measures.

  www.canada.ca

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

California Prop 65 label is on the entrance to Disneyland itself.

View attachment 621425

That’s a true statement correct?

 

[danlb_2000]

That’s a true statement correct?

Here is the 23 page list of things that fall under prop 65. One is "alcoholic beverages" so that alone makes it true.

https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/proposition-65//p65chemicalslistsinglelisttable2021p.pdf

 

[Andrew C]

That’s a true statement correct?

Life in general can cause cancer.

 

[JoeCamel]

Life in general can cause cancer.

Sunlight.....
We replicate therefore we mutate

 

[Chip Chipperson]

California Prop 65 label is on the entrance to Disneyland itself.

View attachment 621425

That's for the sticky lollipop slobber kids leave on any surface they touch.

 

[Heppenheimer]

Life in general can cause cancer.

But some things vastly increase that risk.

 

[Timmay]

I thought ethanol killed cancer? You mean I'm drinking for nothing?

No. Consuming significant amounts of any alcohol…especially in one session, will ensure you don’t die of cancer.

 

[JoeCamel]

No. Consuming significant amounts of any alcohol…especially in one session, will ensure you don’t die of cancer.

Thank you, I have purpose again....

 

[Andrew C]

But some things vastly increase that risk.

Of course. But those prop signs are silly. They are pretty much on every corner of the state which has caused them to lose any true meaning. People laugh at them more than heed them as a warning.