Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Horizons '83

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No

“A well-functioning air conditioning system in the restaurant that actively provided the appropriate amount of ventilation and had good filters for particulate matter would have greatly lowered the concentration of SARS-CoV-2 in the air, perhaps to the point that fewer diners would have contracted COVID-19,” Bahnfleth told Healthline."
Interesting read. Do you happen to know when that was published? I remember reading about that study of the Table A, B,C etc. and that really opened my eyes a bit.
 

monykalyn

Well-Known Member
There’s a pretty big resistance to contact tracing in the US. Health departments are having trouble getting people to cooperate in some cases. It’s all been politicized and one side is against testing and tracing in general because the more you test and trace the more cases you find. Like a toddler that covers their eyes and then believes they are invisible if you don’t test anyone then the total positive is zero. Pandemic over.
Part of that is the absolute hatred and death threats from social media (even if not on it your friends/family/long lost friends of friends of friends) who will scrutinize your life and determine you did something "wrong" if you dared ever to step a foot outside your door unless it was literally an emergency. And not just aimed at you - but your family/kids etc. Why would anyone INVITE that? Our county will put out alerts for higher risk exposure areas (indoor restaurants, mall etc) but is no longer doing the lower risk exposure (mask use, less than 15 minutes inside etc).

.....we have a plan on how to reopen CA.....we are currently doing that plan.....we have to move slowly....to ya know....prevent more mass infection.
Along with New York! Seems they've gone from "flatten the curve" to "no more virus ever before we open-hardships/business loss/homelessness/other deaths be damned" attitude.

Don't know about Disney (cancelled AP) but Universal last week was definitely busier than in June. Resort we stayed at was still blissfully low occupancy though! Love the cleaned after every use and socially distanced loungers at pool! Marriott Vacation club resorts are doing a good job. My UCF college kid went to Animal Kingdom last Friday and pretty much walked onto FoP she said.
FWIW we did see lots of cleaning going on still at Universal (hand rails, queue rails, bathrooms with sinks marked "closed" to keep distance etc).
 

GimpYancIent

Well-Known Member
Seems like theme parks want to increase capacity.
To ease a little bit of tension what if Disney sent a complimentary mask per each guest when a reservation is made. Magic bands are no longer complimentary but a mask could? A single color with a mouse head logo on it would be fine along with the complimentary luggage tag. A small but nice gesture.
 

DCBaker

Premium Member
"Abbott Laboratories said on Wednesday it won U.S. marketing authorization for a COVID-19 portable antigen test that can deliver results within 15 minutes and will sell for $5.

The portable test is about the size of a credit card, requires no additional equipment to operate, and can be conducted using a less invasive nasal swab than traditional lab tests, Abbott executives said on a call with reporters.

Abbott expects to ship tens of millions of tests in September, ramping to 50 million tests a month from the beginning of October."


 

Kevin_W

Well-Known Member
"Abbott Laboratories said on Wednesday it won U.S. marketing authorization for a COVID-19 portable antigen test that can deliver results within 15 minutes and will sell for $5.

The portable test is about the size of a credit card, requires no additional equipment to operate, and can be conducted using a less invasive nasal swab than traditional lab tests, Abbott executives said on a call with reporters.

Abbott expects to ship tens of millions of tests in September, ramping to 50 million tests a month from the beginning of October."


I was just going to post that, DC. 10 million next month and 50 million in October would be impressive. That could definitely be a key for schools /sports/airlines.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Part of that is the absolute hatred and death threats from social media (even if not on it your friends/family/long lost friends of friends of friends) who will scrutinize your life and determine you did something "wrong" if you dared ever to step a foot outside your door unless it was literally an emergency. And not just aimed at you - but your family/kids etc. Why would anyone INVITE that? Our county will put out alerts for higher risk exposure areas (indoor restaurants, mall etc) but is no longer doing the lower risk exposure (mask use, less than 15 minutes inside etc).
It may just be a complete lack of understanding of what contact tracing is and how it works then. In no way does the department of health publicly list out people by name to be harassed on social media. That‘s just not how it works.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
"Abbott Laboratories said on Wednesday it won U.S. marketing authorization for a COVID-19 portable antigen test that can deliver results within 15 minutes and will sell for $5.

The portable test is about the size of a credit card, requires no additional equipment to operate, and can be conducted using a less invasive nasal swab than traditional lab tests, Abbott executives said on a call with reporters.

Abbott expects to ship tens of millions of tests in September, ramping to 50 million tests a month from the beginning of October."


Good news on that front. Could be a game changer for ramping up fast, affordable testing. It’s too bad the powers that be are pushing hard to reduce testing when we need just the opposite.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
I’m sure there is. I believe an initial statement has been released already from Brett Giroir. I think he’s supposed to do a press conference today if it hasn’t happened already. I imagine he will be asked more about it. But I am sure many will not agree the with reasoning. Maybe I won’t either. Experts have disagreed all through the process. There have been plenty of times where the WHO, the CDC or any outside expert have said something and I thought “huh.” And there have been plenty of times when experts have disagreed with one another. It’s why when people say we should listen to the scientists, my response is “which ones?”

Also, since when do states follow CDC guidelines? :)
I’m not disputing that experts disagree on things. My comment stands. I cannot think of any way to explain how this new guidance makes any sense. You say you are sure there is an explanation but I haven’t heard it from anyone and I personally can’t think of what it could possibly be. I’m all ears to hear it, but I’m not holding my breath.

The CDC’s own pandemic planning scenario still states that their current best estimate is up to 50% of the spread occurs without symptoms. How does it make any sense to no longer recommend a test for anyone who came in contact with a known infected person but isn’t showing symptoms? Those 2 things combined make no sense. If the goal is to catch as many sick people as quickly as possible and isolate them then leaving half the infected people out makes no sense. We have no real lack of testing capability either like at the onset of the pandemic, so that can‘t be the explanation.

Why would anyone think this is a good idea? Why isn’t everyone questioning this move? Are politics really that important to people? Don’t we all just want to keep as many people as possible safe and get the economy going as best we can?
 

Andrew C

You know what's funny?
I’m not disputing that experts disagree on things. My comment stands. I cannot think of any way to explain how this new guidance makes any sense. You say you are sure there is an explanation but I haven’t heard it from anyone and I personally can’t think of what it could possibly be. I’m all ears to hear it, but I’m not holding my breath.

The CDC’s own pandemic planning scenario still states that their current best estimate is up to 50% of the spread occurs without symptoms. How does it make any sense to no longer recommend a test for anyone who came in contact with a known infected person but isn’t showing symptoms? Those 2 things combined make no sense. If the goal is to catch as many sick people as quickly as possible and isolate them then leaving half the infected people out makes no sense. We have no real lack of testing capability either like at the onset of the pandemic, so that can‘t be the explanation.

Why would anyone think this is a good idea? Why isn’t everyone questioning this move? Are politics really that important to people? Don’t we all just want to keep as many people as possible safe and get the economy going as best we can?
Some additional details in here. It’s not meant to change your mind. And I know it won’t. Just providing some quotes. Feel free to read through. I really don’t have a firm position on the matter.

 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Some additional details in here. It’s not meant to change your mind. And I know it won’t. Just providing some quotes. Feel free to read through. I really don’t have a firm position on the matter.

Again, I don’t see the science behind why this is a good recommendation. For example, if they said they now thought asymptomatic spread was not likely or wasn’t very common and that’s the reason for the change then it might make some sense. To change it without any actual reason given makes no sense. I could care less about the political BS. I don’t care who told who to do what. Too much focus on that instead of looking at the reason behind it. Saying you aren’t doing this to decrease the number of tests is just lip service when anyone with even passing knowledge of the situation could look at this and see that’s exactly what’s going to happen. Also, if local authorities follow this recommendation the percent positive is going to go way up since you will be back to only testing symptomatic people. I’m at a loss.
 

Andrew C

You know what's funny?
Again, I don’t see the science behind why this is a good recommendation. For example, if they said they now thought asymptomatic spread was not likely or wasn’t very common and that’s the reason for the change then it might make some sense. To change it without any actual reason given makes no sense. I could care less about the political BS. I don’t care who told who to do what. Too much focus on that instead of looking at the reason behind it. Saying you aren’t doing this to decrease the number of tests is just lip service when anyone with even passing knowledge of the situation could look at this and see that’s exactly what’s going to happen. Also, if local authorities follow this recommendation the percent positive is going to go way up since you will be back to only testing symptomatic people. I’m at a loss.

I was just providing some information I found from the person in charge of testing. I don’t have a stance on this change one way or the other.
 

Touchdown

Well-Known Member
Just some context if you have a major exposure to Covid positive patient you need to quarantine for 10 days, if you remain asymptomatic you are then free to resume normal activities, this does not change if you have a positive or negative covid test, you still have to quarantine for 10 days (no more, no less.)

That changes the moment you develop symptoms, so this recommendation really doesn’t change guidelines.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom