Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[danlb_2000]

I think by the very nature of COVID-19 right now it will be political.

Yes, I hear it voted for Trump.

 

[oceanbreeze77]

"Eli Lilly & Co.’s antibody therapy was granted an emergency-use authorization by U.S. drug regulators for treating Covid-19, widening access to a treatment that early data suggests is effective in keeping people infected with the coronavirus out of the hospital.

The Food and Drug Administration authorized the treatment, called bamlanivimab, for use against mild-to-moderate Covid-19 in adult and pediatric patients, the agency said on its website."

Eli Lilly Covid Antibody Drug Gets FDA Emergency Clearence

Eli Lilly & Co.’s antibody therapy was granted an emergency-use authorization by U.S. drug regulators for treating Covid-19, widening access to a treatment that early data suggest is effective in keeping people infected with the coronavirus out of the hospital.

www.bloomberg.com

wasn't this halted 2 weeks ago?

 

[DCBaker]

wasn't this halted 2 weeks ago?

Q. Was the bamlanivimab arm of a clinical trial (ACTIV-3) terminated?

A. Yes. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)-sponsored ACTIV-3 clinical trial is a platform trial designed to test the safety and efficacy of various investigational agents, including bamlanivimab, for the treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The trial was paused on October 13, 2020, by the independent Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB). On October 26, 2020, it was announced that no additional patients in ACTIV-3 would receive bamlanivimab. This recommendation was based on trial data suggesting that bamlanivimab is unlikely to help hospitalized COVID-19 patients recover from a more advanced stage of disease.

The population being studied in the ACTIV-3 trial is different than the population authorized to use bamlanivimab under the EUA. The EUA authorizes emergency use for the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 in non-hospitalized adult and pediatric patients with positive results of direct SARS-CoV-2 viral testing who are 12 years of age and older weighing at least 40kg, and who are at high risk for progressing to severe COVID-19 and/or hospitalization, while the ACTIV-3 trial studied hospitalized patients with COVID-19. This EUA request was based on the interim results from Lilly’s BLAZE-1 clinical trial that includes non-hospitalized patients. The EUA limits the authorized use of bamlanivimab. Bamlanivimab is not authorized for use in patients who are hospitalized due to COVID-19, or who require oxygen therapy due to COVID-19, or who require an increase in baseline oxygen flow rate due to COVID-19 in those on chronic oxygen therapy due to underlying non-COVID-19 related comorbidity. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bamlanivimab, may be associated with worse clinical outcomes when administered to hospitalized patients with COVID-19 requiring high flow oxygen or mechanical ventilation.

https://www.fda.gov/media/143605/download

 

[oceanbreeze77]

Q. Was the bamlanivimab arm of a clinical trial (ACTIV-3) terminated?

A. Yes. The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)-sponsored ACTIV-3 clinical trial is a platform trial designed to test the safety and efficacy of various investigational agents, including bamlanivimab, for the treatment of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The trial was paused on October 13, 2020, by the independent Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB). On October 26, 2020, it was announced that no additional patients in ACTIV-3 would receive bamlanivimab. This recommendation was based on trial data suggesting that bamlanivimab is unlikely to help hospitalized COVID-19 patients recover from a more advanced stage of disease.

The population being studied in the ACTIV-3 trial is different than the population authorized to use bamlanivimab under the EUA. The EUA authorizes emergency use for the treatment of mild to moderate COVID-19 in non-hospitalized adult and pediatric patients with positive results of direct SARS-CoV-2 viral testing who are 12 years of age and older weighing at least 40kg, and who are at high risk for progressing to severe COVID-19 and/or hospitalization, while the ACTIV-3 trial studied hospitalized patients with COVID-19. This EUA request was based on the interim results from Lilly’s BLAZE-1 clinical trial that includes non-hospitalized patients. The EUA limits the authorized use of bamlanivimab. Bamlanivimab is not authorized for use in patients who are hospitalized due to COVID-19, or who require oxygen therapy due to COVID-19, or who require an increase in baseline oxygen flow rate due to COVID-19 in those on chronic oxygen therapy due to underlying non-COVID-19 related comorbidity. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bamlanivimab, may be associated with worse clinical outcomes when administered to hospitalized patients with COVID-19 requiring high flow oxygen or mechanical ventilation.

https://www.fda.gov/media/143605/download

thank you!

 

[GimpYancIent]

I was talking about utility scale solar not rooftop, although rooftop is OK too. These utility scale projects are popping up all of the place and they are economic without tax incentives. Big change from even a few years ago when the math didn’t work. Once you build a solar facility you have no fuel costs and significantly lower overhead. Coal is dead and that is pure economics with nothing to do with climate change. Nuclear is fine but also poor economically. Many nuclear plants in deregulated markets can’t make ends meet. Lots of plans to offer lifelines but with cheap fracked gas and cheaper renewables, coal and nuclear are on the outs.

All electric cars is the future but more like 10+ years out.

Actually listening to engineering heads at Porsche, Audi and Peugeot all electric vehicles are being referred to as interim measures. The long term future outlook is for liquid hydrogen fueled vehicles. Working hydrogen fueled hybrid and non hybrid working prototypes are already being tested with racing prototypes to begin appearing in 2021. Also a reference was made to some commercial vehicles in England being routinely used already with no issues. Imagine vehicle exhaust being mere water vapor.

 

[BrianLo]

I'm very glad the light is at the end of the tunnel officially. Even if absolutely nothing about the progression or efficacy surprises me personally.

I'm just worried about what will happen before then.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I'm very glad the light is at the end of the tunnel officially. Even if absolutely nothing about the progression or efficacy surprises me personally.

I'm just worried about what will happen before then.

Collectively, we're already at the "pandemic is over" stage and this news will only add unintentional fuel to that fire as people will think there's a vaccine now, without realizing it will be several months before anyone can realistically get their hands on it.

 

[oceanbreeze77]

Collectively, we're already at the "pandemic is over" stage and this news will only add unintentional fuel to that fire as people will think there's a vaccine now, without realizing it will be several months before anyone can realistically get their hands on it.

maybe even just under a year from now.

 

[hopemax]

maybe even just under a year from now.

We're all the Rosie scene in American Adventure.

Maybe we'll be able to celebrate together next year.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

You got that a little wrong. In that study it’s wasn’t shown that the people were infected while wearing a mask and distancing it just said that they did those things regularly when required. They weren’t wearing a mask or distancing at home with family or out to dinner with a few friends (common places where infections occurred per the study). The analogy was specifically in relation to getting together for the holidays. Doing that is playing Russian Roulette and hoping your event isn’t the super spreader. Not getting together with family for the Thanksgiving holiday doesn‘t guarantee you won’t get infected anywhere else, it just guarantees you won’t get it at Thanksgiving. So yes, not getting together is an easy way to not play that specific game.

That was my point, perhaps I misread the original post because I interpreted it as an argument that going to WDW is like playing Russian roulette, doing anything right now that involved other people is Russian roulette.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Consistently over 5% now. Not good. Action required, but obviously extremely unlikely with the current national and Florida leaders.

I wish the media would focus on positivity rate rather than new cases with no perspective.

Half as many cases as the previous day but higher positive rate, if someone only watched the news (who focus only on cases and deaths) you’d think it was a great day for Florida.

 

[DisneyTransport]

Actually listening to engineering heads at Porsche, Audi and Peugeot all electric vehicles are being referred to as interim measures. The long term future outlook is for liquid hydrogen fueled vehicles. Working hydrogen fueled hybrid and non hybrid working prototypes are already being tested with racing prototypes to begin appearing in 2021. Also a reference was made to some commercial vehicles in England being routinely used already with no issues. Imagine vehicle exhaust being mere water vapor.

I assisted in fuel cell research years back while in school. Its really great stuff, and just needs a decade or two more of research to really kick into high gear. Definitely that is the future, not electric cars.

 

[Heppenheimer]

I assisted in fuel cell research years back while in school. Its really great stuff, and just needs a decade or two more of research to really kick into high gear. Definitely that is the future, not electric cars.

I'm curious about one point in particular. Because hydrogen production itself consumes energy, what is the proposed power source(s) for the generation process? There wouldn't be a whole lot of net gain if we used a predominantly dirty source, like coal, to drive the electrolysis of water.

Way back when I was an undergrad in the 90s, there was talk of using certain genetically engineered strains of bacteria to feed on garbage and capture the resulting waste hydrogen, but I haven't heard anything more on this proposal in decades. That would seem like a potentially very clean source, but it might not be scalable. And maybe it also produced too much greenhouse gas waste as well.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I'm curious about one point in particular. Because hydrogen production itself consumes energy, what is the proposed power source(s) for the generation process? There wouldn't be a whole lot of net gain if we used a predominantly dirty source, like coal, to drive the electrolysis of water.

Way back when I was an undergrad in the 90s, there was talk of using certain genetically engineered strains of bacteria to feed on garbage and capture the resulting waste hydrogen, but I haven't heard anything more on this proposal in decades. That would seem like a potentially very clean source, but it might not be scalable. And maybe it also produced too much greenhouse gas waste as well.

Any “clean” energy needs to really be so from start to finish. Zero carbon. Perhaps we’ll get there...perhaps we won’t

 

[MisterPenguin]

I'm curious about one point in particular. Because hydrogen production itself consumes energy, what is the proposed power source(s) for the generation process? There wouldn't be a whole lot of net gain if we used a predominantly dirty source, like coal, to drive the electrolysis of water.

In order to reduce carbon emission, solar and wind are taking center stage. However, the problem with solar and wind is the lack of consistency in producing energy. So, the next step is finding carbon-free storage of the energy they produce... IOW, the perfect battery. Hydrogen is a good candidate. Not only can it be made into huge batteries for electric companies, but also small enough for cars. And it's as efficient, if not more so, than other batteries. And certainly more environment-friendly than lithium batteries.

The goal is for all energy production to be carbon-free (excluding the chemical production of the materials used for carbon-free energy production). And for all motors and appliances to be running on that electricity and not burning petroleum/gas locally.

Of course, there's always nuclear energy whose technology has developed into being much safer than the tech of the '70s, being less 'dirty,' less likely to melt down, and doesn't suffer the variability of energy production that solar and wind has. But, you know, nuclear... scary!

 

[Heppenheimer]

In order to reduce carbon emission, solar and wind are taking center stage. However, the problem with solar and wind is the lack of consistency in producing energy. So, the next step is finding carbon-free storage of the energy they produce... IOW, the perfect battery. Hydrogen is a good candidate. Not only can it be made into huge batteries for electric companies, but also small enough for cars. And it's as efficient, if not more so, than other batteries. And certainly more environment-friendly than lithium batteries.

The goal is for all energy production to be carbon-free (excluding the chemical production of the materials used for carbon-free energy production). And for all motors and appliances to be running on that electricity and not burning petroleum/gas locally.

Of course, there's always nuclear energy whose technology has developed into being much safer than the tech of the '70s, being less 'dirty,' less likely to melt down, and doesn't suffer the variability of energy production that solar and wind has. But, you know, nuclear... scary!

So, basically, use the excess energy created by wind and solar during times of low demand to drive the hydrolysis of water, then capture the resulting hydrogen?

 

[SamusAranX]

I always thought hamsters on wheels would be a feasible energy solution

 

[Kevin_W]

So, basically, use the excess energy created by wind and solar during times of low demand to drive the hydrolysis of water, then capture the resulting hydrogen?

In a nutshell, yes.

 

[GoofGoof]

That was my point, perhaps I misread the original post because I interpreted it as an argument that going to WDW is like playing Russian roulette, doing anything right now that involved other people is Russian roulette.

This all started with my comment that people should avoid large gatherings for Thanksgiving. I was making the point that even though the vast majority of families will end up being fine someone is going to host a super spreader event and inadvertently infect their family and I wouldn’t want to take that risk. I was making the analogy to Russian Roulette where most people playing get the empty click but someone gets the full chamber. The counter point was that 99%+ of the population won’t die from Covid so it’s no big deal to take the risk.

IMHO you are better off going to WDW with masks and distancing for the day on Thanksgiving than you are going to a large indoor family gathering with no masks or distancing.

 

[Disstevefan1]

For the industry to be healthy they need a profit. They are losing money today. We cannot lose the incentive to produce anytime soon if you want to keep having all the things that come out of a barrel of oil. Otherwise we are competing against Saudi oil that costs very little to produce (thanks ARAMCO) and our domestic industry suffers so little boys can drive big toys. These prices are not sustainable nor is printing money to prop up our economy. These are short term situations and will need to be adjusted if you want to keep driving that car.

Joe is going to stop subsidizing oil and gas so that will for sure drive up the prices. Who knows, maybe we will need to import more, will will for sure stop being an energy exporter.

It will be interesting to see what happens when oil begins to climb and all the industry that rely on oil and gas to survive will do. Even regular folks who need to heat their homes or drive their cars may be affected.

This will be interesting to watch for sure. As always, it will be hard to tell truth from myth.