Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[_caleb]

Very simply put, I think we were beyond the essential stuff only phase in most places. Now with cases spiking all over it may be necessary to go back to that in some places. The point I was making is that there are levels of risk in all activities and there are mitigating measures that can be used to reduce that risk. In some cases they work well and in others not so much. Taking retail as an example, we have found good ways to make shopping more safe with masks and distancing and hygiene. So if grocery shopping is safe so is going to Dicks to buy a bike or going to a clothing store to buy some pants. Even though groceries are more essential it’s no more or less risky to do. Things like indoor dining are a problem and we haven’t found good ways around it and may never.

I think WDW is pretty solid with precautions excluding the indoor dining part. I don‘t think I’m the current environment anyone should be traveling out of state right now, but if you love local and want to go to the park for a few hours there are many worse things you could choose to do.

Right. You're looking at the measures (masks, distancing, etc.) and thinking "these things should keep us relatively safe no matter where we implement them." But where, and how frequently we put ourselves in situations that require mitigation measures makes a huge difference in how much the virus spreads. So it's wise to differentiate between essential and non-essential activities.

You wrote: "if grocery shopping is safe..." (it's not necessarily safe, it's just more essential), "so is going to Dicks..." but because this is less essential (you won't die if you don't go), even employing the same measures here (the ones that mitigate our risks at the grocery store) amplifies our risk of spreading the virus by creating an unnecessary opportunity for exposure.

 

[DCBaker]

Numbers are out - there were 52 new reported deaths.

 

[GoofGoof]

Right. You're looking at the measures (masks, distancing, etc.) and thinking "these things should keep us relatively safe no matter where we implement them." But where, and how frequently we put ourselves in situations that require mitigation measures makes a huge difference in how much the virus spreads. So it's wise to differentiate between essential and non-essential activities.

You wrote: "if grocery shopping is safe..." (it's not necessarily safe, it's just more essential), "so is going to Dicks..." but because this is less essential (you won't die if you don't go), even employing the same measures here (the ones that mitigate our risks at the grocery store) amplifies our risk of spreading the virus by creating an unnecessary opportunity for exposure.

Back in the stay at home order time we were told only to leave our homes for essential things. What you are describing is essentially a return to stay at home orders. A valid opinion, I just don’t agree with it right now. I considered the stay at home orders a blunt instrument attack due to lack of information. Now that we have a better understanding of what’s higher risk and what can be mitigated with safety protocols I think we can do a more targeted approach and limit the really high risk items. Once spread hits a high enough level (it has in some places) everything becomes higher risk and more restrictions come into play.

 

[_caleb]

Back in the stay at home order time we were told only to leave our homes for essential things. What you are describing is essentially a return to stay at home orders. A valid opinion, I just don’t agree with it right now. I considered the stay at home orders a blunt instrument attack due to lack of information. Now that we have a better understanding of what’s higher risk and what can be mitigated with safety protocols I think we can do a more targeted approach and limit the really high risk items. Once spread hits a high enough level (it has in some places) everything becomes higher risk and more restrictions come into play.

Guess I see a clear difference between "stay at home orders" (lockdown) and "clearer distinction between essential and nonessential," where we prioritize the essential. Do you not?

And the articles posted here just in the last couple days show that while we've learned a lot about how COVID spreads and how we can slow it, we're still learning. Hotels (and cafes, restaurants, and gyms) for example, might be higher risk that we'd assumed. And masks might actually be more helpful than we thought.

Why only limit "high risk" items when we could also limit "less necessary" ones?

 

[DCBaker]

"Monday's news that pharmaceutical company Pfizer's early results on a new COVID-19 vaccine showed a 90% efficacy rate on an initial clinical trial have given concert professionals hope that the business can start mounting a return in 2021. As part of that preparation, Ticketmaster has been working on a framework for post-pandemic fan safety that uses smart phones to verify fans' vaccination status or whether they've tested negative for the coronavirus within a 24 to 72 hour window.

Many of details of the plan, which is still in development phase, will rely on three separate components -- the Ticketmaster digital ticket app, third party health information companies like CLEAR Health Pass or IBM's Digital Health Pass and testing and vaccine distribution providers like Labcorp and the CVS Minute Clinic.

Here's how it would work, if approved: After purchasing a ticket for a concert, fans would need to verify that they have already been vaccinated (which would provide approximately one year of COVID-19 protection) or test negative for coronavirus approximately 24 to 72 hours prior to the concert. The length of coverage a test would provide would be governed by regional health authorities -- if attendees of a Friday night concert had to be tested 48 hours in advance, most could start the testing process the day before the event. If it was a 24-hour window, most people would likely be tested the same day of the event at a lab or a health clinic.

Once the test was complete, the fan would instruct the lab to deliver the results to their health pass company, like CLEAR or IBM. If the tests were negative, or the fan was vaccinated, the health pass company would verify the attendee's COVID-19 status to Ticketmaster, which would then issue the fan the credentials needed to access the event. If a fan tested positive or didn't take a test to verify their status, they would not be granted access to the event. There are still many details to work out, but the goal of the program is for fans to take care of vaccines and testing prior to the concert and not show up hoping to be tested onsite.

Ticketmaster would not store or have access to fans' medical records and would only receive verification of whether a fan is cleared to attend an event on a given date. Different states will have different requirements. The main role of companies like health pass companies will be to collect data from testing and medical providers and deliver status updates to partner companies in a secure, encrypted way that complies with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)."

How Ticketmaster Plans to Check Your Vaccine Status for Concerts: Exclusive

Ticketmaster has been working on a framework for post-pandemic fan safety that uses smart phones to verify fans' vaccination status or COVID-19 test results.

www.billboard.com

 

[DCBaker]

"New York Governor Andrew Cuomo announced the closing of bars, restaurants and gyms daily by 10 p.m.

The measures go into effect starting Friday at 10 p.m. Curb-side pick up may continue after 10 p.m.

Gov Cuomo said the new cases are coming from these three main areas."

Coronavirus Updates: Non high-risk Americans should be able to get vaccine by April, Fauci says

Dr. Anthony Fauci says that Americans who are not on the high-priority list for a COVID-19 vaccine should be able to get vaccinated by the end of April.

abc7ny.com

 

[Disorbust]

I though that there was a study out of China that said that sars I had gone thru apartment buildings thru the “pipes”

 

[seabreezept813]

They advertise it at CVS now too. It’s recommended for older people or anyone at higher risk, but I don’t think really the general population.

I was offered it this year at my physical. I’m 31 and I’ve never been offered it before.. I assumed it’s just one of their tools to give us our best chance against covid

 

[GoofGoof]

Guess I see a clear difference between "stay at home orders" (lockdown) and "clearer distinction between essential and nonessential," where we prioritize the essential. Do you not?

And the articles posted here just in the last couple days show that while we've learned a lot about how COVID spreads and how we can slow it, we're still learning. Hotels (and cafes, restaurants, and gyms) for example, might be higher risk that we'd assumed. And masks might actually be more helpful than we thought.

Why only limit "high risk" items when we could also limit "less necessary" ones?

What is the difference between stay at home orders and only doing activity that is deemed essential. At least where I live during the stay at home orders you could leave the house to shop for groceries, go to the pharmacy, go to a doctor‘s appointment, go to work if you have a job deemed essential. Restaurants were open take out only.

I guess asked a better way, what was restricted during stay at home orders that wouldn’t be restricted if we only left the house for essential activity?

 

[JoeCamel]

Just this morning, I talked to my manager at work who had both shingles and flu shot (Costco) recently at the same time. He's also in the Pfizer vaccine trial (so, 50/50 chance of vaccine or placebo) so he's feeling pretty good about his immune system.

He probably glows in the dark

 

[Jrb1979]

What they have been doing here in Ontario is regional restrictions. The two main regions that have the majority of cases have closed indoor dining, fitness classes and exercise classes for 28 days. Gyms can stay open but are only allowed 10 people inside at a time. IMO its what should be happening in places where cases are rising.

 

[GoofGoof]

"Monday's news that pharmaceutical company Pfizer's early results on a new COVID-19 vaccine showed a 90% efficacy rate on an initial clinical trial have given concert professionals hope that the business can start mounting a return in 2021. As part of that preparation, Ticketmaster has been working on a framework for post-pandemic fan safety that uses smart phones to verify fans' vaccination status or whether they've tested negative for the coronavirus within a 24 to 72 hour window.

Many of details of the plan, which is still in development phase, will rely on three separate components -- the Ticketmaster digital ticket app, third party health information companies like CLEAR Health Pass or IBM's Digital Health Pass and testing and vaccine distribution providers like Labcorp and the CVS Minute Clinic.

Here's how it would work, if approved: After purchasing a ticket for a concert, fans would need to verify that they have already been vaccinated (which would provide approximately one year of COVID-19 protection) or test negative for coronavirus approximately 24 to 72 hours prior to the concert. The length of coverage a test would provide would be governed by regional health authorities -- if attendees of a Friday night concert had to be tested 48 hours in advance, most could start the testing process the day before the event. If it was a 24-hour window, most people would likely be tested the same day of the event at a lab or a health clinic.

Once the test was complete, the fan would instruct the lab to deliver the results to their health pass company, like CLEAR or IBM. If the tests were negative, or the fan was vaccinated, the health pass company would verify the attendee's COVID-19 status to Ticketmaster, which would then issue the fan the credentials needed to access the event. If a fan tested positive or didn't take a test to verify their status, they would not be granted access to the event. There are still many details to work out, but the goal of the program is for fans to take care of vaccines and testing prior to the concert and not show up hoping to be tested onsite.

Ticketmaster would not store or have access to fans' medical records and would only receive verification of whether a fan is cleared to attend an event on a given date. Different states will have different requirements. The main role of companies like health pass companies will be to collect data from testing and medical providers and deliver status updates to partner companies in a secure, encrypted way that complies with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)."

How Ticketmaster Plans to Check Your Vaccine Status for Concerts: Exclusive

Ticketmaster has been working on a framework for post-pandemic fan safety that uses smart phones to verify fans' vaccination status or COVID-19 test results.

www.billboard.com

I think the obvious question is could WDW also implement this? Require CMs to be vaccinated and then require guests to either have proof of vaccination and/or proof of a negative test? It’s a decent interim step before cases go to zero. The obvious risk is that with a 90% effective vaccine 10% of those vaccinated could still be contagious, but there will be fewer people to infect. I’d be fine with that if it meant no masks, distancing, capacity limits and shows and characters could come back. Seems like a fair tradeoff to me.

 

[Patcheslee]

Still issues with rapid test availability in my county. Husband told he had to go home from work for sore throat and 99 deg fever today, come back when tested. Only one location in town is rapid and they have been out since Saturday. Other 2 places 3-5 day wait for results, only one of those doesn't require an appointment which is so far 6 days out. Thought test availability was supposedly "improved". Guess we'll be ruled out of concerts from the Ticketmaster plan. We can't get results turned around quick enough

 

[_caleb]

What is the difference between stay at home orders and only doing activity that is deemed essential. At least where I live during the stay at home orders you could leave the house to shop for groceries, go to the pharmacy, go to a doctor‘s appointment, go to work if you have a job deemed essential. Restaurants were open take out only.

I guess asked a better way, what was restricted during stay at home orders that wouldn’t be restricted if we only left the house for essential activity?

Prioritizing the essentials (at least, in my opinion) shouldn't mean we have only one tier of restrictions called "essentials" and then once we relax the restrictions, everything is treated the same. Some things are more important than others, but less important than food and medical attention, so we need multiple tiers. It's not just the mitigation measures that make a difference, it's also the number of interactions we allow ourselves to have with others.

The most important thing is people's attitudes about all of this. Are we all out trying to do whatever we'd like to do, or are we all committed to willingly going above and beyond the restrictions for the common good? The answer seems pretty clear, and we're all suffering the consequences.

 

[_caleb]

Even if we all face the same level of risk of exposure or infection (and statistics say we don’t), some of our neighbors have much more at stake than many of us.

So many people are not able to keep gainful employment in this economy, work from home, be able to afford to take time off work (with or without pay) to quarantine if needed, have the sense of security that comes with access to good healthcare, or have enough money to even consider a trip to WDW.

The people in our communities who are disproportionately affected by the virus are also the people who are being required to work in higher-risk environments just to keep selfish people with disposable income happy. I’m thinking of CMs, foodservice workers, hotel staff, etc.

This is a time when we have to concern ourselves with more than just our own benefit and comfort. People are dying, hospitals are struggling, and the economy is collapsing. Where is the solidarity? Why can’t we all commit to a small amount of suffering for the sake of the common good? How can we get more people looking for ways they can go above and beyond to sacrifice their preferences in order to keep others safe and stem the tide so that we can open back up and get things back on track?

 

[flutas]

Still issues with rapid test availability in my county. Husband told he had to go home from work for sore throat and 99 deg fever today, come back when tested. Only one location in town is rapid and they have been out since Saturday. Other 2 places 3-5 day wait for results, only one of those doesn't require an appointment which is so far 6 days out. Thought test availability was supposedly "improved". Guess we'll be ruled out of concerts from the Ticketmaster plan. We can't get results turned around quick enough

FWIW: The rapid test is garbage. I had a negative rapid test and a positive lab test (2-5day test). So have many of the people I know who have had it.

 

[GoofGoof]

Prioritizing the essentials (at least, in my opinion) shouldn't mean we have only one tier of restrictions called "essentials" and then once we relax the restrictions, everything is treated the same. Some things are more important than others, but less important than food and medical attention, so we need multiple tiers. It's not just the mitigation measures that make a difference, it's also the number of interactions we allow ourselves to have with others.

I don’t disagree that there are a range of activities that are more or less essential. No matter how many buckets you have there are only 2 options either the activity is allowed or it’s not allowed. So while you are saying we shouldn’t have one bucket called essentials and then everything else not allowed (which was the stay at home orders) you are also saying we should limit our interactions to only activities that are essential. That’s a contradiction. That’s why I’m confused. The other issue is who decides what’s essential? I may think an activity is essential for me but someone else sees it as unnecessary. We can’t rely on people to self regulate. There have to be rules and recommendations laid out.

The most important thing is people's attitudes about all of this. Are we all out trying to do whatever we'd like to do, or are we all committed to willingly going above and beyond the restrictions for the common good? The answer seems pretty clear, and we're all suffering the consequences.

In almost every place that has large spikes in cases the governments and health experts are attributing a large portion of the spikes to people doing activities that are not recommended. In some cases private parties and gatherings, in some cases lack of mask mandates, in some cases indoor dining and bars open without good safety protocols. I gues what I’m saying is if those things are a big problem then shutting down those things as well asking people not to go to retail stores and hotels and theme parks and schools and doctor’s offices and other things operating with safety protocols seems like another version of stay at home orders. A blunt weapon that causes a lot of unnecessary damage.

 

[GoofGoof]

FWIW: The rapid test is garbage. I had a negative rapid test and a positive lab test (2-5day test). So have many of the people I know who have had it.

The rapid saliva test is known to be less sensitive than the lab test is. It can result in false negatives.

 

[DisneyCane]

What is the difference between stay at home orders and only doing activity that is deemed essential. At least where I live during the stay at home orders you could leave the house to shop for groceries, go to the pharmacy, go to a doctor‘s appointment, go to work if you have a job deemed essential. Restaurants were open take out only.

I guess asked a better way, what was restricted during stay at home orders that wouldn’t be restricted if we only left the house for essential activity?

Prioritizing the essentials (at least, in my opinion) shouldn't mean we have only one tier of restrictions called "essentials" and then once we relax the restrictions, everything is treated the same. Some things are more important than others, but less important than food and medical attention, so we need multiple tiers. It's not just the mitigation measures that make a difference, it's also the number of interactions we allow ourselves to have with others.

The most important thing is people's attitudes about all of this. Are we all out trying to do whatever we'd like to do, or are we all committed to willingly going above and beyond the restrictions for the common good? The answer seems pretty clear, and we're all suffering the consequences.

I have to agree with @GoofGoof here (shocking, I know). The stay at home orders in the US were never really lockdowns in the sense that China locked down Wuhan. All they did was defined "essential" business and activities that were allowed to operate.

I'm not sure if anybody has brought a court challenge yet but I do not believe that measures which treat "essential" and "non-essential" businesses differently are constitutional. In the USA, we are guaranteed "equal protection" under the law by the constitution. To me, that clearly means either all businesses can operate under the same restrictions or no businesses can operate. People would still be able to eat if you forced grocery stores to do curbside pickup only so the argument that we will starve if you treat them the same as restaurants goes out the window.

 

[MickeyLuv'r]

Thanks, but not that old yet. 50’s here but my mom about 20 years ago got shingles real bad. Recommend it for anyone 50 and above, that’s not something anyone should go through. Long way off to that pneumonia shot.

Quick info I have read...age aside...is that some folks below the age of 65 should get pneumonia vaccine if they have certain medical conditions. I think among them are: asthma/COPD, smokers, diabetes, and probably other conditions as well.

Everyone should check to see if they are due for any of the common vaccines, if you haven't had them in a while/never had them, like Tdap (every 10 years/when pregnant), Hep A and B, MMR, HPV (up to age 26 if never had), Meningitis.

It is helpful to avoid all unnecessary illness this year. If for no other reason, it is a small civic responsibility to help reduce the burden our medical personal are experiencing.