Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[jmp85]

It's happening now. There are a whole lot of people doing those things now, right in the worst part of the pandemic. Clearly, that shouldn't be happening and their actions are contributing to lengthening the pandemic. But if you're looking at reality, I think you have to acknowledge that if people are not following the restrictions as completely as they should now, they aren't going to suddenly start doing so after they're vaccinated. Mitigation efforts are coming to an end sooner rather than later, regardless of whether people think it's wrong or agree with it. I suspect that's what is being acknowledged by the president-elect with his 100-days after the inauguration mask request.

I agree. That type of behavior is happening now and the number of people that give in will only increase. I don't agree with it, but it's just the reality of the situation.

 

[carolina_yankee]

You are focusing on "masks." I'm focusing on the part about no large indoor gaherings and social distancing (translation: restrictions).

As I asked above, what goal is he "right" about the methods required to achieve?

As someone who has a science background as you claim, you know it’s about numbers. It’s about when numbers are low enough and rate of spread is low enough that the public health emergency is over. You know that it’s not about throwing darts at a dart board or waking up one morning and saying, “You know what, Dr. Jill, It’s beautiful outside. I think today’s the day I’ll announce the health crisis over!”

Enough people have to be vaccinated to create herd immunity. Fauci - someone with a science background in precisely how this plays outs - doesn’t expect that to happen until the Fall. So, “well into 2021” is a logical estimate. I’m sure if numbers suddenly plummet in May and show every indication of staying low, they’ll celebrate that we’ve reached it early.

The problem with this whole crisis is that people *trained* in precisely this have been making recommendations or, sometimes, actually calling the shots, but others with a background in something scientific, or not background at all, have decided they know better.

 

[carolina_yankee]

Does going to EPCOT in the 80s count?

In the 80s, yes. In the last couple of decades? No.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

The mask isn't the only thing. People want to go and travel again, shake hands and hug their peers and generally stop living in worry (not just worry over their health, worry that they don't slip up on their actions and offend anyone). The societal restrictions are taking a toll on a lot of people from many different avenues

I get what your saying but we/they all need to grow a pair, and do what needs to be done now so we can hug our family, that’s been protected and can be hugged shake friends hands and travel. It’s been 9-10 months.. you think the experts were asking to do this for the next 10 years.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

It's kind of why the virus response will always be partly political. If left solely to health professionals, restrictions would be extended as long as possible. The response after a vaccine is widely available will have to balance the concerns of health professionals with those of businesses (especially entertainment-oriented ones like restaurants, theaters and theme parks), workplaces and the general public. It will be interesting to see how things play out, but no one knows with much certainty what will happen in the next few months.

The virus response has only been political in the USA for the most part.

 

[Kevin_W]

I get what your saying but we/they all need to grow a pair, and do what needs to be done now so we can hug our family, that’s been protected and can be hugged shake friends hands and travel. It’s been 9-10 months.. you think the experts were asking to do this for the next 10 years.

I think saying "grow a pair" is a bit extreme (as well as pretty sexist). To the average middle-ages person, 9-10 months, even a year or two might not seem terribly long. To a 10-year-old that hasn't had a playdate for 15-20% of the their life for which they have memories? To the 95-year-old who lost his wife this year, couldn't have a proper funeral, is in failing health and can't see his own grandchildren and great-grandchildren?

I know people in both of those camps personally and saying "suck it up, this is for your own good" is pretty harsh,

 

[MisterPenguin]

Just out of curiosity, how many people commenting about "science" in this thread have any advanced scientific education? I do. Show of hands please and taking a biology class in college doesn't count. I mean people for whom science was an integral part of their education.

"I'M THE EXPERT HERE! LISTEN TO ME!!!"

lol. No.

Are you the expert, Scott Atlas, Trump appointed to be on his COVID task force and resigned in disgrace for saying we don't need masks? {He thought his medical science degree in neuroradiology made him an expert in virology or epidemiology.}

Are you one of the two yahoo doctors from California, who, in the early course of the pandemic proclaimed it was pretty much over because just about everybody already caught the virus and we're now at herd immunity? {They forgot that the sick people who come to their clinic are not representative of the general populations, which is statistics 101 for anyone with a science degree.}

Or are you the scientist whose study proved that vaccines caused autism, and was drummed out of the practice for a profoundly faulty study that you eventually disavowed?

In any field you're going to have a minority dissenting opinion. And you hold it.

But science has a way to vindicate you and all others who have the same opinion: Do the science. Gather the data. Run the experiment. Publish it in a respected mainline scientific journal. Let other replicate it to prove you right... or wrong. That's has science works.

If you were really a scientist, or, at least, a competent one, you would know that and you wouldn't be barking that you're right because of a degree.

You should know better "as a scientist". But, judging by your posts, it's clear you don't and never have.

 

[Heppenheimer]

The virus response has only been political in the USA for the most part.

One of the differences in the US is that parts of a mainstream political party decided that they wouldn't listen to the advise of career scientists and invented their own counter-narrative.

There were large protests against the lockdowns in Germany, but these were not supported by any of the major traditional political parties. I also remember seeing an anti-mask protest in Toronto that appeared to have attracted all but a few dozen individuals, if even that much.

Perhaps our UK contributors can comment on this further.

 

[SamusAranX]

One of the differences in the US is that parts of a mainstream political party decided that they wouldn't listen to the advise of career scientists and invented their own counter-narrative.

There were large protests against the lockdowns in Germany, but these were not supported by any of the major traditional political parties. I also remember seeing an anti-mask protest in Toronto that appeared to have attracted all but a few dozen individuals, if even that much.

Perhaps our UK contributors can comment on this further.

They're perspective is biased, as far as they are concerned, we are all ungrateful, traitorous, colonials.

 

[DCBaker]

Numbers are out - there were 137 new reported deaths, along with 1 Non-Florida Resident death.

Florida has now surpassed 20k deaths.

 

[_caleb]

The mitigation efforts will be done by mid-2021. Why? Because people will just stop doing them. I'm not saying that's right. I'm just saying what I believe to be reality. No matter how much you try to educate people, no matter what the numbers look like, and no matter how many mandates are issued, there is going to come a point at which people just say, "screw this, I'm not doing it anymore" and stop. It's going to happen.

I think a lot of people may start to take things more seriously when people they know start getting sick or dying. And the way the numbers are going, that’s going to start happening soon.

 

[Figgy1]

I think a lot of people may start to take things more seriously when people they know start getting sick or dying. And the way the numbers are going, that’s going to start happening soon.

Happened here at the start

 

[DisneyDebRob]

I think saying "grow a pair" is a bit extreme (as well as pretty sexist). To the average middle-ages person, 9-10 months, even a year or two might not seem terribly long. To a 10-year-old that hasn't had a playdate for 15-20% of the their life for which they have memories? To the 95-year-old who lost his wife this year, couldn't have a proper funeral, is in failing health and can't see his own grandchildren and great-grandchildren?

I know people in both of those camps personally and saying "suck it up, this is for your own good" is pretty harsh,

Sorry if that came across as sexist. Was just what I typed and thought it fit. My apologies.
As for the 10 year old or 95 year old that you mention, of course it’s bad. Of course it’s not right. Of course we all want something different. They were probably saying the same things during year long wars and other pandemics. I’m not saying oh well, tough for them. I’m saying if they want to get back to what we all want, a little sacrifice and some good teaching to the younger ones is the way to go. The attitude of “ I’m going to do what I want because I’m missing out on someone’s birthday” I feel is more harsh and not to caring and a lot selfish. We have been sacrificing throughout history for the better good of our country, this is no different. The only difference is that it’s actually going to take less time then a war or other pandemics. The big ones anyway.

 

[Heppenheimer]

They're perspective is biased, as far as they are concerned, we are all ungrateful, traitorous, colonials.

Well, I meant the UK's perspective of how their own government has handled the pandemic in their country. Informed by the appropriate expertise or wishful thinking/willful ignorance? I haven't followed the pandemic in the UK closely enough to form a Yankee-based opinion.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

Here’s the ingredient list if anyone was wondering what’s in the vaccine. The experts say it’s nothing new for vaccines but was a interesting read.

 

[oceanbreeze77]

Redirect Notice

www.google.com

Here’s the ingredient list if anyone was wondering what’s in the vaccine. The experts say it’s nothing new for vaccines but was a interesting read.

FAKE NEWS. They forgot to include the microchip in the list.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

The mask isn't the only thing. People want to go and travel again, shake hands and hug their peers and generally stop living in worry (not just worry over their health, worry that they don't slip up on their actions and offend anyone). The societal restrictions are taking a toll on a lot of people from many different avenues

What a excuse...

If it’s “taking a toll”...just frankly handle it. If it’s too much to bear...get to the other side. Shortest distance is a straight line...alone.

Just passed 300,000...50,000 in a month.

Toughen up.

As someone who has a science background as you claim, you know it’s about numbers. It’s about when numbers are low enough and rate of spread is low enough that the public health emergency is over. You know that it’s not about throwing darts at a dart board or waking up one morning and saying, “You know what, Dr. Jill, It’s beautiful outside. I think today’s the day I’ll announce the health crisis over!”

Enough people have to be vaccinated to create herd immunity. Fauci - someone with a science background in precisely how this plays outs - doesn’t expect that to happen until the Fall. So, “well into 2021” is a logical estimate. I’m sure if numbers suddenly plummet in May and show every indication of staying low, they’ll celebrate that we’ve reached it early.

The problem with this whole crisis is that people *trained* in precisely this have been making recommendations or, sometimes, actually calling the shots, but others with a background in something scientific, or not background at all, have decided they know better.

Sounds like a perpetrator, huh?

I get what your saying but we/they all need to grow a pair, and do what needs to be done now so we can hug our family, that’s been protected and can be hugged shake friends hands and travel. It’s been 9-10 months.. you think the experts were asking to do this for the next 10 years.

Boom!skakalakalaka

 

[JoeCamel]

Just passed 300,000...50,000 in a month.

Just 4 - 5 more months to go.......

 

[Disney Experience]

The 52% efficacy after first shot is based on the Phase 3 study. But no vaccinated Phase 3 participants (Unless they are dropped from the study) received only one shot. So the 52% efficacy is base on 3 weeksX15000 participants. True efficacy of a single shot could be more or less. While the two shot 95% is base on 15000x8 weeks and counting. (For example I am close to three months post my second Pfizer shot).
When they did Phase 1 they tried a stronger dose as a single dose (100 vs 30 they chose), as well as two different two dose(10 and 30, with the second shot being the same as the first). That is when they decided the best choice to move to phase 2/3 was a two dose shot sequence. The single dose had more side effects in their small phase 1 sample, and (I do not have the data in front of me) I assume not enough additional (or even less) efficacy benefit. Will they in the future perhaps look at a different single does? Perhaps.


I understand why there is a legitimate discussion on the merits when people are dying everyday on getting more people to 52% vs getting half as many to 95%. That is not total stupidity. But going away from the phase 3 study protocol in number of doses or even timeline is doing one's own new "study". Is the risk vs benefit really there?

One dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine offers some protection. But experts say you still need the second shot - The Boston Globe

The FDA is close to approving the Pfizer vaccine based on a two-dose regimen. Getting only one shot would mean less protection for people, infectious disease experts say. And no one knows how long that protection might last.

www.bostonglobe.com

Now concerning people taking just one shot vs the two shots, because they think the second shot is just a "booster". Well they are foolish in my opinion. 95% is much better than ~52%. How much inconvenience is it to take two shots?

 

[Disney Experience]

I would be puzzled by a state holding back a lot of the shots in fear of supply chain issues if the federal government is already doing a large hedge against that risk. Having both Federal and State hedging by hold back doses is mostly redundant.