Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[lisa12000]

No where did I say he was spot on from Day 1 or that he knew what to do to prevent it. I only stated that he and the rest of the task force were stating that a lot of people were gonna die, and that all you had to do was listen to the experts and look at what happened to other countries to know this wasn’t some hoax that was gonna disappear come November. No where did I ever state or even imply he was spot on from day one.

Again, it did not take an advanced degree to predict this outcome. People only had to listen to and trust science. Unfortunately, this is something that we as a society have gotten very bad at over the last several years.

Okay again speaking for the UK here - one problem with science is that it is supposed to be apolitical and objective. Of course we know science can never be truly value free due to the fact its human led but still.. My issue is with the SAGE group in the UK. We have a situation now where member of the SAGE group are all popping up on breakfast TV, other daytime programs, every new program to the point where I feel we are seeing most of them every day. There sole aim seems to be to keep restrictions in place longer and go against the govt narrative at times (even though they advise them) - we have John Edmunds telling us we will need to keep masks on forever the other day! Not good for the nations morale, they also advised during Jan that the govt should make it mandatory for. person to wear a mask everywhere but their private dwellings. Its almost seems as though some of them are enjoying the publicity too much, and also making political views known which I do not agree with - its not their job! Just stay off the TV and advise the govt!

Once people see this then the trust starts to wane and start to see conspiracies when they're not there. We forget that for many scientists this is their life work coming to fruition (hope that doesn't sound sadistic), they are able to put into practice what they know - and they dont seem to see the consequences of their words at times (especially when the same SAGE group all are saying different things each day). When Neil Ferguson (of the imperial college model early on!) is one of the most optimistic I do worry a little.

Another issue we have in the UK at the moment are the unions (same in the US?). The NEU I know are protecting their members but they were a little too gleeful when schools were shut (tweets of "we won we are better together" didnt go down well!) and they are already starting to rail against school openings and using it to ask for a pay rise! - it all a bit messy

 

[DisneyCane]

I wonder for Florida got more allocations earlier because their >65 population was higher than other states relative to total population?

They didn't. Desantis requested a higher allocation due to the >65 population ratio but (still under the Trump administration) they denied the request and said it was allocated based on total population.

I think some states are more aggressive in giving out shots and taking the risk there aren’t enough for 2nd shots and others are being more conservative.

For sure some are a lot more aggressive. All you need to do is subtract total doses administered from total doses delivered and compare to the number of first shot only recipients. If the result of the subtraction is close to the number of first shot only then the State is being conservative and holding back doses. If it isn't they are relying on the second dose showing up. Based on that, FL appears to be holding back 2nd shots for the most part.

 

[GoofGoof]

They didn't. Desantis requested a higher allocation due to the >65 population ratio but (still under the Trump administration) they denied the request and said it was allocated based on total population.

For sure some are a lot more aggressive. All you need to do is subtract total doses administered from total doses delivered and compare to the number of first shot only recipients. If the result of the subtraction is close to the number of first shot only then the State is being conservative and holding back doses. If it isn't they are relying on the second dose showing up. Based on that, FL appears to be holding back 2nd shots for the most part.

Yep, makes sense. Looking at the Bloomberg list FL sits at #28 on percent of doses used which implies they are holding back some doses for 2nd shots which is necessary. Some of the rural states near the top of the list have used almost all doses but will grind to a halt once people need to get their second shots.

 

[sullyinMT]

Yep, makes sense. Looking at the Bloomberg list FL sits at #28 on percent of doses used which implies they are holding back some doses for 2nd shots which is necessary. Some of the rural states near the top of the list have used almost all doses but will grind to a halt once people need to get their second shots.

Not necessarily. The Dakotas and Montana are being very deliberate in allocation which portion of the shipments are earmarked for first and second doses. People will still get their series on time assuming manufacturing doesn’t fall short (no indication yet for that happening).

What may slow down is the pace of first doses. Where we’re well above 10% in many rural states, the climb to 20, 30, 40+ may stall, but fully vaccinated % will climb rather quickly. I’m fascinated by ND’s dashboard. As of Mon, over 20% of 80+ were fully protected.

 

[OrlandoRising]

There sole aim seems to be to keep restrictions in place longer and go against the govt narrative at times (even though they advise them) - we have John Edmunds telling us we will need to keep masks on forever the other day!

Where's the evidence he actually said that? In the ITV interview I saw, he said the COVID-19 virus will be around in some form "probably forever," which is totally different. Almost all infectious disease experts agree that the virus is likely to be endemic, much like the flu, but doesn't mean mandatory masks forever at all (or even once most people have been vaccinated).

 

[Flugell]

Okay again speaking for the UK here - one problem with science is that it is supposed to be apolitical and objective. Of course we know science can never be truly value free due to the fact its human led but still.. My issue is with the SAGE group in the UK. We have a situation now where member of the SAGE group are all popping up on breakfast TV, other daytime programs, every new program to the point where I feel we are seeing most of them every day. There sole aim seems to be to keep restrictions in place longer and go against the govt narrative at times (even though they advise them) - we have John Edmunds telling us we will need to keep masks on forever the other day! Not good for the nations morale, they also advised during Jan that the govt should make it mandatory for. person to wear a mask everywhere but their private dwellings. Its almost seems as though some of them are enjoying the publicity too much, and also making political views known which I do not agree with - its not their job! Just stay off the TV and advise the govt!

Once people see this then the trust starts to wane and start to see conspiracies when they're not there. We forget that for many scientists this is their life work coming to fruition (hope that doesn't sound sadistic), they are able to put into practice what they know - and they dont seem to see the consequences of their words at times (especially when the same SAGE group all are saying different things each day). When Neil Ferguson (of the imperial college model early on!) is one of the most optimistic I do worry a little.

Another issue we have in the UK at the moment are the unions (same in the US?). The NEU I know are protecting their members but they were a little too gleeful when schools were shut (tweets of "we won we are better together" didnt go down well!) and they are already starting to rail against school openings and using it to ask for a pay rise! - it all a bit messy

First of all you are not speaking FOR the U.K. but FROM the U.K.. A semantic but vital difference. (Sorry but you’re not speaking for me!)
The government has been accused of ignoring the science so having SAGE speaking to us directly I consider progress. If, as they say, restrictions need to remain in place then they should remain in place. I doubt that they are on a power crush, instead I think that they are desperately trying to explain to the British public what they believe to be true.
I do not understand the reticence of wearing masks whenever you leave the house. Forever seems unlikely but who can see into the future and decide now when it will happen in the future? Surely it is better to remain cautious rather than risk the outbreak spreading again.
As for the Unions, you especially mentioned teachers. Teachers who have suffered horrendously throughout the pandemic. Being an ex teacher and having many friends who remain in the profession I can’t begin to explain the fear, the stress and the additional work load that they have had to cope with. That doesn’t even take into account the number of school based staff who have had COVID-19 and those who have died. Education is vital but health and safety overrides everything. The Union celebrated because it meant that teachers and school based staff were in less danger. Schools remain open for the children of key workers so staff are dealing with and planning lessons for those in school, those distance learning and being available for zoom classes throughout the day.
There is no easy solution but releasing the restrictions too quickly will, in my opinion, risk the R rate increasing with the resulting hospitalisations and deaths. Not to mention making the roll out of vaccines less effective. There is no scientific evidence, as yet, that those who are vaccinated are not able to spread the virus as asymptomatic carriers do. Until we have clarification on this I firmly believe it would be utterly stupid to remove any restrictions or reopen schools and non essential shops and services.

 

[Disney Experience]

There is no scientific evidence, as yet, that those who are vaccinated are not able to spread the virus as asymptomatic carriers do.

There is some scientific evidence that at least the duration and viral load is lower if vaccinated. ( See the linked studies in previous posts.).

Conclusive clinical evidence is still pending on how much ( if any) transmission occurs through those fully vaccinated. But there is some evidence.

 

[GoofGoof]

Not necessarily. The Dakotas and Montana are being very deliberate in allocation which portion of the shipments are earmarked for first and second doses. People will still get their series on time assuming manufacturing doesn’t fall short (no indication yet for that happening).

What may slow down is the pace of first doses. Where we’re well above 10% in many rural states, the climb to 20, 30, 40+ may stall, but fully vaccinated % will climb rather quickly. I’m fascinated by ND’s dashboard. As of Mon, over 20% of 80+ were fully protected.

I meant new first doses will grind to a halt if they used all the doses without holding any back for 2nd. Delivery will pick up so it won’t go to zero but it’s a temporary win now that will slow.

 

[techgeek]

So I have a question for those who seem to be a bit more knowledgeable about the science of COVID.
If I get tested say tomorrow, and it comes back negative, does that mean for all intents and purposes I most likely was not carrying Covid asymptomatically within the prior ten days? Because it it takes two weeks to incubate and/or leave my system right? So negative means I am not carrying it at that moment and wasn’t prior ten days, positive means yes? Only reason I ask is I’m going to be around non-household members next weekend and am getting tested after to make I wasn’t carrying and gave to them or someone at the store/gas station on the road.

The CDC defines a negative result pretty straightforwardly and makes no assumptions outside the snapshot moment that the sample was taken:

COVID-19 and Your Health

Symptoms, testing, what to do if sick, daily activities, and more.

www.cdc.gov

• If you test negative, you probably were not infected at the time your sample was collected. The test result only means that you did not have COVID-19 at the time of testing. Continue to take steps to protect yourself.

 

[Heppenheimer]

Darker is more doses administered per 100k. Looks like FL is doing pretty well from a shots in the arm perspective especially compared to other States with similar population. Map from the CDC:

View attachment 531971

Wow, West Virginia leading the way in a positive metric, for once.

 

[Heppenheimer]

True, but at the same time they are no longer recommending quarantining if you are fully vaccinated and have contact with a covid positive person unless you have symptoms. So if you are exempt from quarantine with known contact I would assume you are also exempt from travel quarantining too when fully vaccinated. Maybe reading too much between the lines, but that’s my interpretation.

I think we are starting to see the beginning of relaxing of restrictions based on vaccinations. We aren’t close to enough vaccinated yet to see big moves but I think it’s going to be a reality in a matter of months. Right now only 4% of the population is fully vaccinated but in less than a month that will be over 10% since 11.4% right now have gotten at least 1 shot. It’s coming and sooner than later.

I linked the CDC statement about the change in quarantine requirements somewhere on this website, but it did not mention a change in travel restrictions. The loosening of the quarantine recommendation only applies for a known asymptomatic exposure in someone who is fully vaccinated.

 

[James J]

First of all you are not speaking FOR the U.K. but FROM the U.K.. A semantic but vital difference. (Sorry but you’re not speaking for me!)
The government has been accused of ignoring the science so having SAGE speaking to us directly I consider progress. If, as they say, restrictions need to remain in place then they should remain in place. I doubt that they are on a power crush, instead I think that they are desperately trying to explain to the British public what they believe to be true.
I do not understand the reticence of wearing masks whenever you leave the house. Forever seems unlikely but who can see into the future and decide now when it will happen in the future? Surely it is better to remain cautious rather than risk the outbreak spreading again.
As for the Unions, you especially mentioned teachers. Teachers who have suffered horrendously throughout the pandemic. Being an ex teacher and having many friends who remain in the profession I can’t begin to explain the fear, the stress and the additional work load that they have had to cope with. That doesn’t even take into account the number of school based staff who have had COVID-19 and those who have died. Education is vital but health and safety overrides everything. The Union celebrated because it meant that teachers and school based staff were in less danger. Schools remain open for the children of key workers so staff are dealing with and planning lessons for those in school, those distance learning and being available for zoom classes throughout the day.
There is no easy solution but releasing the restrictions too quickly will, in my opinion, risk the R rate increasing with the resulting hospitalisations and deaths. Not to mention making the roll out of vaccines less effective. There is no scientific evidence, as yet, that those who are vaccinated are not able to spread the virus as asymptomatic carriers do. Until we have clarification on this I firmly believe it would be utterly stupid to remove any restrictions or reopen schools and non essential shops and services.

Well put, and much more in line with my views here in the UK as well as those I know!

 

[Crunchie9]

Again.. time and time again you have thrown shots at probably one of the greatest people of all time dealing with things related to viruses. You can pick out one or two things over the last year and say..” what if we listened to him when he said” .. just stop. Again, here is he’s unbelievable resume of what he has done in his career. Please read and just stop.
When you say “ I understand that things change as more data comes in” should be enough to know that’s how science works. You understand, I think that part, but in a back handed way still criticize.

Anthony S. Fauci, M.D.

Anthony S. Fauci, M.D., Director of NIAID, oversees research to prevent, diagnose, and treat infectious diseases, immune-related illnesses, and allergies.

www.niaid.nih.gov

The greatest minds subscribe to the Delphi method. Fauci does not subscribe to that approach.

 

[_caleb]

The greatest minds subscribe to the Delphi method. Fauci does not subscribe to that approach.

Dr. Fauci does not work alone. Not sure what you mean by this.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Certain trips are not feasible by car. My recent trip to Colorado to ski is an example.

You are most likely within one days drive of a ski resort. Don’t get me wrong, I love Colorado and there is nothing like the Colorado Rockies so I get it... but that’s a strange example. You didn’t have to take a vacation to Colorado in order to ski, you chose to do that. Which is fine, but it was a unnecessary risk that you chose to take.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

The greatest minds subscribe to the Delphi method. Fauci does not subscribe to that approach.

 

[Kevin_W]

You are most likely within one days drive of a ski resort. Don’t get me wrong, I love Colorado and there is nothing like the Colorado Rockies so I get it... but that’s a strange example. You didn’t have to take a vacation to Colorado in order to ski, you chose to do that. Which is fine, but it was a unnecessary risk that you chose to take.

It depends how you define "ski resort". If you have skied in the Rockies, nothing in the east is even close.

 

[SamusAranX]

It depends how you define "ski resort". If you have skied in the Rockies, nothing in the east is even close.

Going in NC next weekend it’s a days drive. It’s smaller resorts and runs but it will kill my “itch”.

 

[GoofGoof]

It depends how you define "ski resort". If you have skied in the Rockies, nothing in the east is even close.

Are you telling me the pocono Mountains in PA aren’t on par with Aspen

It‘s like going to a casino to gamble. I can drive down the road to a local casino and play blackjack or roulette or slots but it’s in no way the same overall experience as going to Vegas.

 

[Lilofan]

Are you telling me the pocono Mountains in PA aren’t on par with Aspen

It‘s like going to a casino to gamble. I can drive down the road to a local casino and play blackjack or roulette or slots but it’s in no way the same overall experience as going to Vegas.

Vegas is one of a kind for gambling, food and drink. When my brother went to Hong Kong on vacation with his friends, they made a side trip to Macau. Macau is light years ahead of Vegas.