Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[danlb_2000]

I’m not advocating that anything should be ignored. I’m just saying let’s run our own studies and compile data and analyze the results before we declare the vaccines ineffective after less than 6 months and we start rolling out boosters. That study is one piece of data (just like the UK study showing 88% efficacy vs delta variant), not the end all be all of the discussion that some people seem to want it to be. We are still trying to get the remaining people vaccinated and this is certainly not helping. Is it possible that officials are purposely exaggerating the lack of infections in fully vaccinated people? Sure, but all we have is the numbers they tell us. I have no way of knowing if it’s real or not.

From the attached:
Caseloads are skyrocketing in Orange County, almost exclusively among unvaccinated people, said Dr. Raul Pino, the local state health officer, and warned numbers could further climb.

Every new infection reported Sunday and the eight additional deaths reported since last week were among people without the COVID-19 vaccine.

COVID-19 cases surge in Orange County among unvaccinated; Demings urges masks indoors

Amid a surge in new COVID-19 infections — powered by the delta variant taking root in unvaccinated people — Orange County Mayor Jerry Demings said Monday vaccinated people should strong…

www.orlandosentinel.com

In addition we have this article (some stats only reference hospitalizations or deaths but there are also stats on cases:

Statistics show the stark risks of not getting vaccinated against COVID-19

Recent figures from states and cities throughout the United States reveal the extent to which the virus is impacting people who are not fully vaccinated.

abcnews.go.com

I am not doubting the numbers on deaths and hospitalizations, what I am concerned about is asymptomatic and mild infections are much harder to count. If protection from the vaccines and natural infection start to wane, it will probably show up first as mild cases, so it would be good to know how well we are counting these.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

A former nurse, of all things.

Covid vaccine: Speech comparing NHS medics to Nazis condemned

The Royal College of Nursing says the comments at a protest rally were "reprehensible".

www.bbc.com

I remember coming across her name when I watched this interview of her son:

That interview must've been difficult for him...I give him massive credit for trying to expose the falsehoods his mother is spreading.

 

[GoofGoof]

I am not doubting the numbers on deaths and hospitalizations, what I am concerned about is asymptomatic and mild infections are much harder to count. If protection from the vaccines and natural infection start to wane, it will probably show up first as mild cases, so it would be good to know how well we are counting these.

It’s not widely reported, but in the examples I quoted from Orange County FL, LA county in CA and Louisiana a very high percent of cases are among the unvaccinated. I haven’t seen a report from anywhere at all where they are saying a large number of cases are in fully vaccinated. Again, not saying there aren’t breakthrough cases but we aren’t seeing widespread issues yet.

As far as asymptomatic cases I don’t think that’s an issue at all. The vaccines do nothing to prevent a fully vaccinated person from being exposed to covid or from that person breathing it in and becoming infected. What they do is teach the immune system to ramp up and crush the virus before it becomes full blown. So if a fully vaccinated person with no symptoms is tested randomly for Covid (due to work requirements or a medical procedure) and tests positive but it never progresses to symptomatic Covid then the vaccine is doing exactly what it’s supposed to do. There has been strong evidence all along that asymptomatic people are not likely to spread covid due to low viral loads. We were always worried about pre-symptomatic people who were infected and spread the virus before they started showing symptoms. Today once someone is vaccinated they are not even recommended to get a covid test unless they show symptoms. Maybe that’s a mistake, but that’s the current guidance out there so it won’t be possible to track asymptomatic cases in vaccinated people with any level of accuracy.

 

[mf1972]

these people are craaaazy.

since i can’t say what i really want to say…i’ll keep it simple

 

[correcaminos]

I don't think any church would get into trouble with the government for promoting vaccination..That's actually the kind of thing that the government would smile upon.

Trying to avoid politics in this as much as possible...The more subtle issue is if vaccination would be considered "political" within a church. Some of the more evangelical branches of Protestantism seem to have firmly aligned themselves on a certain side of the politcal aisle, even embracing a certain politician, that to put it lightly, seems to stand for almost everything that Christians should be against. And it is no secret that this certain side of the political aisle is far less enthusiastic about promoting vaccinations than the other. So, in this context, the partisan divide might bleed into the internal workings of the church, so much so that fully embracing and encouraging vaccination might be seen also as a betrayal by joining the "other side" of the political aisle.

Thank you for putting it into words better than I could.

This makes me hang my head in shame as a Brit. And to make matters worse, she's spewing this nonsense from in front of the National Gallery, one of the finest art museums in the world. A surreal juxtaposition of the best and worst of humanity.

We have our own set of crazies here, so don't worry, we know it's just the vocal wackos who sadly get others to follow.

 

[GoofGoof]

For anyone looking for someone to be mad at or to blame maybe this guy would be a good start:

The Most Influential Spreader of Coronavirus Misinformation Online

SAN FRANCISCO — The article that appeared online Feb. 9 began with a seemingly innocuous question about the legal definition of vaccines. Then over its next 3,400 words, it declared coronavirus vaccines were “a medical fraud” and said the injections did not prevent infections, provide immunity...

www.yahoo.com

 

[Sans Souci]

A former nurse, of all things.

Covid vaccine: Speech comparing NHS medics to Nazis condemned

The Royal College of Nursing says the comments at a protest rally were "reprehensible".

www.bbc.com

I remember coming across her name when I watched this interview of her son:

Unfortunately, the fear and manipulation tactics these people use on their followers influence their parenting as well. It goes well beyond making your children think the Rothschilds are after them.

 

[Virtual Toad]

For anyone looking for someone to be mad at or to blame maybe this guy would be a good start:

The Most Influential Spreader of Coronavirus Misinformation Online

SAN FRANCISCO — The article that appeared online Feb. 9 began with a seemingly innocuous question about the legal definition of vaccines. Then over its next 3,400 words, it declared coronavirus vaccines were “a medical fraud” and said the injections did not prevent infections, provide immunity...

www.yahoo.com

And he had to be from Florida. Social media is a scourge on the civilized world. Their entire financial model is based on amplifying the voices of those who shout “fire” in a crowded theatre. Media literacy courses should be mandatory in our schools. Because sadly far too many people rely solely on FB for their news and have absolutely no clue they’re being fed destructive propoaganda.

 

[Smooth]

voanews/covid-19-pandemic/thousands-around-globe-protest-covid-19-shots-lockdown

 

[huwar18]

Even without forced physical distancing people may just be staying further away from each other. I know I still do when out in public. I’m not measuring out 6 feet or anything but I’m still more aware of where I stand or walk then I ever was before Covid.

Yeah that makes a ton of sense. I know we definitely left space. That was one nice thing about Covid lol.

 

[Virtual Toad]

And there’s this from the BBC:

“A mysterious marketing agency secretly offered to pay social media stars to spread disinformation about Covid-19 vaccines. Their plan failed when the influencers went public about the attempt to recruit them.”

The YouTubers who blew the whistle on an anti-vax plot - BBC News

A mysterious marketing agency secretly offered to pay social media stars to spread disinformation about Covid-19 vaccines

www.bbc.co.uk

From the article (worth reading in its entirety):

"If you want to manipulate public opinion, especially for young people, you don't go to TV" says French YouTuber Léo Grasset." Just spend the same money on TikTok creators, YouTube creators. The whole ecosystem is perfectly built for maximum efficiency of disinformation right now."

 

[ImperfectPixie]

And he had to be from Florida. Social media is a scourge on the civilized world. Their entire financial model is based on amplifying the voices of those who shout “fire” in a crowded theatre. Media literacy courses should be mandatory in our schools. Because sadly far too many people rely solely on FB for their news and have absolutely no clue they’re being fed destructive propoaganda.

My son is in high school and they do talk about finding quality sources, but I agree...that should be it's own class and it should also cover thinking about the motivations of people who post things online.

Relying on FB for news though, I think, is more of an issue among those who didn't grow up with smartphones, etc.

 

[hopemax]

I’m not advocating that anything should be ignored. I’m just saying let’s run our own studies and compile data and analyze the results before we declare the vaccines ineffective after less than 6 months and we start rolling out boosters. That study is one piece of data (just like the UK study showing 88% efficacy vs delta variant), not the end all be all of the discussion that some people seem to want it to be. We are still trying to get the remaining people vaccinated and this is certainly not helping. Is it possible that officials are purposely exaggerating the lack of infections in fully vaccinated people? Sure, but all we have is the numbers they tell us. I have no way of knowing if it’s real or not.

From the attached:
Caseloads are skyrocketing in Orange County, almost exclusively among unvaccinated people, said Dr. Raul Pino, the local state health officer, and warned numbers could further climb.

Every new infection reported Sunday and the eight additional deaths reported since last week were among people without the COVID-19 vaccine.

COVID-19 cases surge in Orange County among unvaccinated; Demings urges masks indoors

Amid a surge in new COVID-19 infections — powered by the delta variant taking root in unvaccinated people — Orange County Mayor Jerry Demings said Monday vaccinated people should strong…

www.orlandosentinel.com

In addition we have this article (some stats only reference hospitalizations or deaths but there are also stats on cases:

Statistics show the stark risks of not getting vaccinated against COVID-19

Recent figures from states and cities throughout the United States reveal the extent to which the virus is impacting people who are not fully vaccinated.

abcnews.go.com

There are two groups of people being tested.

A. People who get sick enough to head to a testing site. These people, due to severity of their symptoms are likely heavily weighted to the unvaccinated. They're the ones showing up in the reporting, because they are by far the largest group.

B. People who are still being regularly tested as part of their employment. If they’re athletes we hear about them. But are we getting reporting about anyone else? This behavior isn't just happening with athletes.

We definitely aren’t getting surveillance about the people who would test positive if they were actually tested but aren’t because they don't realize they have a technical infection going on. I'm going to call them Group C.

We know breakthrough cases occur, so does it really make sense for the numbers to come back 99% infections in the unvaccinated? To me, that doesn't make sense either. No one believes the vaccines are THAT good. And so I will continue to wonder if the Israel data is capturing something different than we are because we aren't looking for the same things.

And do not interpret that as an "end of discussion." I get way more of that feeling from your dismissal of the Israeli data. I am certainly open to the Israeli data being wrong. Are you open to the Israeli data capturing something important? The main difference between us is should a study like this be treated as valid or invalid until proven or not with additional data. IMO, if you dismiss the validity and wait for our data, we lose the opportunity to react to it and change behavior and therefore the outcome for our people who would be affected, if validity is eventually proven. If you proceed as it as valid, and take additional precautions do you make the situation worse in terms of protection against infection (American head space is another thing), if it's found to be invalid. The whole "plan for the worst." Everyone says they want early warning systems, but then when the light flashes people seem to just want to chalk it up to error, doesn't mean anything, so they don't have to change what they are doing.

 

[danlb_2000]

There are two groups of people being tested.

A. People who get sick enough to head to a testing site. These people, due to severity of their symptoms are likely heavily weighted to the unvaccinated. They're the ones showing up in the reporting, because they are by far the largest group.

B. People who are still being regularly tested as part of their employment. If they’re athletes we hear about them. But are we getting reporting about anyone else? This behavior isn't just happening with athletes.

We definitely aren’t getting surveillance about the people who would test positive if they were actually tested but aren’t because they don't realize they have a technical infection going on. I'm going to call them Group C.

We know breakthrough cases occur, so does it really make sense for the numbers to come back 99% infections in the unvaccinated? To me, that doesn't make sense either. No one believes the vaccines are THAT good. And so I will continue to wonder if the Israel data is capturing something different than we are because we aren't looking for the same things.

And do not interpret that as an "end of discussion." I get way more of that feeling from your dismissal of the Israeli data. I am certainly open to the Israeli data being wrong. Are you open to the Israeli data capturing something important? The main difference between us is should a study like this be treated as valid or invalid until proven or not with additional data. IMO, if you dismiss the validity and wait for our data, we lose the opportunity to react to it and change behavior and therefore the outcome for our people who would be affected, if validity is eventually proven. If you proceed as it as valid, and take additional precautions do you make the situation worse in terms of protection against infection (American head space is another thing), if it's found to be invalid. The whole "plan for the worst." Everyone says they want early warning systems, but then when the light flashes people seem to just want to chalk it up to error, doesn't mean anything, so they don't have to change what they are doing.

Which brings me back to a question I asked earlier, when you get tested do you have to provide your vaccination status, because this is the only way we would be able to capture reliable data about un-hospitalized people getting infected.

 

[Heppenheimer]

Who is this woman?

I notice she's got loads of distance between herself and the thronging mass.

I thought she was that Congresswoman from Georgia at first, before I heard her accent.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

I thought she was that Congresswoman from Georgia at first, before I hear her accent.

Seems like the same personality type, for sure.

 

[hopemax]

Which brings me back to a question I asked earlier, when you get tested do you have to provide your vaccination status, because this is the only way we would be able to capture reliable data about un-hospitalized people getting infected.

I imagine, like everything else, it depends on who is running the test and where the testing is happening. And what happens if people leave that question blank, when asked? Are they not going to test you? Doubtful.

 

[GoofGoof]

There are two groups of people being tested.

A. People who get sick enough to head to a testing site. These people, due to severity of their symptoms are likely heavily weighted to the unvaccinated. They're the ones showing up in the reporting, because they are by far the largest group.

B. People who are still being regularly tested as part of their employment. If they’re athletes we hear about them. But are we getting reporting about anyone else? This behavior isn't just happening with athletes.

We definitely aren’t getting surveillance about the people who would test positive if they were actually tested but aren’t because they don't realize they have a technical infection going on. I'm going to call them Group C.

We know breakthrough cases occur, so does it really make sense for the numbers to come back 99% infections in the unvaccinated? To me, that doesn't make sense either. No one believes the vaccines are THAT good. And so I will continue to wonder if the Israel data is capturing something different than we are because we aren't looking for the same things.

And do not interpret that as an "end of discussion." I get way more of that feeling from your dismissal of the Israeli data. I am certainly open to the Israeli data being wrong. Are you open to the Israeli data capturing something important? The main difference between us is should a study like this be treated as valid or invalid until proven or not with additional data. IMO, if you dismiss the validity and wait for our data, we lose the opportunity to react to it and change behavior and therefore the outcome for our people who would be affected, if validity is eventually proven. If you proceed as it as valid, and take additional precautions do you make the situation worse in terms of protection against infection (American head space is another thing), if it's found to be invalid. The whole "plan for the worst." Everyone says they want early warning systems, but then when the light flashes people seem to just want to chalk it up to error, doesn't mean anything, so they don't have to change what they are doing.

I know it’s easy to just label me as dismissing the data and I could honestly care less, but I’m not sure how we can set policy and react to this study when it’s an outlier. I think we certainly need to study this further but we cannot react every time some additional study shows anything negative. If the only data we had was a single study from Israel that showed the vaccine efficacy is down to 40% then that would be much more troubling. Instead we have other recent studies like the one in the UK that showed 88% efficacy and a whole lot of real life case data that just doesn’t point to the same conclusions. What you are suggesting is we ignore the other data and plan as if this data from the single study could be accurate because it’s the worst and you always plan for the worst. I’m not sure that’s a solid way to set policy. Imagine if they started rolling out boosters now because of this data and it was later proven to be flawed. That would really damage the public confidence in vaccinations.

Let me try to explain this a different way. We all know the delta variant is far more contagious than the previous versions of Covid. Various studies and lots of real world data shows this to be true. If a study comes out of Israel tomorrow that shows the delta variant is 50% less contagious than alpha do we automatically accept that it‘s accurate or do we look at the various evidence out there and treat that study as an outlier? Most people would be skeptical and treat it as an outlier. That doesn’t mean they are dismissing it outright, but we would need more than 1 outlier study to change public opinion.

 

[GoofGoof]

Which brings me back to a question I asked earlier, when you get tested do you have to provide your vaccination status, because this is the only way we would be able to capture reliable data about un-hospitalized people getting infected.

How could various states and localities report percentages if they were not tracking it?

 

[hopemax]

I know it’s easy to just label me as dismissing the data and I could honestly care less, but I’m not sure how we can set policy and react to this study when it’s an outlier. I think we certainly need to study this further but we cannot react every time some additional study shows anything negative. If the only data we had was a single study from Israel that showed the vaccine efficacy is down to 40% then that would be much more troubling. Instead we have other recent studies like the one in the UK that showed 88% efficacy and a whole lot of real life case data that just doesn’t point to the same conclusions. What you are suggesting is we ignore the other data and plan as if this data from the single study could be accurate because it’s the worst and you always plan for the worst. I’m not sure that’s a solid way to set policy. Imagine if they started rolling out boosters now because of this data and it was later proven to be flawed. That would really damage the public confidence in vaccinations.

Let me try to explain this a different way. We all know the delta variant is far more contagious than the previous versions of Covid. Various studies and lots of real world data shows this to be true. If a study comes out of Israel tomorrow that shows the delta variant is 50% less contagious than alpha do we automatically accept that it‘s accurate or do we look at the various evidence out there and treat that study as an outlier? Most people would be skeptical and treat it as an outlier. That doesn’t mean they are dismissing it outright, but we would need more than 1 outlier study to change public opinion.

For everyone else, this is not what I am suggesting in my post.