Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[GoofGoof]

The CDC advisors are meeting today to develop the rules on booster shots for 65+ and high risk. I assume we should have guidelines on who qualifies for the booster and when they will be available. I assume they will also potentially detail what the plan is for vaccine cards. Will they issue new cards with a line for the 3rd shot date or just use the extra line on the existing cards? Also what happens if someone already laminated the original card.

 

[mmascari]

I think I read several places that MU and the other variant R1 just cannot out work Delta and probably wouldn't be an issue. There was this piece of good news today. Several models have indicated this would be under control by March. I am crossing my fingers but at this point I'll believe it when I see it.

March?

I guess that's "good" news. But, frankly, I find it depressing that it's going to take us 6 more months (at least).

 

[GoofGoof]

March?

I guess that's "good" news. But, frankly, I find it depressing that it's going to take us 6 more months (at least).

The WHO is saying IF we focus on vaccinating the low vaccination countries now the pandemic could be under control by March 2022. It won’t be completely over but it could be under control instead of spreading unchecked. The timeline is based on when we will have enough vaccine doses manufactured for enough people. The issue is around logistics and distribution. Can we get those doses to the people who need them and will enough of them take it?

 

[correcaminos]

The CDC advisors are meeting today to develop the rules on booster shots for 65+ and high risk. I assume we should have guidelines on who qualifies for the booster and when they will be available. I assume they will also potentially detail what the plan is for vaccine cards. Will they issue new cards with a line for the 3rd shot date or just use the extra line on the existing cards? Also what happens if someone already laminated the original card.

They can just write out a new card I know quite a few who had to have it done for various reasons.

 

[DisneyFan32]

The WHO is saying IF we focus on vaccinating the low vaccination countries now the pandemic could be under control by March 2022. It won’t be completely over but it could be under control instead of spreading unchecked. The timeline is based on when we will have enough vaccine doses manufactured for enough people. The issue is around logistics and distribution. Can we get those doses to the people who need them and will enough of them take it?

Will the pandemic will ending soon? @GoofGoof

 

[DisneyCane]

What is the end game here? If we have cases that thanks to vaccines are no more than a cold, what's the issue? That's what the idea of vaccines are. To make something deadly not. Given most vaccines have a high acceptance rate (and while this is higher than some areas, it's not as high as other vaccines - aka stop using percent eligible because it leaves out many) it reduces spread better. We are not doing enough honestly and if you think this is enough I have a piece of land Disney wants that I can sell you.

You are really pushing this so hard, it's seriously baffling. Why are you being anti-vax? And yes, you are. So how about this... just stop. It's honestly like you're trolling.

I'm pushing so hard because I'm concerned about policies after 5-11 are eligible and after the mandates/passports/whatever get 85%+ of the population vaccinated. Data indicates that community spread will still happen to a not insignificant degree. Then what? Masks forever indoors and on planes? Bringing back capacity limits for social distancing? I'm not being anti-vax. I'm being pro-be honest about what the vaccines do and anti-mitigation.

It turns out kids can and do get and spread covid. 15% of the population isn’t eligible. The virus doesn’t just say “let me skip these people since they aren’t eligible”. Somehow people have been duped into believing that kids can’t get covid and don’t need to be vaccinated. Obviously not the case.

I am really disappointed to see your change in attitude on the vaccines (yes, I know you will deny that but come on man, clearly your stance has changed). Despite your obvious political leanings you managed to stay pretty level headed until now on vaccinations. I fear that this is a sign of what’s to come as more people dig in on the wrong side of the vaccine debate. It does just highlight to me that our only path forward is additional mandates and vaccine passports. When even the level headed are digging in and attacking the vaccines left and right now there’s no hope to get enough people to go in and get the shots. It’s disappointing and quite sad that this is where we are as a nation

You have changed your attitude on the vaccines as much as, if not more than, I have. It wasn't that long ago when your attitude was as soon as 5-11 were approved, all mitigation should be dropped and people who didn't get vaccinated would suffer the potential consequences and become immune the hard way.

Now your stance is we need mandates and passports to essentially force everybody to be vaccinated. My stance hasn't really changed. I have always believed that it is a personal choice. I have always said that the vaccines significantly reduce your likelihood of being hospitalized or dying. I've taken a more negative tone because in the first few months after vaccines began to be administered, it looked like they reduced the chance of being hospitalized or dying from COVID by 95%+ AND reduced the chance of being infected by almost 90%. Now the data shows (with Delta dominant) that they reduce the chance of being hospitalized or dying by something in the 70-80 percent range (which is still extremely effective) but they don't reduce the chance of being infected or being able to spread the virus by anything close to 90%.

The relative sizes, percent, and rate/100K are all making VT look worse than it really is, that's how.

Vermont looks "bad" in the rate per 100K because there's nobody in VT generally speaking (apologies to @Heppenheimer). Assuming my math is correct, VT has about 600K people, total. While FL has 34 times more people. So, if a large family of 6 all catches COVID the VT rate/100K goes up 1. Say, a family that's back from a FL vacation. In FL, to move the rate up 1/100K that family would need to be 215 people.

It's the same problem looking at the percents. Each individual person in VT contributes to a much larger change in percent than a single person in FL. The huge difference in size between VT and FL makes even trying to use a normalized metric questionable.

Vermont did really well early on. They're doing about the same now. The vaccinated percent's ability to reduce transmission isn't linear. Until it hits the inflection point, it's simply not going to do much on the population scale.

That's how I explain the VT graph. That it's simply not as bad as it appears at first glance. That looking at the raw totals and the graph scale not just it's shape becomes important.

VT compared to NH, where NH is still bigger but only twice as big, looks different. That comparison shows that NH did way worse than VT in the earlier wave and they're doing about the same now. Which gives some perspective that it's not VT doing super bad now, it's that they did very good earlier.

Vermont looks bad now compared to Vermont earlier in the pandemic without any vaccinations. That's the point. Looking at Vermont or Israel (76.1% of the population fully vaccinated, 82.6% one shot, all Pfizer), there is no evidence that high vaccination rates lead to low levels of community transmission. Yet that is the justification being used to force people to get vaccinated, to protect others.

To be clear, I believe that being vaccinated is the smart thing to do and that doing so will essentially make your risk of serious issues from COVID irrelevant compared to other risks you face based on age, general health and activities you participate in. I am not anti-vax, I'm just not in favor of forced vaccination. It is possible to support the vaccines but be honest about what they do and what they don't do in the face of the current dominant variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. It is also possible to think that getting vaccinated is the right decision for people to make but not think that I have the right to force them to be injected.

 

[GoofGoof]

They can just write out a new card I know quite a few who had to have it done for various reasons.

That’s what I assumed. I’m more interested to see if the CDC issues everyone a new card with a line that says 3rd dose and maybe even 4th dose or they just use the other lines.

 

[mmascari]

The CDC advisors are meeting today to develop the rules on booster shots for 65+ and high risk. I assume we should have guidelines on who qualifies for the booster and when they will be available. I assume they will also potentially detail what the plan is for vaccine cards. Will they issue new cards with a line for the 3rd shot date or just use the extra line on the existing cards? Also what happens if someone already laminated the original card.

They just give you a new card if there is no space or whatever other issue using the original has.

Remember, the card wasn't (and isn't) intended as a "proof of vaccination". It's a medical record for personal use. It's a standard way for the vaccine administration to document the important details, provide those to the recipient, and for them to provide that information to their doctors and medical record. Having a standard way ensures that everyone is collecting all the correct information for their own medical records. For instance, you know the lot number and dosage and not just that you got X. Which could be super important if some issue is discovered with a specific batch or if someone has a reaction in the weeks right after. My single dose J&J one has a sticker with the details that covers three and a half lines. You could barely use the fourth if you really tried for another entry.


That's why all the things trying to use them as proof of vaccination for passports are so screwed up and so open to fakes. Assuming we really do go down this route, and I agree it looks like we need to. We'll need states to create the systems that use their back end vaccination registries along with a consortium of states to create an interoperable standard. Just like drivers licenses are state specific not federal, or EZ Pass interoperates between many (but not all) states. It's going to be a total mess for a long time as people are only able to rely on the inadequate card. It's not so bad for something like employment where lying has a very high risk if found out. It's just a guess for something like a movie, concert, or any one time event where the biggest risk is denied entry.

Right now, the requirement alone probably has just as big an impact as actually validating the proof that the vast majority of people aren't faking it. That will change eventually though.

 

[mmascari]

The WHO is saying IF we focus on vaccinating the low vaccination countries now the pandemic could be under control by March 2022. It won’t be completely over but it could be under control instead of spreading unchecked. The timeline is based on when we will have enough vaccine doses manufactured for enough people. The issue is around logistics and distribution. Can we get those doses to the people who need them and will enough of them take it?

I thought that report was just the US.

We've got enough vaccine doses in the US.
We've solved the logistics and distribution within the US for the vast majority, not every last area but the vast majority.
We're pretty good at knowing who is vaccinated and who isn't in the US.
Will enough people take them? That's the real problem. The answer seems to be "no".

That's what makes March depressing. It assume we solve that last one and that it takes until March. We've solved all the rest, we could be done, pandemic over and we really really mean it within the US by Thanksgiving or Christmas. But, Mach is our best hope. Hence, depressing to me.

Hopeful that we'll get there eventually, even with all the disfunction. At least that is good news.

Indoor winter soccer league this year sounded nice. But, outdoor (cold) winter soccer league like last year sounds more likely.

 

[Virtual Toad]

There's no question they significantly reduce the rate of hospitalization and death

You said it. No one put those words into your mouth.

“There’s no question they significantly reduce the rate of hospitalization and death.”

Isn’t that enough on its own? Why should ANYONE be against getting as many vaccinated as possible, since doing so “significantly reduces the rate of hospitalization and death?”

Deep down, everyone knows this. Yet it seems some folks are determined to troll, argue and bloviate (some literally to their dying day) over the prospect that— gasp— they might have to literally roll up their sleeves to protect the common interest.

Think about it this way. Like the COVID vaccine, traffic lights also “significantly reduce the rate of hospitalization and death.”

The individualistic approach would be to just shut them off completely, and let people “decide for themselves” when and how to make it through the intersection.

How well would that work?

Sure, a lot of folks would make it to wherever they’re going eventually, but at what cost?

Funny how so very few people assail the importance of traffic lights. I’m sure you can find examples out there. Folks might complain about being stuck at a red light now and then, but society as a whole accepts them as beneficial.

Because we all know the alternative would be laughable if it weren’t so unnecessarily primitive, barbaric and tragic.

Yet here we are on vaccines.

Which makes no sense at all.

Cooperation for the common good has always been with us, has always been necessary. It’s not evil, it’s not some sort of socialistic plot. But those manipulating the anti-vaccine crowd have brainwashed them into thinking it is.

“There’s no question they significantly reduce the rate of hospitalization and death.”

Everyone knows this. Even if they won’t admit it.

Seems like it’s way past time to stop fighting over it, consider it a settled issue, and just move on.

 

[Heppenheimer]

Somebody please explain Vermont in the context of "if the stupid anti-vaxxers would get a shot everything would be fine." 77.3% of the population with at least one dose, 69% of the population FULLY VACCINATED. 87.4% of eligible population with at least one dose, 78.2% of eligible population fully vaccinated. 88.2% of adults with at least one dose, 78% of adults fully vaccinated. 99.9% of 65+ with at least one dose, 95.1% fully vaccinated. And yet...

View attachment 588463

Let me introduce you to Vermont's COVID dashboard, which is very easy to navigate and shows you almost all the data you might want:

COVID-19 Data | Vermont Department of Health

Find up-to-date information on the statewide community level, hospitalizations, emergency visits, wastewater monitoring, case counts, outbreaks, vaccination rates, and more. Data and reports are updated on Wednesdays.

www.healthvermont.gov

You can easily flip back and forth between the disease activity and vaccination screens. What you will see is an almost exact inverse correlation between which age brackets have the lowest vaccination rates and the highest case loads, mainly the 20-29 year old demographic, with a vaccination rate stubbornly stuck in the 60% range. Note that the completely unvaccinated 0-9 age group has far lower numbers than even some of the adult groups. The difference for them? Well, some are too young to really have any significant interactions outside the house, but for those in school, most (if not all) schools maintain strong mitigation strategies, like mandatory masking and distancing. Hmm, how about that, maybe mitigation strategies can actually have the desired result? Nah, screw that, let's just give up, learn to live with COVID, since doing hard but necessary things these days has become un-'Merican... or worse, SOCIALIST!!!!

If you also look under the "COVID-19 Data Summary" tab, it allows you to download a periodic update of even more data not readily apparent on the dashboard. According to the latest report from 10 September, of fully vaccinated Vermonters, only 0.4% have suffered a breakthrough infection, and of this 0.4%, only 2.7% have required hospitalization and 0.9% have died. So, in Vermont, if fully vaccinated, you have only a 0.01% chance of hospitalization, and a 0.004% chance of dying from COVID-19. I'll take those odds and policies that move people towards those odds.

 

[danlb_2000]

Infectious Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in Exhaled Aerosols and Efficacy of Masks During Early Mild Infection

Exhaled SARS-CoV-2 aerosols are infectious and evolution is favoring more efficient aerosol generation. Loose-fitting masks moderately reduce viral aerosol rele

academic.oup.com

Interesting article on aerosols and masks.

Yep, more evidence that masks help reduce spread...

" Masks reduced viral RNA by 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3 to 72%) in fine and by 77% (95% CI, 51 to 89%) in coarse aerosols; cloth and surgical masks were not significantly different. "

 

[mattpeto]

As long as reinfections aren't part of the equation, this is how I see it playing out:

• Cases surge over the holidays especially where it's cold. The death and hospitalizations will come from mostly the unvaccinated.
• Due to delta spread and the vaccines, we'll have a really good dose of immunity coming into the Spring.
• Covid turns into an endemic going forward and we learn to live with it. Life really starts going back to pre-pandemic norms in Fall of 2022.

 

[correcaminos]

That’s what I assumed. I’m more interested to see if the CDC issues everyone a new card with a line that says 3rd dose and maybe even 4th dose or they just use the other lines.

People I know had third dose written in on the third block. I doubt that would change?

Yes, at one time, they required waiting two weeks after a flu or other vaccine to get a COVID vaccine. However, that is no longer the case. You can get multiple vaccinations along with COVID all at once. Just ask anyone who served in the military.

I only recall being told for the trial to wait 2 weeks. I don't recall family having to wait. Was that really a thing? I'm totally curious

I'm pushing so hard because I'm concerned about policies after 5-11 are eligible and after the mandates/passports/whatever get 85%+ of the population vaccinated. Data indicates that community spread will still happen to a not insignificant degree. Then what? Masks forever indoors and on planes? Bringing back capacity limits for social distancing? I'm not being anti-vax. I'm being pro-be honest about what the vaccines do and anti-mitigation.


Vermont looks bad now compared to Vermont earlier in the pandemic without any vaccinations. That's the point. Looking at Vermont or Israel (76.1% of the population fully vaccinated, 82.6% one shot, all Pfizer), there is no evidence that high vaccination rates lead to low levels of community transmission. Yet that is the justification being used to force people to get vaccinated, to protect others.

To be clear, I believe that being vaccinated is the smart thing to do and that doing so will essentially make your risk of serious issues from COVID irrelevant compared to other risks you face based on age, general health and activities you participate in. I am not anti-vax, I'm just not in favor of forced vaccination. It is possible to support the vaccines but be honest about what they do and what they don't do in the face of the current dominant variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. It is also possible to think that getting vaccinated is the right decision for people to make but not think that I have the right to force them to be injected.

So are you worried more about "policies" or trying to vaccinate everyone. Maybe it's me, but Vermont never looked bad. Still looks really damn good. We're talking numbers I can count on my hands.

Israel is not 76% - they are much lower at 67%. We keep trying to tell you and you keep missing this entirely - we need pretty much the whole population vaccinated thanks to Delta's spread. Had it remained lower we'd be okay with these numbers.

You are not making it clear at all about vaccination being #1. You in fact are putting it down every darn chance you are getting lately and honestly I am disappointed as well. Seems politics has gotten a hold of you.

We absolutely need all who can vaccinate to vaccinate. To act like it should be a choice will keep this going longer. You want "mah freedoms"? then freaking vaccinate and push all to do it and stop pretending it will never end. It actually could and instead of trashing vaccines, you should be promoting more so maybe we won't need vaccine passports. But what you are doing is damaging to the country by promoting anti-vax rhetoric. I hope you pause to understand what you are doing and seeing how your words are just regurgitations of what I hear from certain places.

As a 100% independent I am seriously sick of political aspects of it all. I see it here. I claim I hate masks and OMG I'm horrible. I still wear them too. It goes both ways and it needs to stop. Now.

 

[GoofGoof]

I'm pushing so hard because I'm concerned about policies after 5-11 are eligible and after the mandates/passports/whatever get 85%+ of the population vaccinated. Data indicates that community spread will still happen to a not insignificant degree. Then what? Masks forever indoors and on planes? Bringing back capacity limits for social distancing? I'm not being anti-vax. I'm being pro-be honest about what the vaccines do and anti-mitigation.

You are assuming that once we get enough people vaccinated we won’t see a difference but we have no way of knowing of that happens. It’s a what If. What if lizard people really run the country, what if the Earth is flat. What IFs are fun games but not a way to develop policy. Your idea of “being honest“ about the vaccines is that we should assume a bunch of what ifs (that happen to fit your narrative) are true. I’m not sure why you are tying mitigations to vaccination levels. Masks are needed now because community spread is too high. Get more people vaccinated and spread drops (unless you are still convinced efficacy is zero on the vaccines). It’s not a yes/no question. It’s not we either reach full herd immunity or nothing changes. Even if community spread continues with 85%+ vaccinated it will be much lower than spread today. That’s a fact not my opinion.

You have changed your attitude on the vaccines as much as, if not more than, I have. It wasn't that long ago when your attitude was as soon as 5-11 were approved, all mitigation should be dropped and people who didn't get vaccinated would suffer the potential consequences and become immune the hard way.

Now your stance is we need mandates and passports to essentially force everybody to be vaccinated. My stance hasn't really changed. I have always believed that it is a personal choice. I have always said that the vaccines significantly reduce your likelihood of being hospitalized or dying. I've taken a more negative tone because in the first few months after vaccines began to be administered, it looked like they reduced the chance of being hospitalized or dying from COVID by 95%+ AND reduced the chance of being infected by almost 90%. Now the data shows (with Delta dominant) that they reduce the chance of being hospitalized or dying by something in the 70-80 percent range (which is still extremely effective) but they don't reduce the chance of being infected or being able to spread the virus by anything close to 90%.

I have changed my stance on vaccine passports and mandates. 100% true. I have stated this numerous times. I favored letting people make up their own minds on vaccination as plan A. We tried that and we failed. Part of that failure was not enough people got vaccinated and part was due to delta being more contagious and as a result requiring a higher percent vaccinated. I said back then that if the plan didn’t work we’d move to plan B which is where we are today. We mandate vaccines and use passports and get more people vaccinated that way and/or reduce the public interactions of the unvaccinated.

I did support removing all mitigation once we got to a level where vaccine percent was high enough that cases and community spread was way down. I haven’t changed my opinion on that. Before delta we hit that point briefly in May/June and it was pretty nice, but the bar has been raised again with a more contagious variant. I do believe we will hit that point again where cases and community spread will drop enough to remove most mitigations if we get enough people vaccinated. I believe we will but that’s not a guarantee it happens.

I don’t agree with your “data”. I think you are cherry picking a study here or there that fits your narrative. The narrative is “if the vaccines no longer stop spread effectively and they only partially protect against hospitalization or death then they shouldn’t be required for anyone.“ That ties into the whole covid will be around forever so we need to just drop all mitigations and move on with life. There are many studies (including the massive UK study I posted a few days ago) which still show the vaccines have high efficacy and are very effective vs hospitalization and death. We also have boosters on the horizon for 65+ and high risk. The vast majority of breakthrough deaths are in the 65+ demographic and they will have their immunity booster very soon. You keep saying the data shows this or that but there is no real definitive data showing anything you are saying. We know the vaccines work (even against delta) so there’s no harm whatsoever in getting everyone vaccinated. That’s a fact. Undisputed.

 

[Nubs70]

I'm pushing so hard because I'm concerned about policies after 5-11 are eligible and after the mandates/passports/whatever get 85%+ of the population vaccinated. Data indicates that community spread will still happen to a not insignificant degree. Then what? Masks forever indoors and on planes? Bringing back capacity limits for social distancing? I'm not being anti-vax. I'm being pro-be honest about what the vaccines do and anti-mitigation.

You have changed your attitude on the vaccines as much as, if not more than, I have. It wasn't that long ago when your attitude was as soon as 5-11 were approved, all mitigation should be dropped and people who didn't get vaccinated would suffer the potential consequences and become immune the hard way.

Now your stance is we need mandates and passports to essentially force everybody to be vaccinated. My stance hasn't really changed. I have always believed that it is a personal choice. I have always said that the vaccines significantly reduce your likelihood of being hospitalized or dying. I've taken a more negative tone because in the first few months after vaccines began to be administered, it looked like they reduced the chance of being hospitalized or dying from COVID by 95%+ AND reduced the chance of being infected by almost 90%. Now the data shows (with Delta dominant) that they reduce the chance of being hospitalized or dying by something in the 70-80 percent range (which is still extremely effective) but they don't reduce the chance of being infected or being able to spread the virus by anything close to 90%.


Vermont looks bad now compared to Vermont earlier in the pandemic without any vaccinations. That's the point. Looking at Vermont or Israel (76.1% of the population fully vaccinated, 82.6% one shot, all Pfizer), there is no evidence that high vaccination rates lead to low levels of community transmission. Yet that is the justification being used to force people to get vaccinated, to protect others.

To be clear, I believe that being vaccinated is the smart thing to do and that doing so will essentially make your risk of serious issues from COVID irrelevant compared to other risks you face based on age, general health and activities you participate in. I am not anti-vax, I'm just not in favor of forced vaccination. It is possible to support the vaccines but be honest about what they do and what they don't do in the face of the current dominant variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. It is also possible to think that getting vaccinated is the right decision for people to make but not think that I have the right to force them to be injected.

My God, stop asking questions. It is safe and effective

 

[Virtual Toad]

be clear, I believe that being vaccinated is the smart thing to do and that doing so will essentially make your risk of serious issues from COVID irrelevant compared to other risks you face based on age, general health and activities you participate in. I am not anti-vax, I'm just not in favor of forced vaccination.

It is also possible to think that getting vaccinated is the right decision for people to make but not think that I have the right to force them to be injected.

Glad you cleared that up for us. So (currently at least) you’re not arguing the supposed faults and imperfections of COVID vaccinations, just expressing adamant fear, outrage and disgust that “someone” is chomping at the bit to gleefully “force” people to be injected?

The word “force” is used, presumably, to conjure up evil totalitarian images.

But guess what? That’s complete hogwash. A bogeyman argument.

No one is “forcing” anyone to do anything. And no one will.

Even the “mandates” some choose to wail against aren’t really “mandates” at all. There are clear options available for those who inexplicably do not want the vaccine.

And when it comes to schoolchildren, no one will be “forcing” them to get the vaccine either. In many places government isn’t even encouraging them.

Yes, vaccine requirements to attend public schools are pretty much settled public policy— and have been for decades.

But no one is “forcing them to be injected.”

It’s just another nonsense, fear mongering argument. Without reason and without any sort of positive outcome in mind.

 

[StarWarsGirl]

I'm pushing so hard because I'm concerned about policies after 5-11 are eligible and after the mandates/passports/whatever get 85%+ of the population vaccinated.

You're literally worrying about something that hasn't even happened yet.

Instead of focusing on what might happen and things we don't know, how about focusing on what we do know? For instance, that getting vaccines mitigates the risk of severe illness and that the quicker we get the rest of the population vaccinated, the quicker things can go back to normal.

 

[DisneyCane]

Yep, more evidence that masks help reduce spread...

" Masks reduced viral RNA by 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3 to 72%) in fine and by 77% (95% CI, 51 to 89%) in coarse aerosols; cloth and surgical masks were not significantly different. "

People accuse me of cherry picking:

"Conclusion
SARS-CoV-2 is evolving toward more efficient aerosol generation and loose-fitting masks provide significant but only modest source control. Therefore, until vaccination rates are very high, continued layered controls and tight-fitting masks and respirators will be necessary."

 

[StarWarsGirl]

My God, stop asking questions. It is safe and effective

Yes, it's not like vaccines have never, I don't know, completely eliminated deadly diseases in the past...oh wait...