Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[havoc315]

That’s not accurate is it? Only if everyone in the private setting is vaccinated is it safe to meet without masks I thought.

I thought they already updated their guidance along those lines:
When fully vaccinated, you can congregate in small settings with low risk individuals who aren't vaccinated.

Per the CDC:

• You can gather indoors with fully vaccinated people without wearing a mask.
• You can gather indoors with unvaccinated people from one other household (for example, visiting with relatives who all live together) without masks, unless any of those people or anyone they live with has an increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19.

COVID-19 Vaccination

COVID-19 vaccines protect against COVID-19. Get safety info and more.

www.cdc.gov

 

[GoofGoof]

The variant is very new and just now increasing fast. It likely is a reason that while cases and deaths are declining across the country, they are stagnating/rising in the Northeast.

You're citing one line, attributed to unidentified "officials" basically giving an anecdotal statement. The reality is -- They don't know. Those officials haven't studied it. The variants are way too new and vaccinations too recent to really know the effect.
There has not been a single study showing "95% effectiveness" against the B.1521 variant. All we have so far, "it looks like vaccines are working."
The scientific community is indeed studying it -- And they have expressed concerns. Answers aren't instantaneous. There are reasons for optimism (a lab based study showed Pfizer vaccine still neutralized the new variant), and there are reasons for concern (other studies have shown a much weaker vaccine anti-body response to the new variant).

The reality is we don’t know the full impact. Every time a new variant is discovered it’s factually accurate to say we don’t know definitively that the vaccines will be effective against it. That doesn’t mean they are not effective or even less effective, just that we don’t know. The scientific community was also deeply concerned about the effectiveness of vaccines against the UK variant too. It has since turned out to not be an issue. I would rather wait and see what the real evidence shows then play chicken little every time a new variant is discovered.

Everyone should get the vaccine, they work really well. That should be the only message. A growing trend among people resisting the vaccine is the feeling that the vaccines aren’t going to be as effective as advertised and/or the insistence that we will all need a new vaccine soon anyway to protect against the variants so why get one now. Clickbait headlines implying the vaccines won’t work against these variants are doing damage to the effort to get people vaccinated.

 

[DisneyFan32]

Now some good news as to the efficacy of the vaccine effort:
Israel has partially vaccinated 57% of the population --- about 47% are fully vaccinated.

Today, Israel reported only 611 new cases and 3 deaths. (Population-wise, Israel is about the size of the state of Georgia)
The case number is the type they haven't seen since November. The death number is at about the lowest of the last 6 months+.
And it doesn't appear to be a 1 day reporting fluke. Deaths have been under 20 per day for a week. Cases have mostly been under 2,000 per day for the last week, they are falling quickly.

I'd take a hard look at Israel over the next week. I'd also take a hard look in 2-3 weeks. Passover is coming in 10 days to Israel, which is like Thanksgiving here: Extended families congregating for dinner and get togethers. It can give us an idea of what Memorial day / July 4th might be for us. How much, or how little of a spike, do they get for the holiday with 50% of the population vaccinated.

Hopefully it's not gonna spike at all. US needs to vaccinating all 70% or 80% people by July.

 

[havoc315]

The reality is we don’t know the full impact. Every time a new variant is discovered it’s factually accurate to say we don’t know definitively that the vaccines will be effective against it. That doesn’t mean they are not effective or even less effective, just that we don’t know. The scientific community was also deeply concerned about the effectiveness of vaccines against the UK variant too. It has since turned out to not be an issue. I would rather wait and see what the real evidence shows then play chicken little every time a new variant is discovered.

Everyone should get the vaccine, they work really well. That should be the only message. A growing trend among people resisting the vaccine is the feeling that the vaccines aren’t going to be as effective as advertised and/or the insistence that we will all need a new vaccine soon anyway to protect against the variants so why get one now. Clickbait headlines implying the vaccines won’t work against these variants are doing damage to the effort to get people vaccinated.

1. I agree -- there shouldn't be panic every time there is new variant. But there also shouldn't be automatic dismissal. It's a reason we do need to continue masks for the time being. It's entirely appropriate to be "concerned" about new variants, to continue precautions, and to study. There is indeed accumulating evidence that vaccines will be less effective against the E484K variant, but that's even more reason to get vaccinated quickly, to follow recommendations for boosters, etc..
2. The message should be the truth. Yes, vaccines do work REALLY WELL. Yes, vaccines are highly effective. Nobody should skip the vaccine. But part of the truth is also that other mitigation is currently necessary besides vaccines, while we sort out the new variants, while step up vaccination efforts. So yes -- the truth is vaccines do work really well, everyone should get vaccinated. The truth is also that there are remaining concerns, which require vigilance and mitigation.
3. In fact, the CDC actually labels certain variants as being "of concern" -- So denying "concern" is denying the science: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/201...ariant-surveillance/variant-info.html#Concern

 

[havoc315]

Hopefully it's not gonna spike at all. US needs to vaccinating all 70% or 80% people by July.

That's why it's worth keeping an eye on Israel over the next couple of weeks. I'd be shocked if there was no uptick at all. But hopefully it's just a small temporary uptick, not a new surge.

 

[GoofGoof]

That’s not accurate is it? Only if everyone in the private setting is vaccinated is it safe to meet without masks I thought.

I’m not saying that’s the recommendation today, I’m saying it should be soon. If all teachers have access to the vaccine today then the schools should allow any teacher who is 2 weeks past their final shot to work without a mask on. That would be a great incentive for unvaccinated teachers to get the jab. Do the same for the general public when they are eligible.

 

[correcaminos]

I never said it doesn't work at all. I said it's likely less effective. Less than the 95%+ we are seeing against the Wuhan and UK variants.

And I get my ideas from reading scientific journals, peer reviewed studies, etc.

New coronavirus variant in NYC has vaccine-evading mutation

The variant, dubbed B.1.526, is on the rise in the city.

www.livescience.com

You quoted that article already I thought or maybe I just read it while searching for facts. It says nothing about efficacy. Sorry but this says pretty much nothing about it other than it may. We've all heard that line before. I'm not dismissing but nothing has been peer reviewed to even support this is a legit worry.

 

[havoc315]

You quoted that article already I thought or maybe I just read it while searching for facts. It says nothing about efficacy. Sorry but this says pretty much nothing about it other than it may. We've all heard that line before. I'm not dismissing but nothing has been peer reviewed to even support this is a legit worry.

And nothing has been peer reviewed showing not to be concerned. The CDC officially says it is of "concern."
I try to stick to accuracy -- There are things that are known (like the high efficacy against the UK and Wuhan strands), and then there are things that are unknown with varying levels of concern.
If you're going to insist on only looking at final peer reviewed studies -- that cuts both ways. You can't rely on some unidentified NYC official who anecdotally dismissed concern.

The article cited specifically says:
"This mutation may reduce the ability of certain antibodies to neutralize, or inactivate, the virus, and may help the coronavirus partially evade COVID-19 vaccines, " [Says nothing about efficacy?! That sure sounds like efficacy]

It further cites to the study that is currently undergoing peer review!

 

[DisneyFan32]

And nothing has been peer reviewed showing not to be concerned. The CDC officially says it is of "concern."
I try to stick to accuracy -- There are things that are known (like the high efficacy against the UK and Wuhan strands), and then there are things that are unknown with varying levels of concern.
If you're going to insist on only looking at final peer reviewed studies -- that cuts both ways. You can't rely on some unidentified NYC official who anecdotally dismissed concern.

The article cited specifically says:
"This mutation may reduce the ability of certain antibodies to neutralize, or inactivate, the virus, and may help the coronavirus partially evade COVID-19 vaccines, " [Says nothing about efficacy?! That sure sounds like efficacy]

It further cites to the study that is currently undergoing peer review!

so vaccines are high efficacy to against any variants like NYC, UK, Wuhan, South Africa, Brazil, etc...?

 

[sullyinMT]

I’m not saying that’s the recommendation today, I’m saying it should be soon. If all teachers have access to the vaccine today then the schools should allow any teacher who is 2 weeks past their final shot to work without a mask on. That would be a great incentive for unvaccinated teachers to get the jab. Do the same for the general public when they are eligible.

As states are opening to GP in the very near future (a growing number by 4/1), why not extend that to high schoolers 16+? It would be a great incentive, and positive peer pressure, if the graduating seniors could have a mask-free walk if they get the vaccine.

It's probably too late in the school year to bother with maskless fully vaccinated classrooms. But graduation ceremonies potentially 3ft apart and you don't need a mask? I'm sure you'd get some sign-up there. Crowds (parents/siblings) would be seated far from the student body and staff. Many of them would likely be vaccinated, too, if their students are. Here, the same arena that hosts PBR and major concerts hosts HS graduations for the three public schools. It seats 12k people, so I'd be shocked if they couldn't figure something out. Heck, hold 2 ceremonies. Vaccinated and mask free, or no shot and just as awkward as last year.

 

[havoc315]

so vaccines are high efficacy to against any variants like NYC, UK, Wuhan, South Africa, Brazil, etc...?

UK and Wuhan -- yes. Pfizer very high efficacy. J&J slightly less, but still highly effective.
AZ showed poor efficacy against the SA variant.
IIRC, Pfizer and Moderna and JNJ have shown efficacy against the SA variant, but less effective than against the Uhan and UK..
Efficacy against the NYC and Brazil variants is pretty new and unstudied -- Reasons to believe that they still should be effective, but also reasons to suspect may be less effective, may need boosters, etc.

Basically, people want answers that are absolute and certain. The reality is, there are few absolutes, a lot is unknown, there is variation between vaccines, variation between variants.
No -- Not all vaccines are 95% effective against all variants. Some vaccines are a little more or a little less effective than others. Some variants are more or less responsive than others.

 

[GoofGoof]

As states are opening to GP in the very near future (a growing number by 4/1), why not extend that to high schoolers 16+? It would be a great incentive, and positive peer pressure, if the graduating seniors could have a mask-free walk if they get the vaccine.

It's probably too late in the school year to bother with maskless fully vaccinated classrooms. But graduation ceremonies potentially 3ft apart and you don't need a mask? I'm sure you'd get some sign-up there. Crowds (parents/siblings) would be seated far from the student body and staff. Many of them would likely be vaccinated, too, if their students are. Here, the same arena that hosts PBR and major concerts hosts HS graduations for the three public schools. It seats 12k people, so I'd be shocked if they couldn't figure something out. Heck, hold 2 ceremonies. Vaccinated and mask free, or no shot and just as awkward as last year.

I don’t know if kids will be done yet for this year, but I think that absolutely should be the rule for next school year unless Covid is completely gone (unlikely). Any kid not vaccinated has to wear a mask in school, the vaccinated do not.

 

[Figgy1]

Now we will never get back to normal, thanks alot variants, it's end of everything......it's over for me.....

No it's not. It just means it may take a little while longer and you may need to get a booster shot. Please try and calm down. What do you like to do that you can do in your home? Do you have any hobbies? Favorite shows?

 

[GoofGoof]

And nothing has been peer reviewed showing not to be concerned. The CDC officially says it is of "concern."
I try to stick to accuracy -- There are things that are known (like the high efficacy against the UK and Wuhan strands), and then there are things that are unknown with varying levels of concern.
If you're going to insist on only looking at final peer reviewed studies -- that cuts both ways. You can't rely on some unidentified NYC official who anecdotally dismissed concern.

The article cited specifically says:
"This mutation may reduce the ability of certain antibodies to neutralize, or inactivate, the virus, and may help the coronavirus partially evade COVID-19 vaccines, " [Says nothing about efficacy?! That sure sounds like efficacy]

It further cites to the study that is currently undergoing peer review!

I take a different approach on these variants. Let the professionals do their research and let them draw conclusions. So far they haven’t found any definitive proof that any variant is fully resistant to any of the 3 vaccines we have. The general public should wait for the research to be complete to be concerned. There is no reason to change any behaviors based on a what if. Keep wearing masks, keep following safety protocols and get vaccinated. If we need to alter our behavior due to a vaccine resistant variant then we cross that bridge when we come to it. The rest is just clickbait headlines and I can’t believe I’m saying this, but attempting to fear monger. There will be plenty of time to be gravely concerned once we determine if there is something to be gravely concerned about.

 

[correcaminos]

And nothing has been peer reviewed showing not to be concerned. The CDC officially says it is of "concern."
I try to stick to accuracy -- There are things that are known (like the high efficacy against the UK and Wuhan strands), and then there are things that are unknown with varying levels of concern.
If you're going to insist on only looking at final peer reviewed studies -- that cuts both ways. You can't rely on some unidentified NYC official who anecdotally dismissed concern.

The article cited specifically says:
"This mutation may reduce the ability of certain antibodies to neutralize, or inactivate, the virus, and may help the coronavirus partially evade COVID-19 vaccines, " [Says nothing about efficacy?! That sure sounds like efficacy]

It further cites to the study that is currently undergoing peer review!

Just because I do not view this the same as you, does not mean I have not read the articles and need it pointed out three times to me. Be worried if you like. Right now I am not. I am not dismissing but after so many times of crying wolf, I wait for real information about things. I'm not into being worried endlessly. I've done enough where I now filter out when I am not concerned. Some are concerned. Some are not. Nothing we can do anyway until tests are done. Can we just agree to disagree and move on please?

 

[havoc315]

I take a different approach on these variants. Let the professionals do their research and let them draw conclusions. So far they haven’t found any definitive proof that any variant is fully resistant to any of the 3 vaccines we have. The general public should wait for the research to be complete to be concerned. There is no reason to change any behaviors based on a what if. Keep wearing masks, keep following safety protocols and get vaccinated. If we need to alter our behavior due to a vaccine resistant variant then we cross that bridge when we come to it. The rest is just clickbait headlines and I can’t believe I’m saying this, but attempting to fear monger. There will be plenty of time to be gravely concerned once we determine if there is something to be gravely concerned about.

I don't think the scientific journals or CDC are fear mongering when they appreciate the concerns. I don't think the CDC is click-baiting.

But you hit the key -- about changing behaviors. And that's why an honest approach is necessary.
If every vaccine is 97% effective against every variant, then why should anybody keep wearing a mask after they are vaccinated?
That's why honesty is critical. Yes, we know the vaccines are highly effective. We know that some of the vaccines are super effective against some of the variants, while we have less information about others. And it's because of that gap in knowledge-- that we need to keep wearing masks, keep following safety protocols.
It's important to be honest with the public.

 

[havoc315]

Just because I do not view this the same as you, does not mean I have not read the articles and need it pointed out three times to me. Be worried if you like. Right now I am not. I am not dismissing but after so many times of crying wolf, I wait for real information about things. I'm not into being worried endlessly. I've done enough where I now filter out when I am not concerned. Some are concerned. Some are not. Nothing we can do anyway until tests are done. Can we just agree to disagree and move on please?

I'm just saying -- CDC is "real information." Anonymous anecdotal statement is not "real information."
I'm absolutely willing to agree to disagree on matters of opinion, matters on public policy. You can say "some are concerned, some are not." But the fact is, the CDC is concerned.

 

[Chi84]

I don’t know if kids will be done yet for this year, but I think that absolutely should be the rule for next school year unless Covid is completely gone (unlikely). Any kid not vaccinated has to wear a mask in school, the vaccinated do not.

I guess I must have missed a lot of what led up to this, but I doubt schools are going to think this is a good idea, even if it's workable. I'd be interested to know how teachers would feel about it.

Treating adult employees differently based on whether or not they are vaccinated could be more doable, although I suspect few employers are going to want to deal with the practical problems that arise from doing so.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but I wish Biden had pushed more strongly for his "100 days after inauguration" mask-wearing idea. Just take it off the table until the CDC has some time to catch up to what's happening with the vaccines and re-evaluate whether it's necessary or advisable to have unvaccinated people wearing masks at that time.

 

[GoofGoof]

I don't think the scientific journals or CDC are fear mongering when they appreciate the concerns. I don't think the CDC is click-baiting.

But you hit the key -- about changing behaviors. And that's why an honest approach is necessary.
If every vaccine is 97% effective against every variant, then why should anybody keep wearing a mask after they are vaccinated?
That's why honesty is critical. Yes, we know the vaccines are highly effective. We know that some of the vaccines are super effective against some of the variants, while we have less information about others. And it's because of that gap in knowledge-- that we need to keep wearing masks, keep following safety protocols.
It's important to be honest with the public.

I said let the scientists do their thing. The fear mongering is the mainstream media leaping to conclusions and people on social media sharing those clickbait stories.

Safety protocols should be based on known information. We should not be removing most of them right now since enough people aren’t vaccinated. That has nothing to do with variants. I definitely disagree that we should keep all the safety protocols and keep wearing masks indefinitely even if the masses are vaccinated just in case a variant hits that the vaccine doesn‘t protect us from. We continue the vaccine rollout, we let the scientists do their testing on known variants and when we hit a high enough number of people vaccinated as long as cases are looking good we can remove the remaining protocols. The relaxing of Covid safety protocols should follow cases and community spread. As long as we continue to trend downward and continue to vaccinate we can and should continue a gradual relaxing. If cases plateau for an extended period or spike we pull back on relaxing. If a new vaccine resistant variant becomes dominant in the US we will see it in the case numbers. I don’t think we need to wait or pause anything now based on the possibility of a variant.

 

[sullyinMT]

I'm just saying -- CDC is "real information." Anonymous anecdotal statement is not "real information."
I'm absolutely willing to agree to disagree on matters of opinion, matters on public policy. You can say "some are concerned, some are not." But the fact is, the CDC is concerned.

It's also a semantics game with regards to the CDC being concerned. When the CDC takes up an issue as a matter of concern (viral variants, in this case), it means they look into what it could mean. Their best experts in that area of concern are looking into it to provide advice or data.

When a reporter or a member of the population at large starts talking about "concern," it generally means there's a fear of the proverbial sky falling. The problem becomes, then, that reports of the CDC being "concerned" about this or that turns into yet another faction of the GP crying foul and creating memes where Dr Fauci is a two-faced git for eating a hot dog in an empty ballpark after throwing out the first pitch.

We should be "concerned" about the variants insomuch as the CDC is concerned about them. Nothing more until we know more. And, I agree with others, reporters need to do a better job of parsing the language and use phrases like "looking into" or "have discovered and are researching implications of" new variants. Also, while we deserve to be an informed public, "discoveries" like the one in a KY nursing home do nothing but fuel fear.