Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

havoc315

Well-Known Member
Now do it by demographic cohort and tell me how scared a 30 year old woman should be?

Spoiler alert: Not at all.

I'm not 30 and I'm not a woman.. but I'm in my 40's, generally good health. I have Covid a few months ago... I had "mild symptoms" -- Mild being extreme fatigue, chest tightness, and pain with deep breaths. I still am getting fatigued easily, still have bouts of chest tightness. So even this "mild case" is indeed pretty scary.
Not to mention, that 30-year-old woman has parents, Aunts and Uncles, whom she can be scared for as well.
 

kong1802

Well-Known Member
The Pope seemed to be okay with it, so I wouldn't expect anyone to face any sort of punishment for missing any of the things normally required due to following safety protocols. I don't mean that in a dismissive or condescending way, if that's how it comes across. I just mean that even the Pope acknowledged that exceptions can be made during times like this.


But is the Pope Catholic?
 

Touchdown

Well-Known Member
"Our freedom of religion is being infringed on"

Presented with evidence that that's not true

"Our freedom to peacefully assemble is being infringed on"

Can't wait to see what it is next.....
1614626966350.jpeg
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
So I got sick of waiting for the CDC update so This is potentially missing a day worth of data. Where we stand on the vaccine rollout: the yellow section at the top is actual data through February 28. We have officially started to vaccinate 15.5% of the population with 7.7% done as of the end of February.

The next table down in blue is projected March data based on manufacturer projections. I limited Pfizer deliveries to 100M even though they still say 120M. It just made the math cleaner and is probably more realistic. I rounded the Feb numbers to make the math cleaner as well. We know that we have roughly 25M people as of 3/1 who got 1 shot but not both so in the first 21 to 28 days of March they need their second dose. In addition I estimated 10M more people getting their first shot in the first 10 days of March for Pfizer and 3 days of March for Moderna will need their 2nd shot in March. That’s how I got to 35M second shots in March. Since JnJ is a one and done I count all JnJ shots as both shots done for simplicity.

As of 2/28 we are sitting on an inventory of unused shots. I am assuming as we go forward that as deliveries increase so will number of unused shots. Right now we have 11 days worth of shots in reserve and so if that continues but the average number of daily shots goes up then we should have more shots unused by 3/31. Going forward as deliveries stabilize the number unused should go down but to be conservative I’m keeping it constant.

The good news is by March 31 we would have 36% of the total population with at least 1 shot and almost half of all adults. Also we would have 120M people who at least got started and estimates are somewhere in the 150M range for people people in the phase A categories and assuming only 80% take the vaccine 120M will need to go before the vaccine is open to the general public. So if we hit the delivery and administration targets the vaccine should be open to the general public in early April at the latest.

Going down to the final green table with April activity we are assuming we cover the 40M who need the 2nd shot from March as well as 10M more from the beginning of April to get to 50M second doses. Assuming we hit the targets again, we will have 200M people at least started and 160M done by end of April which is 60% and 48% of the total population. In addition that means 80% of adults have started going or 71% of 12+ since there’s a good chance this opens to kids 12+ by April. Right now polling shows 71% of people will take the vaccine. If we hit these targets we will need to start kicking the tires to find additional takers sometime in May

CDBEAC93-584D-4BFC-9C67-1EB5AC37C04D.png
 

havoc315

Well-Known Member
If people couldn’t assemble who were all those people cheering for Trump in DC?

And marching for BLM across the country?

Is that not people assembling? (Peacefully is debatable in both cases...)

The Supreme Court has always ruled that non-content time/place/manner regulation of the First Amendment is entirely proper.
Yes, you have the right to peacefully assemble. That doesn't mean you have the right to block 5th Avenue with 5,000 people in the middle of the day.

Yes, you have the right to worship and peacefully assemble. That doesn't mean you have the right to squeeze 500 people into an auditorium that the fire code limits to 100 people.

It would be entirely unconstitutional to have a law that said Catholics can have full Churches but protestants are limited to 10 people.

But to say that all congregations are limited to 30% of the fire code capacity (for example) is entirely consistent with our Constitution. It doesn't prohibit peaceful assembly or worship, simply regulates the time / place / manner to serve the public interest in protecting the public health.
 

kong1802

Well-Known Member
The Supreme Court has always ruled that non-content time/place/manner regulation of the First Amendment is entirely proper.
Yes, you have the right to peacefully assemble. That doesn't mean you have the right to block 5th Avenue with 5,000 people in the middle of the day.

Yes, you have the right to worship and peacefully assemble. That doesn't mean you have the right to squeeze 500 people into an auditorium that the fire code limits to 100 people.

It would be entirely unconstitutional to have a law that said Catholics can have full Churches but protestants are limited to 10 people.

But to say that all congregations are limited to 30% of the fire code capacity (for example) is entirely consistent with our Constitution. It doesn't prohibit peaceful assembly or worship, simply regulates the time / place / manner to serve the public interest in protecting the public health.

You are telling me that there have been laws and regulations on the books pre COVID to regulate crowd sizes?!
 

Tom P.

Well-Known Member
The Supreme Court has always ruled that non-content time/place/manner regulation of the First Amendment is entirely proper.
Yes, you have the right to peacefully assemble. That doesn't mean you have the right to block 5th Avenue with 5,000 people in the middle of the day.

Yes, you have the right to worship and peacefully assemble. That doesn't mean you have the right to squeeze 500 people into an auditorium that the fire code limits to 100 people.

It would be entirely unconstitutional to have a law that said Catholics can have full Churches but protestants are limited to 10 people.

But to say that all congregations are limited to 30% of the fire code capacity (for example) is entirely consistent with our Constitution. It doesn't prohibit peaceful assembly or worship, simply regulates the time / place / manner to serve the public interest in protecting the public health.
The Supreme Court has, in the last few weeks, ruled in several cases against restrictions that have been placed on churches. One order was just handed down on Friday night forcing San Rafael County, California to permit indoor religious gatherings.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Some further support that the manufacturers are ramping up to hit their targets. 17.6M doses being shipped this week.

Pfizer says they will ramp up further to as many as 13.5M doses a week by early March and is still committed to delivering the 120M doses by 3/31.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom