Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[lilypgirl]

Our governor here in MA really had be super-worried that he was going to re-open schools next week by the way he was talking last week. We don't even have declining deaths and new cases yet.

If this information holds to be true maybe kids going back to school isn't a bad idea.

Children Donât Pass Covid-19 to Adults, Report Indicates

There doesn’t appear to be cases of a child passing Covid-19 to an adult, according to a new report.

www.bloombergquint.com

 

[WEDway Inc & Company LLC]

If this information holds to be true maybe kids going back to school isn't a bad idea.

Children Donât Pass Covid-19 to Adults, Report Indicates

There doesn’t appear to be cases of a child passing Covid-19 to an adult, according to a new report.

www.bloombergquint.com

That's not true. Fake News.

 

[jinx8402]

That's not true. Fake News.

Exactly. The report doesn't even say what the headline states. It says it is unclear on the role of children for transmission, and that is mostly due to children being far more likely to be asymptomatic so it is hard to determine.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

If this information holds to be true maybe kids going back to school isn't a bad idea.

Children Donât Pass Covid-19 to Adults, Report Indicates

There doesn’t appear to be cases of a child passing Covid-19 to an adult, according to a new report.

www.bloombergquint.com

I’ll listen to the medical experts, not this.The report even says that there are reports of children passing it on. Click bait headline.

 

[lilypgirl]

That's not true. Fake News.

Exactly. The report doesn't even say what the headline states. It says it is unclear on the role of children for transmission, and that is mostly due to children being far more likely to be asymptomatic so it is hard to determine.

I’ll listen to the medical experts, not this.The report even says that there are reports of children passing it on. Click bait headline.

So Bloomberg is fake news now? Is it because it doesn't fit the doom and gloom stay locked in your houses until there is a vaccine narrative? It's one of many studies being done right now. It's funny anytime there is something remotely positive that comes about this virus it is automatically discounted. I looked at the list of people who contributed to this study lots "medical experts" listed.

 

[GoofGoof]

I’m still trying to figure out who’s going to want to travel and vacation under these conditions.

I understand opening up local businesses with some restrictions, but opening up places like Disney, Universal, etc. just seems kinda odd to me. Masks, CM’s behind plexiglass, temperature screenings, you can’t stand here, you can’t touch that, etc. at some point when does it continue to be enjoyable at all?

In my opinion if you have to take those measures to open, it’s not safe to open yet.

Of course, I don’t have to visit so I’ll be one of the people who votes with my wallet. Others will choose to visit and they get to vote as well.

I’m glad that state parks have been opening up around me... been great to get out about and enjoy some nature walks.

I tend to agree with you on this. I don’t think a re-opening goes very well under some of the potential strict regulations suggested. I may be over simplifying the situation, but it seems to me there’s very little good that comes from opening WDW before phase 3. The potential requirements loosen greatly. At that point Disney could call the shots on what measures it wants to implement and whatever they do will be above and beyond what’s required. Seems like a logical place to start.

What is interesting to me is how potential guests would really feel. This board is not a good sample set because of an obvious bias but what does the general public or average Disney guest think. My feeling is if there are mask requirements and some of the more extreme measures then I don’t want to go. In the Six Flags earnings call they implied that guest feedback to them suggested that people want temperature checks, masks and lowered capacity to feel comfortable going. I get that feeling for the grocery store, going to work or something more essential but for a vacation if there’s still a need for masks then I’m not going to feel its worth going. Just thought it was an interesting perspective they presented. I was thinking of the hoops Disney had to jump through as a CYA and to get the government and mass media to accept their opening but Six Flags implied those steps were driven by customer demand. Could be BS and they are just using that as an excuse.

 

[GoofGoof]

So Bloomberg is fake news now? Is it because it doesn't fit the doom and gloom stay locked in your houses until there is a vaccine narrative? It's one of many studies being done right now. It's funny anytime there is something remotely positive that comes about this virus it is automatically discounted. I looked a the list of people who contributed to this study lots "medical experts" listed.

In this case I think it’s that the content of the article didn’t match the headline, not the source.

It goes both ways too. For example, the first bullet point lists a WHO/China joint commission was the basis of the study (which to me is a valid source) but I’ve heard from numerous posters on this thread that we can’t trust anything that comes from China and the WHO has been blasted for being completely wrong in the beginning of this to the point that the US government decided to defund them. This is what happens when an issue gets so politicized. Everyone digs in on their side and immediately dismisses anything that says the opposite.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

So Bloomberg is fake news now? Is it because it doesn't fit the doom and gloom stay locked in your houses until there is a vaccine narrative? It's one of many studies being done right now. It's funny anytime there is something remotely positive that comes about this virus it is automatically discounted. I looked at the list of people who contributed to this study lots "medical experts" listed.

I never said Bloomberg is fake news. The headline of the report is:
Children don’t pass Covid-19 to adults. That’s the headline. Upon further reading, nothing again is ever mentioned that they don’t. In fact the conclusion of it says:
Conclusion
COVID-19 appears to affect children less often, and with less severity, including frequent asymptomatic or subclinical infection. There is evi- dence of critical illness, but it is rare. The role of children in transmission is unclear, but it seems likely they do not play a significant role. Changes in laboratory or radiographic parameters are slightly different to adults, and changes usually mild. There is no direct evidence of vertical trans- mission, and early evidence suggests both infected mothers and infants are no more severely affected than other groups. Early evidence sug- gests no significant increased risk for children with immunosuppression, but further data is needed.

The conclusion does away with the headline. It’s click bait.

 

[jinx8402]

So Bloomberg is fake news now? Is it because it doesn't fit the doom and gloom stay locked in your houses until there is a vaccine narrative? It's one of many studies being done right now. It's funny anytime there is something remotely positive that comes about this virus it is automatically discounted. I looked at the list of people who contributed to this study lots "medical experts" listed.

No, it's because the headline is misleading because that is not at all what the reports says. Just think logically, how in the world could kids not get adults sick if they actually have the virus and cough/sneeze on them? The virus doesn't care if it is expelled from an adult or kid.

And just to be clear, my "narrative" is not to stay inside until the vaccine. I am much closer to the re-open safely as soon as possible, with clear limits and expectations. What is positive about the report is that children are largely not affected in a major way. Mostly asymptomatic, which while is bad for tracing and understanding rate of transmission, is good from the point of view that they are not getting sick from the virus.

 

[easyrowrdw]

So Bloomberg is fake news now? Is it because it doesn't fit the doom and gloom stay locked in your houses until there is a vaccine narrative? It's one of many studies being done right now. It's funny anytime there is something remotely positive that comes about this virus it is automatically discounted. I looked at the list of people who contributed to this study lots "medical experts" listed.

I didn't read this particular article, but saw one with the same headine last night. That article was careful to note that everything was preliminary, but most signs pointed to less risk in children. Part of that was that they didn't seem as likely to spread it either. Ignore the headline (which isn't part of the article) and the takeaway from the research seemed encouraging.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

If this information holds to be true maybe kids going back to school isn't a bad idea.

Children Donât Pass Covid-19 to Adults, Report Indicates

There doesn’t appear to be cases of a child passing Covid-19 to an adult, according to a new report.

www.bloombergquint.com

I don't mean to pile on, but I don't buy into children not spreading the virus at all. They can study it all they want, but germs don't care the age of a person.

 

[DCBaker]

Josh in DHS to recognize DHS birthday - shows some video of the park and turns on some music.

 

[WEDway Inc & Company LLC]

So Bloomberg is fake news now? Is it because it doesn't fit the doom and gloom stay locked in your houses until there is a vaccine narrative? It's one of many studies being done right now. It's funny anytime there is something remotely positive that comes about this virus it is automatically discounted. I looked at the list of people who contributed to this study lots "medical experts" listed.

No, Bloomberg isn't. However, many others have stated that the study was flawed and should not be trusted. We are quite optimistic for something positive, but when a whole bunch of others are calling out on study, it's kinda hard to believe.

 

[GoofGoof]

I don't mean to pile on, but I don't buy into children not spreading the virus at all. They can study it all they want, but germs don't care the age of a person.

There seems to be a lot of conflicting information. So we know children tend to have mild or no symptoms. That is really good and well documented. This study seems to suggest they are also less likely to pass the virus on. Logically then you could conclude that if the study is accurate that because their symptoms are mild or none that they have a lower dose of the virus or the virus has not replicated as effectively in them so maybe that’s why they are less contagious. That actually makes some sense. The sicker you get the more contagious. Then you have other studies claiming that asymptomatic people are more contagious than the people with symptoms. Some of the evidence includes widespread anti-body testing done in the NYC area that shows way more people were infected than previously assumed. As you said its not very likely that the age alone of the person impacts their level of being contagious. So one side must be wrong, or potentially both. Either asymptomatic people are more contagious, less contagious or exactly as contagious as everyone else.

The only thing to conclude from all of this is we really don’t know enough to conclude on almost anything.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

There seems to be a lot of conflicting information. So we know children tend to have mild or no symptoms. That is really good and well documented. This study seems to suggest they are also less likely to pass the virus on. Logically then you could conclude that if the study is accurate that because their symptoms are mild or none that they have a lower dose of the virus or the virus has not replicated as effectively in them so maybe that’s why they are less contagious. That actually makes some sense. The sicker you get the more contagious. Then you have other studies claiming that asymptomatic people are more contagious than the people with symptoms. Some of the evidence includes widespread anti-body testing done in the NYC area that shows way more people were infected than previously assumed. As you said its not very likely that the age alone of the person impacts their level of being contagious. So one side must be wrong, or potentially both. Either asymptomatic people are more contagious, less contagious or exactly as contagious as everyone else.

The only thing to conclude from all of this is we really don’t know enough to conclude on almost anything.

Agreed. And children being the gross little humans they are, a lighter viral load doesn't necessarily mean they won't spread infection simply because they touch SO MUCH. (Boys especially, lol.)

 

[GoofGoof]

Agreed. And children being the gross little humans they are, a lighter viral load doesn't necessarily mean they won't spread infection simply because they touch SO MUCH. (Boys especially, lol.)

I’m convinced that children were really the main cause of spread of the bubonic plague. Rats took the rap for it but it was really kids . I have no scientific or historical evidence to prove my theory, but until someone invents an actual working time machine there’s also no way to prove it’s not true

 

[marni1971]

So Bloomberg is fake news now?

Apparently it’s poorly written, misleading, inconclusive juvenile journalism.

So maybe.

 

[Chi84]

We don’t have enough data to precisely tell (thanks, Orange Bird for your tireless incompetence) but the concern is the identified superspreading events. Choir practice (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-38808-z), funerals, subways, meat factories— these are enclosed spaces or events of close contact which would worsen aerosol transmission. Anecdotally there is some possible evidence: the R_0 is significantly higher in densely populated areas with public transportation vs densely populated areas without major public transport usage.


“Researchers don’t yet know how many individual pieces of SARS-CoV-2 an aerosol produced by an infected person’s cough might hold. But in one preprint study, meaning it is currently under peer review, researchers used a model to estimate that a person standing and speaking in a room could release up to 114 infectious doses per hour. The researchers predict that these aerosolized bits of saliva would easily infect other people if this happened in public indoor spaces like a bank, restaurant or pharmacy.

Another thing to consider is how easy these particles are to inhale. In a recent computer model study, researchers found that people would most likely inhale aerosols from another person that is talking and coughing while sitting less than 6 feet away.

While this seems bad, the actual process from exposure to infection is a complicated numbers game. Often, viral particles found in aerosols are damaged. A study looking at the flu virus found that only exhaled by a person are actually infectious. The coronavirus also starts to die off once it has left the body, remaining viable in the air for up to three hours. And of course, not every aerosol coming from an infected person will contain the coronavirus. There is a lot of chance involved.

Public health officials still don’t know whether direct contact, indirect contact through surfaces, or aerosols are the main pathway of transmission for the coronavirus. But everything experts like myself know about aerosols suggests that they could be a major pathway of transmission.

Overall, the evidence suggests that it is much more risky to be inside than outside. The reason is the lack of airflow. It takes between 15 minutes and three hours for an aerosol to be sucked outside by a ventilation system or float out an open window.”

Medscape explanation of aerosol transmission

3D model of a person coughing in an indoor environment

I appreciate your response, but none of what you said or linked supports the statement that wearing masks is more effective than hand washing in preventing spread of the virus. I have no quarrel with requiring face masks, and clearly they would contain droplets of virus exhaled by a sick person. My concern is that the articles that go into great detail about how far virus molecules can be expelled or how long they can remain detectable on surfaces in laboratory conditions state that they do not know whether the virus can actually (rather than theoretically) infect people under those circumstances. Contrast that with a person who goes into a public bathroom, touches surfaces recently touched by a sick person before that person could wash their hands, and then adjusts a face mask before washing their own hands. This would involve direct rather than airborne spread. As far as I know, prolonged exposure to a sick person or touching surfaces touched by that person are still the main source of spreading the virus - at least according to the CDC and WHO. I still have yet to see any support for the statement that mask-wearing is more effective than hand-washing in stopping the spread of the virus.

 

[lilypgirl]

No, Bloomberg isn't. However, many others have stated that the study was flawed and should not be trusted. We are quite optimistic for something positive, but when a whole bunch of others are calling out on study, it's kinda hard to believe.

You mean like legit medical professionals or people on a Disney board?

 

[ImperfectPixie]

You mean like legit medical professionals or people on a Disney board?

You don't need to be a medical professional to understand that a virus isn't going to infect people based on age. That's common sense.