Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
hopemax said:
They are homes to the University of Florida (Gainesville - Alachula County which is the large orange one next to the little red one) and Florida State University (Tallahassee - marked and very red)
Click to expand...
Party schools - FSU and UF. That is where some of the damage is done.
 
dfisher9

dfisher9

Member
It would be interesting to see an overlay of major college campuses vs. the new hotspot areas. Like mentioned above, University of Florida and Florida St are right at hotspots. The lone red area in the middle of Pennsylvania is where Penn St. is located.
 
Kevin_W

Kevin_W

Well-Known Member
dfisher9 said:
It would be interesting to see an overlay of major college campuses vs. the new hotspot areas. Like mentioned above, University of Florida and Florida St are right at hotspots. The lone red area in the middle of Pennsylvania is where Penn St. is located.
Click to expand...

Someone has tracked that, thought I cannot find the link. Not surprisingly, there is a strong correlation.

My county's cases per 100k spiked up quite a bit when Ohio State came back on campus. The good news is that they are testing the college kids quite a bit, so most of the positives have been mild or asymptomatic. Even though cases have gone up here, hospitalizations have continued to decline. I would assume/hope that is the case for most of the college areas.
 
JoeCamel

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
Kevin_W said:
Someone has tracked that, thought I cannot find the link. Not surprisingly, there is a strong correlation.

My county's cases per 100k spiked up quite a bit when Ohio State came back on campus. The good news is that they are testing the college kids quite a bit, so most of the positives have been mild or asymptomatic. Even though cases have gone up here, hospitalizations have continued to decline. I would assume/hope that is the case for most of the college areas.
Click to expand...
Seems to be the case of less severe symptoms. Lets keep them on campus so they don't bring it home to mom and pop.
 
Heppenheimer

Heppenheimer

Well-Known Member
dfisher9 said:
It would be interesting to see an overlay of major college campuses vs. the new hotspot areas. Like mentioned above, University of Florida and Florida St are right at hotspots. The lone red area in the middle of Pennsylvania is where Penn St. is located.
Click to expand...
Ah, I was also wondering about that blip in the dead Centre of Pennsylvania...
 
Heppenheimer

Heppenheimer

Well-Known Member
ParkerLoLs said:
You're going to joke about my father's service to his country? Welcome to ignore, it's been a long time coming.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the internet. I'm a combat veteran, but I've been accused of being an America-hater (not here) because I suggested there's things that we could perhaps do a little better here, especially if we (gasp!) followed the example of some of our close allies.
 
Parker in NYC

Parker in NYC

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Heppenheimer said:
Welcome to the internet. I'm a combat veteran, but I've been accused of being an America-hater (not here) because I suggested there's things that we could perhaps do a little better here, especially if we (gasp!) followed the example of some of our close allies.
Click to expand...

Trust me, I have my big-girl pants on. But LUVMCO's comment was received within the context of a much larger lack of taste on her part. This wasn't just recognition of the internet but of a "tipping point", so to speak.
 
D

DisneyCane

Well-Known Member
GoofGoof said:
Yes and no. I think part of the issue with College football is thousands of people in the stands and tailgates and the party surrounding the games. You can ban tailgates but that won’t stop it. You could play the games without the fans but nobody wants that.
Click to expand...

The majority of teams/conferences are playing and doing it with either no fans or limited capacity. Some places can ban tailgating (like Hard Rock Stadium where I attended a game last Thursday). The only reason to ban tailgating is to keep people from drinking, not because the tailgate parties would be a source of spread. They take place in a wide open outdoor space. The University of Miami banned alcohol sales for the same reason. They are afraid that people who drink will not follow the protocols.

The only protocols necessary in an outdoor football stadium are socially distancing the lines and seating and capacity limiting the bathrooms. Everything else is just "health theatre."

GoofGoof said:
The reason indoor dining is more risky than shopping or visiting a doctor‘s office or even working indoors is that by default you have to take the mask off to eat. There’s a reason spike’s coincided with opening of bars and expanding indoor dining. It’s because people are indoors without masks. There wasn’t an outbreak when Indoor retail stores re-opened. The difference between shopping and dining is you wear masks in one and not the other.
Click to expand...

I don't think it has been established that socially distanced indoor dining is any more risky than shopping or visiting a doctor's office. The spike in Florida did not coincide with indoor dining. Indoor dining was reopened in Palm Beach, Broward and Miami-Dade on 5/18. The rest of the State had reopened indoor dining a few weeks earlier. There was no significant change to the number of daily cases until the somewhere around June 5. However, that increase essentially tracked with the increase in testing. The spike didn't start until the middle of June.

If there was a correlation, it was to bars opening and the protests. I don't believe spread was happening at the protests but I do agree that the media focus on them and, at the same time, stopping the 24/7 COVID reporting did lead people to let their guard down.

If there is spread from dining, it is most likely due to the prolonged period of time spent close to other people in an indoor space, not because you eat without a mask. The mask is A difference between shopping and dining, not THE difference. The biggest difference is that, when shopping you don't have very long contact or interactions with anybody.

I would be willing to bet that if no masks were worn shopping, there would be very little additional spread from shopping and if somehow dining could be done with a mask on there wouldn't be much less spread from dining.

You put WAY too much faith in the effectiveness of "masks." Cloth face coverings that have absolutely no standards or specifications do not help very much. There are all kinds of examples where you can compare States with and without mask mandates and not be able to find a significant difference in spread.

There is no significant spread linked to WDW because of the socially distanced queues and rides for indoor environments, not because everybody is walking around with a piece of fabric on their face. The only reason I support the requirement at WDW is because they will get some additional attendance from people that think they do something and feel more comfortable because everybody is wearing one.
 
L

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
DisneyCane said:
The majority of teams/conferences are playing and doing it with either no fans or limited capacity. Some places can ban tailgating (like Hard Rock Stadium where I attended a game last Thursday). The only reason to ban tailgating is to keep people from drinking, not because the tailgate parties would be a source of spread. They take place in a wide open outdoor space. The University of Miami banned alcohol sales for the same reason. They are afraid that people who drink will not follow the protocols.

The only protocols necessary in an outdoor football stadium are socially distancing the lines and seating and capacity limiting the bathrooms. Everything else is just "health theatre."



I don't think it has been established that socially distanced indoor dining is any more risky than shopping or visiting a doctor's office. The spike in Florida did not coincide with indoor dining. Indoor dining was reopened in Palm Beach, Broward and Miami-Dade on 5/18. The rest of the State had reopened indoor dining a few weeks earlier. There was no significant change to the number of daily cases until the somewhere around June 5. However, that increase essentially tracked with the increase in testing. The spike didn't start until the middle of June.

If there was a correlation, it was to bars opening and the protests. I don't believe spread was happening at the protests but I do agree that the media focus on them and, at the same time, stopping the 24/7 COVID reporting did lead people to let their guard down.

If there is spread from dining, it is most likely due to the prolonged period of time spent close to other people in an indoor space, not because you eat without a mask. The mask is A difference between shopping and dining, not THE difference. The biggest difference is that, when shopping you don't have very long contact or interactions with anybody.

I would be willing to bet that if no masks were worn shopping, there would be very little additional spread from shopping and if somehow dining could be done with a mask on there wouldn't be much less spread from dining.

You put WAY too much faith in the effectiveness of "masks." Cloth face coverings that have absolutely no standards or specifications do not help very much. There are all kinds of examples where you can compare States with and without mask mandates and not be able to find a significant difference in spread.

There is no significant spread linked to WDW because of the socially distanced queues and rides for indoor environments, not because everybody is walking around with a piece of fabric on their face. The only reason I support the requirement at WDW is because they will get some additional attendance from people that think they do something and feel more comfortable because everybody is wearing one.
Click to expand...
Our family will keep masking up. Best of luck to you if you decide not to wear one.
 
SamusAranX

SamusAranX

Well-Known Member
DisneyCane said:
The majority of teams/conferences are playing and doing it with either no fans or limited capacity. Some places can ban tailgating (like Hard Rock Stadium where I attended a game last Thursday). The only reason to ban tailgating is to keep people from drinking, not because the tailgate parties would be a source of spread. They take place in a wide open outdoor space. The University of Miami banned alcohol sales for the same reason. They are afraid that people who drink will not follow the protocols.

The only protocols necessary in an outdoor football stadium are socially distancing the lines and seating and capacity limiting the bathrooms. Everything else is just "health theatre."



I don't think it has been established that socially distanced indoor dining is any more risky than shopping or visiting a doctor's office. The spike in Florida did not coincide with indoor dining. Indoor dining was reopened in Palm Beach, Broward and Miami-Dade on 5/18. The rest of the State had reopened indoor dining a few weeks earlier. There was no significant change to the number of daily cases until the somewhere around June 5. However, that increase essentially tracked with the increase in testing. The spike didn't start until the middle of June.

If there was a correlation, it was to bars opening and the protests. I don't believe spread was happening at the protests but I do agree that the media focus on them and, at the same time, stopping the 24/7 COVID reporting did lead people to let their guard down.

If there is spread from dining, it is most likely due to the prolonged period of time spent close to other people in an indoor space, not because you eat without a mask. The mask is A difference between shopping and dining, not THE difference. The biggest difference is that, when shopping you don't have very long contact or interactions with anybody.

I would be willing to bet that if no masks were worn shopping, there would be very little additional spread from shopping and if somehow dining could be done with a mask on there wouldn't be much less spread from dining.

You put WAY too much faith in the effectiveness of "masks." Cloth face coverings that have absolutely no standards or specifications do not help very much. There are all kinds of examples where you can compare States with and without mask mandates and not be able to find a significant difference in spread.

There is no significant spread linked to WDW because of the socially distanced queues and rides for indoor environments, not because everybody is walking around with a piece of fabric on their face. The only reason I support the requirement at WDW is because they will get some additional attendance from people that think they do something and feel more comfortable because everybody is wearing one.
Click to expand...

good write up, I guess my only disagreement is with the masks; I agree their effectiveness is limited, but they do help somewhat. But I think people get a false sense of security that they are more effective then they really are and let up in other areas of safety
 
D

DisneyCane

Well-Known Member
Lilofan said:
Our family will keep masking up. Best of luck to you if you decide not to wear one.
Click to expand...
Good for you and your family! You are amazing, unselfish people who care deeply about the rest of humanity!

At almost all places I go in Florida, I can't decide not to wear one either because of government mandates or business policies so I don't really need the luck.

SamusAranX said:
good write up, I guess my only disagreement is with the masks; I agree their effectiveness is limited, but they do help somewhat. But I think people get a false sense of security that they are more effective then they really are and let up in other areas of safety
Click to expand...

I think the negative effect of the false sense of security far outweighs whatever limited effectiveness they have. I'm not an "anti-masker." I don't enjoy wearing one and would prefer not to because no data I've seen indicates that they really do much. If there was science and data that indicated that they had a significant effect on reducing the spread, all politicians would be pushing them. If it was that easy to suppress the virus, they would all want credit for doing it.
 
P

Polkadotdress

Well-Known Member
DisneyCane said:
I'm not an "anti-masker." I don't enjoy wearing one and would prefer not to because no data I've seen indicates that they really do much. If there was science and data that indicated that they had a significant effect on reducing the spread, all politicians would be pushing them. If it was that easy to suppress the virus, they would all want credit for doing it.
Click to expand...

www.cdc.gov

Coronavirus Disease 2019

CDC provides credible COVID-19 health information to the U.S.
www.cdc.gov www.cdc.gov

One statement from this article that is especially relevant: “The finding adds to a growing body of evidence that cloth face coverings provide source control – that is, they help prevent the person wearing the mask from spreading COVID-19 to others.”
 
SamusAranX

SamusAranX

Well-Known Member
TJ Vazquez said:
Yeah, they aren't marginally effective if worn properly.
Click to expand...

I am referring to cloth masks mainly, not N95's.

Even if worn properly, they can't completely protect people, and this leads to people not socially distancing sometimes even though it is possible. For example, i will be at Publix one day shopping; we're all wearing masks, properly over the nose, and people are standing right next to me, etc. and it aggravates me to no end.

Masks help reduce spread but don't eliminate it completely. I am not anti-mask.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom